King Kong
Okay, I'm trying to leave behind my bitterness about Johnny. [One of my favorite quotes was about why would be shocked he'd pick another new trophy wife?!"]
I forgot to give you my take on Peter Jackson's new version of King Kong, which I saw this weekend - just prior to my flu. (I don't think the events are connected!) I thought it was visually spectacular - the special effects, art direction were beautiful. I thought Naomi Watts was wonderful - she goes through about the last third of the movie with barely any lines, communicating with the big age through body movements and her eyes. I loved seeing Colin Hanks again - he's been a favorite of mine since the tv series Roswell.
Okay, here I must admit that I don't think I've ever seen the original all the way through - just caught snippets of it here and there. But of course I know the story. So this was really a fresh film for me, rather than a remake, and I feel like I could see it with a fresh eye. The story is simple, but well written.
What is most striking if you compare the three film versions is how REAL King Kong is in this version. Brought to life by Andy Serkin (who was Golem in the LOTR series), he and Peter Jackson clearly studied real apes. Every move is natural, and feels real. It's easy to forget how huge he is and picture him as real. It reminded me of visiting the Atlanta Zoo years ago and seeing their gorilla exhibit. My companion remarked, "How can you look at these animals and NOT believe in evolution? They are clearly our cousins!" And that's how Kong feels - like our wild cousin.
My only complaint is the length - the three hours felt too long. I would have trimmed some of the dinosaur battles, although that is what will attract the teenaged fanboys. And I wouldn't bring any child younger than at least 10 or 12 - it's really quite a scary, gross film in parts.
I forgot to give you my take on Peter Jackson's new version of King Kong, which I saw this weekend - just prior to my flu. (I don't think the events are connected!) I thought it was visually spectacular - the special effects, art direction were beautiful. I thought Naomi Watts was wonderful - she goes through about the last third of the movie with barely any lines, communicating with the big age through body movements and her eyes. I loved seeing Colin Hanks again - he's been a favorite of mine since the tv series Roswell.
Okay, here I must admit that I don't think I've ever seen the original all the way through - just caught snippets of it here and there. But of course I know the story. So this was really a fresh film for me, rather than a remake, and I feel like I could see it with a fresh eye. The story is simple, but well written.
What is most striking if you compare the three film versions is how REAL King Kong is in this version. Brought to life by Andy Serkin (who was Golem in the LOTR series), he and Peter Jackson clearly studied real apes. Every move is natural, and feels real. It's easy to forget how huge he is and picture him as real. It reminded me of visiting the Atlanta Zoo years ago and seeing their gorilla exhibit. My companion remarked, "How can you look at these animals and NOT believe in evolution? They are clearly our cousins!" And that's how Kong feels - like our wild cousin.
My only complaint is the length - the three hours felt too long. I would have trimmed some of the dinosaur battles, although that is what will attract the teenaged fanboys. And I wouldn't bring any child younger than at least 10 or 12 - it's really quite a scary, gross film in parts.
posted by Beth at 11:42 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home