|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
thats a relief... (Reply to this comment)
by mascot1063
I was hoping I wasn't the only one who found this movie to be a big stinker...
|
May 26 '06
2:25 pm PDT
|
|
"Kong, Kong, Kong, Kong" (Reply to this comment)
by susidee34
the natives kept repeating in in reverence. Again, Carl wasn't very original.
Glad to see someone else didn't worship at the altar of Kong.
Susi
|
Jan 01 '06
7:34 am PST
|
|
Re: Re: Hey Dave.... (Reply to this comment)
by scotte1218
Dave,
I don't recall ever receiving an email from you. Either I deleted it by mistake (which..ahem...I have been known to do) or it didn't come through. Probably the former. Please feel free to email me any time my friend. I will most certainly email you back :)
Scott
|
Dec 21 '05
9:55 am PST
|
|
Re: ... (Reply to this comment)
by captaind
Heh... I think most people who saw it were left wondering "so how did he get Kong home?!?!"
I also wondered where the name "Kong" came from, Carl seemed to just suddenly come up with it for no apparent reason - or maybe I missed something earlier?
Cheers,
CaptainD
|
Dec 20 '05
8:10 am PST
|
|
Re: Hey Dave.... (Reply to this comment)
by captaind
Aha, so you are still around! :-D
Nice to have you back Scott, I take it the wife and baby are keeping you very busy? I did try to email you some time ago but I guess you didn't receive it.
Cheers buddy,
CaptainD
|
Dec 20 '05
8:09 am PST
|
|
... (Reply to this comment)
by smadakcin
"A problematic script passage is conveniently glossed over when Kong has to be transported many miles on a ship that doesn’t seem much bigger than he is… but there you go"
That certainly struck me too!
Great review.
|
Dec 19 '05
12:32 pm PST
|
|
Hey Dave.... (Reply to this comment)
by scotte1218
Great review as always. It's nice to see a differing opinion on this film. It seems every single review written by the media sings praises about this one....despite its 3 hour running length. I too will see it but I have some rather large doubts about its so-called greatness. It will have to take a pretty darn good film to unseat the original as the definitive "Kong". Great job!!
Scott
|
Dec 19 '05
9:17 am PST
|
|
Re: although (Reply to this comment)
by captaind
If in doubt, leave it out was te theory I guess. (As in almost every episode of Star Trek!! :-D)
CaptainD
|
Dec 19 '05
8:43 am PST
|
|
Re: Nothing succeeds like excess (Reply to this comment)
by captaind
Personally I think Peter Jackson should now make an 8-hour movie version of The Silmarillion, but I doubt it'll happen!!
BTW I'm not really a Brummie, I'm a Londoner who moved up 3 years ago. Everyone up here thinks I'm a cockney!! :-D
CaptainD
|
Dec 19 '05
8:42 am PST
|
|
although (Reply to this comment)
by shopaholic_man
Although I liked the film a lot more than you apparently did, my friends and I also wondered aloud just how exaclty DID they get that giant knocked out Gorilla up and onto the VENTURE? Sure sure, we see the hour long boring boat ride TO SKULL ISLAND, but the trip back is glossed over with a quick fade to New York City!
|
Dec 17 '05
8:29 pm PST
|
|
Nothing succeeds like excess (Reply to this comment)
by waynio
Good review, Dave,
My girlfriend (also a Brummie, btw) & I were among those snickering at those ludicrous, interminable action scenes. There really should be a warning posted, as for cell-phones: "Please turn off your brain before entering." (Obviously you did not!)
I wonder if Jackson even knows that his homage is also a parody. Seems like an awful lot of trouble and expense, don't you think? And too bad for Adrien Brody: he really wasn't holding up his end of the "love triangle"!
Cheers,
Wayne
|
Dec 17 '05
8:55 am PST
|
|
Re: Ha ha! (Reply to this comment)
by captaind
Thanks :-D I actually came up with the title long before I saw the film and wrote the review!!
Glad you liked the review. Hope you like the film more than I did if you see it.
CaptainD
|
Dec 17 '05
4:44 am PST
|
|
Re: Re: Why? Well... (Reply to this comment)
by captaind
That could explain it I guess! :-D
|
Dec 17 '05
4:43 am PST
|
|
Ha ha! (Reply to this comment)
by weirdo_87
Loved your title! Great review
|
Dec 16 '05
10:58 pm PST
|
|
Re: Why? Well... (Reply to this comment)
by El_Terrible
Actually, having seen this movie and thinking it was an excellent rendition of an age old classic I can answer that question...
Kong wasn't an original nor an anomoly as has been hinted at... When he's traversing through the Jungle with Ann Darrow on his Shoulder he passes by the skulls of many of his species very much the same size he was... What happened to those species is anyones guess but there were quite a few nasty creatures and critters on that island!
|
Dec 16 '05
9:12 pm PST
|
|
Re: Why? Well... (Reply to this comment)
by captaind
Hmm... interesting theories, but as I didn't see Godzilla or any 18 foot high gorillas either, it's merely conjecture...
|
Dec 16 '05
7:20 am PST
|
|
Why? Well... (Reply to this comment)
by anderclayton
Other questions that spring unbidden the mind are, “why only one 25-foot high gorilla?”
Well, he is actually a abberation from a race of eighteen-foot high gorillas, much like Andre the Giant for us.
...or he is a mutant like Godzilla.
Kinda silly stuff really. I think you have to get past it though.
Ander
|
Dec 15 '05
6:52 pm PST
|
|
Re: Wow... (Reply to this comment)
by captaind
Dunno, but I really liked Titanic, so it'd be interesting to see if people who liked that didn't like Kong and vice-versa?!!?
|
Dec 15 '05
3:48 pm PST
|
|
Wow... (Reply to this comment)
by three_ster
You really didn't like this one eh? I wonder if this will be like Titanic where many people love it, but many people hate it as well.
--Ryan (three_ster)
|
Dec 15 '05
3:34 pm PST
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.