King Kong (2005)
7/10
Will Peter Jackson's "King Kong" rise as the new movie king?
11 July 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Peter Jackson's "King Kong" from 2005 is a epic adventure who seems to have all the right ingredients to make a film of a lifetime, especially considering that he went directly from making the epic "Lord of the Rings" trilogy. But is this new "Kong" version going to last to be a memorable masterpiece or just a blockbuster who is going to be forgotten? Comparing of all the epic blockbusters who have been made, I think "Kong" is going to fade behind them.

This new version of "Kong" is mostly entertaining and watchable, though it isn't perfect. When you make a new and updated version of one of the worlds most famous movie icons, there are some expectations to make and some worries lying ahead.

Anyway; as mentioned, this movie is both grand and epic. There are some knock-out visuals sequences who are absolutely stunning, especially in Scull Island. The dialog is well written, so the interaction between the characters works well (since the movie takes a while before our characters get to Scull Island, the screenplay require that the interaction between the cast isn't boring). The score by James Newton Howarsd isn't his most memorable, but it's still good and epic and James still shows why he's one of the worlds greatest film composers.

Naomi Watts carries the movie with her stunning beauty and natural charisma. Jack Black does actually a very convincing job as the cynical director Carl Denham, Colin Hanks is good as Preston and the rest of the cast does a great job, even young Jamie Bell is decent as Jimmy, despite the latter character doesn't have a real purpose in the story. As for Kong himself; he is a character which many emotions and is likable enough, but without stealing the show, like last time Andy Serkis did with Gollum.

The main problem with this film that it's too long. The film introduces quickly the main characters in New York, but from there on the film become too unnecessary long in some sequences, like the cast voyage through the sea and especially in Scull Island. Of course the time is filled with some exciting action sequences, like the first encounter with the tribe who wants to sacrifice Ann and the exploration of the jungle in Scull Island, but after a while the film becomes filled with too many action sequences, which are there just to fill the 187 minutes of screen time (I've not seen the extended version). And just to make a note; this is movie is pretty violent, with really explicit battle sequences, so the PG-13 rating is appropriate.

The most of us already is familiar with the story of Kong and knows how it's going to end before seeing the movie, which of course makes the viewing experience a little poignant when the film reaches it's end. What I personally missed was more screen time between Ann and Kong, to make their relationship more touching. Of course they share a few moments (I felt the part when Kong and Ann on the ice was a nice, sweet touch), but the movie is too much of action and chasing sequences and not enough bonding time between Kong and Ann, which was essential to the story.

Despite that, "King Kong" is a entertaining and epic movie experience, but of all epic blockbusters this movie isn't doesn't stand out among them. I remember reading all the reviews for this flick in my country and they were all overwhelmingly positive, while the public comments were more skeptical, so I was prepared for even to be thrilled or disappointed. If you're going to be both, it's up to you. But for you who haven't seen it, just go ahead and check it out.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed