Wednesday, December 14, 2005

king yawn



it looks like a lot of movie reviewers have king kong-sized boners (hee hee) over the new king kong movie. i'm not much of a film buff or film historian, but all i can say is that peter jackson has sold his soul to steven spielberg. i've only seen one of peter jackson's pre-lotr movies [heavenly creatures], and thought it was great. plus, it didn't involve that creepy andy serkis guy. let's not forget that history often repeats itself. the first king kong was a snoozefest, the second king kong was a snoozefest, which guarantees that this one will be the ultimate snoozefest, clocking in at three hours. sweet dreams.

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mais non, mais non. The 1933 Kong is a stop-motion landmark. It inspired ten-year-old Ray Harryhausen--king of stop-motion animation--to go into the movies for crissakes. As for the 1976 remake, it's way too maligned. It has incredible effects for the time (for which it won an Oscar) and a great camp sensibility (for which it earned a rave from Ms. Britches-Too-Tight herself, New Yorker critic Pauline Kael), as well as outstanding performance from three fine actors, Jeff Bridges, Charles Grodin, and Jessica Lange, in her first film. Say what you want about Jackson--I check out too after Heavenly Creatures--but lay off the other two why dontcha?

6:37 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home