King Kong


Sep 28, 2005
Reaction score
Tis ok went to see it tonight, buts its very long and a couple of bits are slightly cringy-ing. the films about 3hs as well so gear up for a major numb ***.

the funniest bit was making immature comments about the film, alithough its not directly linked to it, doesnt really matter. and the bird in the film is stunning, she has lovely eyes especially.

not better than geisha but if u really really really have nothing to do then its worth a watch.


The fight with the 3 T-Rex's gives it atleast a 6 and it's not like it's all about fighting, you really feel for Kong. Plus I had to sit through all 3 hours of this movie an hour after I played 5-a-side for 2 hours.
I liked Kong, it deserves about 7/10 as the animation for Kong and everything else was done really well and it was a pretty good film alltogether.
i agree the trex fight and the sheeer agony that was caused when kong died give it a higher score, but it really did drag on.

i didnt know that kong actualy died until abuot 10 mins before when i foolishly asked my mate whether kong dies or not..:(
How can you not know King Kong dies? Did you expect him to spend the rest of his life on top of the Empire State Building? :p
see thats what i thought and i asked al, foolishly.

and coming onto lovely eyes...naomi watts has lovly lovely eyes, and man shes fit..
Last edited:
Murali said:
and the bird in the film is stunning, she has lovely eyes especially.

Apparently she's just broke up with her boyfriend so if you act fast Murali you might be able to get it on. :wub:
wow i mentioned that she ahs lovely eyes 3 times....whoop and theres the third, thank you for the newsflash lee. always good to have a scout who knows about all this shizlle..
Lee said:
Plus I had to sit through all 3 hours of this movie an hour after I played 5-a-side for 2 hours.

Boo freakin' hoo! I had to do the same PLUS I had already seen it :(

Anyway it's a good film, doubt it will translate as well on a smaller screen.

Well as in a tv and not a giant cinema screen, foolio :p
I did a movie review not too long ago as part of a school ITC project, we were told to write a page long (in Word) review of any film we wanted and having seen it not so long before, I chose King Kong...

The year is 1933; the setting; New York and an overly ambitious
soon-to-be-washed up movie director hires an unknown blonde to star in
his very latest film, to be shot on an uncharted and creepy Island,
Skull Island. The cast, crew and director later discover that a giant
ape amongst other unnatural life forms reside on the Island.

I’m sure in one way or another, you’ve heard of the creature known only
as King Kong – gigantic gorilla, twenty-five feet high? Quite simply,
he’s so big he’d collapse under his own weight and since his television
debut back in 1933; he’s been one of the most well known fictional
beasts of all time. Don’t get me wrong here; he’s no Godzilla in the way
that he intentionally causes havoc and destruction, he’s more your
average kind-hearted giant-ape who only harms those that attempt to
thwart him.

Well, as the title of the movie so simply suggests, he’s the star though
you may well be disappointed to hear that his action is limited. You
see, the biggest flaw here is the sheer length of it all – it’s a hefty
three hours long, twice the length of the much-recognised original and
Kong’s first appearance isn’t due ‘til the film’s very nearly half-way
through. The movie’s no doubt impressive but it’s also exhausting and
somewhat overwhelming.

What Jackson does get right is the thirties setting taking the movie
back to its roots. Too much post-modern irony would wreck such a movie,
wouldn’t you agree? But most importantly, it just wouldn’t be believable
otherwise. Let’s be realistic here – back then it’s possible to imagine
an uncharted island being discovered.

I've felt that Mr Jackson has been getting away with murder ever since
"Braindead" and "Heavenly Creatures" - still his best films by far for
my money - and this continues his tiresome preoccupation with CGI and
excessive length over content. Still, millions will disagree so I
imagine Universal are going to be more than happy.

The film’s first hour was somewhat mind-numbingly dull and slow but once
that’s over and the second act begins – it’s non-stop action and I’m
quite sure I wasn’t the only viewer perched atop my seat. The movie’s
stunning effects were superb also with remarkable believability granted
upon the many amazing creatures and places showcased on the big screen.
From the effective New York set-ups and to the masterfully energetic
conclusion, King Kong was one truly accomplished movie

In regard to what I’ve said before – don’t forget the points I mentioned
earlier and do note that this is by no means a perfect film. For
instance, I feel that whilst I rate both Adrien Brody and Jack Black as
actors, they weren’t right for the roles that they took.

In short – it’s largely based around huge monkey kicking’ ***, add to
that some stunning CGI effects with a surprisingly potent love story and
you have yourself an ideal popcorn flick – so yeah, it drags on in
places, it doesn’t live up to the name of the original and the cast
isn’t perfect but so what – if huge monkey kicking’ *** is your thing
then you can’t go wrong with this movie.
very nice review mate....i agree with a good deal of it :D mainly the part where its boring..

peter jacksons done LOTR as well btw...