Take the monkey and run.
*pounds chest*
Dude. I'm home from the King Kong screening and ready to kick Peter Jackson's newly skinny ass. Hear me roar!
How could a talented director ostensibly fulfilling a life's ambition mangle things so badly? For Chrissakes, Peter Jackson. Velociraptors! A Brontosaurus stampede! A lengthy preamble about life among New York's struggling Depression-era thespians! An interminable sea journey filled with leaden parallels to Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness!" Naomi Watts swinging from a T. Rex's nostrils! No, I AM NOT MAKING ANY OF THIS UP. Jackson's King Kong remake is three hours long, and a good 60 minutes of it is utterly ridiculous.
What really breaks my heart? The big ape is wonderful, and so is his interaction with Watts. They made me laugh; they made me cry like a crying fool. Their bond was sweet and tangible. This is the soul of the film, but it's smothered in cinematic lard. Really expensive cinematic lard, I might add. Jackson seems to have spent an extra $100 million in special effects to destroy his own movie. Is there no one willing to say "no" or "enough" to the director of Lord of the Rings? Has that trilogy's artistic and boxoffice success ruined a good filmmaker? I hope not... because I suspect it's responsible for ruining King Kong.
So. Disappointed. And yet. I know that when it's available on DVD, some bedroom genius will re-edit it and uncover a great two-hour movie buried under the gratuitous dinosaurs and special effects.
*waits*
And... R.I.P. Stanley Tookie Williams. It's been a dark night all around.
ETA: Looking at RottenTomatoes.com, I see King Kong is receiving almost universal raves. Even A.O. Scott at the Times likes it. In-fucking-credible. Well, I'm happy for the gorilla, but I despair for good taste.
Dude. I'm home from the King Kong screening and ready to kick Peter Jackson's newly skinny ass. Hear me roar!
How could a talented director ostensibly fulfilling a life's ambition mangle things so badly? For Chrissakes, Peter Jackson. Velociraptors! A Brontosaurus stampede! A lengthy preamble about life among New York's struggling Depression-era thespians! An interminable sea journey filled with leaden parallels to Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness!" Naomi Watts swinging from a T. Rex's nostrils! No, I AM NOT MAKING ANY OF THIS UP. Jackson's King Kong remake is three hours long, and a good 60 minutes of it is utterly ridiculous.
What really breaks my heart? The big ape is wonderful, and so is his interaction with Watts. They made me laugh; they made me cry like a crying fool. Their bond was sweet and tangible. This is the soul of the film, but it's smothered in cinematic lard. Really expensive cinematic lard, I might add. Jackson seems to have spent an extra $100 million in special effects to destroy his own movie. Is there no one willing to say "no" or "enough" to the director of Lord of the Rings? Has that trilogy's artistic and boxoffice success ruined a good filmmaker? I hope not... because I suspect it's responsible for ruining King Kong.
So. Disappointed. And yet. I know that when it's available on DVD, some bedroom genius will re-edit it and uncover a great two-hour movie buried under the gratuitous dinosaurs and special effects.
*waits*
And... R.I.P. Stanley Tookie Williams. It's been a dark night all around.
ETA: Looking at RottenTomatoes.com, I see King Kong is receiving almost universal raves. Even A.O. Scott at the Times likes it. In-fucking-credible. Well, I'm happy for the gorilla, but I despair for good taste.