King Kong
Universal Pictures | Release Date: December 14, 2005
7.4
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 1573 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,149
Mixed:
174
Negative:
250
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
9
JP32Jul 31, 2023
Jackson simply plays it seriously, with great love, and it all works. His film is an A+ special effects epic. A real story; something with dramatic purpose, something given actual care and attention.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
alerikandersonMay 15, 2023
Another good monster movie that audiences once dislike and now love to watch.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
Ez1459Mar 14, 2023
best movie ever, my fav. I always cry at the end, overwhelmed by emotions..
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
DolphinReviewsJul 25, 2022
This movie has some great moments but they are hidden in a 3 hour messy film.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
CoreGamer1408Apr 14, 2022
This is mostly a fun monster action movie until they leave the island. The sympathy for Kong goes out the window when he trashes a street full of people and cars kills random passers-by. Even throws a fair few blonde women away to a boneThis is mostly a fun monster action movie until they leave the island. The sympathy for Kong goes out the window when he trashes a street full of people and cars kills random passers-by. Even throws a fair few blonde women away to a bone crunching death. Peter Jackson has the same issue in this movie as he did in the later Hobbit series. So many rediculas over the top action sequences. This makes me think Peter Jackson action sequencess was more restrained by other people in The Lord of the Rings?… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
Velandiatorres1Apr 7, 2022
Comentario de película “King Kong”

“King Kong”, es una película de acción y ciencia ficción dirigida por Peter Jackson en 2005 y protagonizada por Naoimi Watts, Jack Black, Andrien Brody, Andy Serkis. En general, es una película que enComentario de película “King Kong”

“King Kong”, es una película de acción y ciencia ficción dirigida por Peter Jackson en 2005 y protagonizada por Naoimi Watts, Jack Black, Andrien Brody, Andy Serkis.
En general, es una película que en primer momento muestra a uno de los personajes principales, Ann, ella se ha quedado sin empleo en la gran ciudad de New York; y en su camino se conoce con Denham, un productor de cine con altos rasgos de ambición y poder dispuesto a ayudarle. Denham emprende viaje junto a Ann hacia una isla con el fin de grabar su nueva película, al viaje se suma Jack Driscoll , un autor de teatro el cual se enamora de Ann consiguiendo crear lazos afectivos durante el viaje a la isla. El lugar es totalmente desconocido para la tripulación, enfrentando las condiciones de peligro dentro de una selva húmeda y espesa. Desde que ocurre la escena del secuestro de Ann por parte de la tribu caníbal y es entregada a King Kong, este momento el sentido de la película cambia y se centra en el primer impacto que produjo en Ann, el estar frente a un simio gigante, pensando que le iba hacer daño, pero las cosas poco a poco cambiaron, cuando ella se dio cuenta que Kong lo único que quería era protegerle de las otras criaturas. Por otro lado, Kong al representar una bestia en la película no estaba exento de poder sentir alguna atracción hacia Ann. Al tratarse de un encuentro repentino entre un hombre y una mujer, como ocurriría en cualquier obra literaria, el director de la película hace que la historia tome cierto aire romántico, al tratarse del amor entre un simio y una bella chica.
En definitiva, es una película que atrapa al televidente, la recomiendo para aquella persona que quiera encontrar un espacio de lleno de acción y ciencia ficción, acompañada de un toque de romance.
Merece una calificación de 10 estrellas, en una escala de 0 a 10.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
kyle20ellisMar 17, 2022
I do agree with anyone who says that the 2005 film isn't as good as the 1933 classic, but I did think it was very good. Many complained of the first hour or so being too slow, but I didn't find that. The stunning cinematography actually moreI do agree with anyone who says that the 2005 film isn't as good as the 1933 classic, but I did think it was very good. Many complained of the first hour or so being too slow, but I didn't find that. The stunning cinematography actually more than compensated, and throughout the movie Naomi Watts is a delight as Ann Darrow. Jack Black was an admittedly odd choice as Carl Denham but he still manages a worthwhile performance. Although Kong doesn't appear until an hour and a quarter into the movie, he was flawlessly designed, and credit also must go to Andy Serkis for performing him, as he did a fantastic job. In fact, the only weak performance comes from Adrien Brody, his performance was a little too wimpy for my liking. The film is superbly designed, with the amount of detail evident, and the direction from Peter Jackson was excellent. However, I was disturbed by a number of scenes, like any part with the aborigines, and when that flower thing sucked that man's face. My other criticism of the movie, was that although the scenes with Ann and Kong were well handled on the most part, I found the ice skating bit a bit too slushy and unconvincing. Despite the flaws King Kong may have, it was still a very good film, that I will happily award a 7/10. Bethany Cox… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
ComandanteCobraJan 30, 2022
Good movie.
Visuals are fantastic:
1) Costumes, hairstyles, locations, characters, veichles, colors are on spot for a pulp adventure. Lost and Lots and Lots of homage from the black and white king kong of 1933. 2) GCI is a little dated (2021)Good movie.
Visuals are fantastic:
1) Costumes, hairstyles, locations, characters, veichles, colors are on spot for a pulp adventure. Lost and Lots and Lots of homage from the black and white king kong of 1933.
2) GCI is a little dated (2021) but it does a very good job and back in the days was stunnig. Kong and other creatures fight in bright daylight, cleary visible......without slo-motion,blur, fog and other trick to conceal special effects. Cudos to that.
3)Kong (and other creatures) have a very relevant part in the movie and a high screen time....This is not to be taken for granted. In other "blockbusters monsters movies" (expecially filmed in modern time) monsters are often just in the background and has a very limited screentime filled with unnecessary "humans" protagonists (Like 2014 Godzilla)
4) Naomi Watts is breathtaking and very talented in this role...Jack Black do a real good job in a serious role.

Like other I find the first half of the movie more entertaining than the second part...and I think that this film could be a shorter...3 hours for this kind of movie is too much.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
HabibiehakimAug 1, 2021
I'm pretty sure everybody was not very happy on the ending, and that's why King Kong is a great film, Peter Jackson's Kong have a heart, he have a feeling, he's like human but on a different size and different look, he is a King Kong that weI'm pretty sure everybody was not very happy on the ending, and that's why King Kong is a great film, Peter Jackson's Kong have a heart, he have a feeling, he's like human but on a different size and different look, he is a King Kong that we care, and not only that, the movie fills with an amazing performance by everybody, the look of a great 1930s city by Jackson's, King Kong is incredible, and is 100% must watch film, don' t care about the duration because no matter how long great film have, it's always feels short.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
geewahJan 12, 2021
A thoroughly entertaining re-make of a classic story. The CGI is brilliant, but Naomi Watts is the real star here.
It is a long movie and could of been a bit shorter.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
meydianarizki21Nov 20, 2020
A Monumental Success of a Movie
If it had been announced that a remake of the classic "King Kong" was being made without the name Peter Jackson attached to it, there is no doubt audiences would have been outraged. But after the enormousA Monumental Success of a Movie
If it had been announced that a remake of the classic "King Kong" was being made without the name Peter Jackson attached to it, there is no doubt audiences would have been outraged. But after the enormous success of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, it would seem that the general public has learned to trust director Peter Jackson. After watching his remake of King Kong, I would have to say that their trust was well placed.

Jackson now firmly cements his name as a master filmmaker, the kind that all aspiring directors want to be. The attention he pays to the most minute details, the sheer class he shows in terms of production and scale, the amount of skill he has in manipulating our fragile emotions... the man is clearly one of the most talented directors in film history. And Jackson certainly brings his considerable skill and flair to show here in 'Kong'. While a different director likely would have sped up the story to the crew's arrival on Skull Island, Jackson takes his time with a nice, leisurely build up to their arrival, giving us lots of time to really get to know these characters, and also providing time for a slow and genuine romance building between the characters of Anne and Jack. This romance does lead to the very few and seldom weaknesses of the film... the romance scenes can seem a bit cheesy and contrived at times. But when that's literally the only complain I can make, it's a pretty damn good sign for the movie!

The visual effects are an essential part of the movie, and they really needed to be done well here to properly sell the idea - safe to say that they were still good enough to surpass my already unrealistically high expectations! Safe to say, even in today's computer saturated film industry the special effects in King Kong will still succeed in blowing you away. And Jackson seems to have an almost uncanny skill in manipulating his audience's emotions - you will cheer, you will laugh, you will cry, you will really be on the edge of your seat and you will be truly and thoroughly disgusted in at least one part of the movie - watch out for a cave full of giant insects on Skull Island. It seemed only fair to post a warning considering how profoundly well done it is...

The cast is pitch perfect, right down to the most minuscule parts. (the natives on Skull Island are even more terrifying than any orcs or evil creatures in LOTR) Naomi Watts gives a heartwarming and wonderful performance as the innocent Ann Darrow, the "beauty who killed the beast". And indeed, performance aside, Watts hasn't looked this beautiful for quite a while! While everyone had their doubts about Jack Black's casting a while back, he proves to be just what his character needed to be truly believable. Black harnesses his trademark manic energy, and instead of playing it for laughs, expels it through Carl Denham's passion for the film industry, and his lust for providing a show for his audiences - sometimes at the cost of his morals. I must admit, I have never been a fan of Adrien Brody, but even he managed to win my sympathies, and proves surprisingly convincing as heroic screenwriter Jack Driscoll. And then there's Andy Serkis... the man is so underrated, since his best performances have been overshadowed by masks of admittably impressive CGI, but result in him losing credit he so desperately deserves. Serkis, while utterly convincing as an enormous silverback gorilla in terms of movement and vocalizations, still manages to bring a surprising humanity to Kong. I'm hard pressed to remember the last time an animal protagonist has managed to capture our hearts and emotional involvement as much as Kong does, and Serkis definitely deserves accolades for re-creating such an iconic character in a beautiful fashion only through movement and body language. He also takes a hilarious supporting role as the grizzled and trigger-happy Lumpy the cook.

Overall, I think it is safe to say that King Kong succeeds on a level completely lost to most productions these days. Rarely are our emotions manipulated with such ease, rarely do we find ourselves getting so engrossed in a story that a 3 hour running time seems to have gone by far too quickly and we yearn for more. King Kong is an odyssey of a movie, and the most genuine and compelling output seen since... well, the Lord of the Rings. This is classic storytelling at its peak - don't miss out on it!

-10/10… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
LopakfAug 5, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Pretty well made and actors knew their role and they performed it really good. But one thing is, why there are same idea in every movie like this: 1.Person wants to go to danger | 2. He nearly dies | 3. He escape or he don't 4.| He wants money 5. | He kidnaps The Creature, Example King Kong. 6. |He makes little bit money from it but king Kong destroys the whole city and kills lot of innocents | 7. It dies. | 8 End.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
MorrowwindAug 3, 2020
1. Jack black shouldn't have come anywhere near this , he feels so out of place its hard to look at him without wincing. 2. The natives shouldn't forced into abject Destituteness making them forced to be savages , they should just be savages1. Jack black shouldn't have come anywhere near this , he feels so out of place its hard to look at him without wincing. 2. The natives shouldn't forced into abject Destituteness making them forced to be savages , they should just be savages ! Jackson you left wing coporate hack , the fun things about the movie was primordial feeling on the island , savage tribes , dinosaurs , lost civilizations etc. 3. The film feels weird , disjointed and way too long , using poorly organized bits of humor like the **** awful and weird bit with the brontosaurs followed by a death of some **** made to feel animatedly sad 4. You don't need a controlled environment and CGI for everything , even those **** at disney accomplished that with the pirates of the caribbean movies. How can we have multi million dollar films like the fantastic adventures of mr fox and coraline yet we can't get the same treatment for a king kong movie , also didn't we burn george lucas in effigy for this horse **** for the prequels yet Jackson gets away it cuz hes so gosh darn quirky and loveable. Thinking about the creation of this movie dosen't give me a personal feeling of love for his work when watching the orginal , it makes me wanna sucker punch him in the jaw for ruining it.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
ericandlilJul 26, 2020
I like Jack Black. That is all I can say. The movie was 1/2 cartoon. Some of the scenes were just rediculous Nd not in a good way.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
FilipeNetoApr 5, 2020
There are some films that reach technical perfection and are visually magnificent, but simply have no script to stand themselves. This film is one of them.

It is extraordinary how Peter Jackson made a three-hour movie with so little story toThere are some films that reach technical perfection and are visually magnificent, but simply have no script to stand themselves. This film is one of them.

It is extraordinary how Peter Jackson made a three-hour movie with so little story to tell! Full of visual effects and green screen, the film bases its script on three characters: Ann Darrow, an actress who is failing to succeed, Jack Driscoll, a potential playwright forced to write a film script and finally Carl Denham, a filmmaker candidate willing to do anything for success. With his immense ambition, Denham leads the action to a mysterious unknown island populated by terrible creatures. We don't know the extent of his knowledge of the island, but he will do anything to get there and film. This happens, sensibly, in the first 45 minutes, that is, what we have in this film is two and a half hours watching characters running or fighting for their lives. There is no plot.

Concerning the cast, there are also some flaws, despite the quality and weight of the actors. Naomi Watts was fine, given the circumstances, but it is far below what I expected, considering she was already an excellent actress when she made this film. Jack Black was very well. He is not an actor that I like, but he was able to give his character some cleverness laden with malice. I just didn't like that, at the end, he was able to get away with so much impunity. Adrien Brody is good and does what he is asked to do with some talent, but his character is very flat, one-dimensional, even underdeveloped. Andy Serkis was very important in turning King Kong into a realistic creature, but I don't consider his work here to be a true dramatic interpretation.

Visually great, it uses and abuses CGI, visual and special effects, and colorful and lively cinematography helps to give the film an extraordinary beauty and realism. The sound is also amazing, with all the effects harmonizing well, even during the most confusing action scenes. And action is not lacking in this film, as I already mentioned. The film really deserved the three Oscars it received in the categories of Best Visual Effects, Sound Editing and Sound Mixing. The soundtrack could have been better but there is no denying that, in general, the film is technically excellent, justifies the budget well and is at the level of the best blockbuster.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
Jaredc324Dec 11, 2019
We just don't get movies like King Kong anymore. That breath with that sense of cinematic wonder and feel like they're made from that place of childhood imagination, and enlivened with an adult-like attitude. It's not only the best Kong we'veWe just don't get movies like King Kong anymore. That breath with that sense of cinematic wonder and feel like they're made from that place of childhood imagination, and enlivened with an adult-like attitude. It's not only the best Kong we've seen, but it's the best interpretation of the story in cinematic history. The characters are rich, the relationship between Anne and Kong is empowering, and the adventure is as good as it gets. Peter Jackson is the king master of the fantasy genre and continues to prove his worth.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
JPKJun 29, 2019
Another Amazing Film From Peter Jackson
It’s definitely no Lord Of The Rings. But King Kong is still undoubtedly a very impressive movie story-wise and visually.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
9
alejandro970Apr 21, 2019
A tribute/homage for going ape. The first 45 minutes feels some slow but are well compensed with action sequences that not disturb the spirit of the original. The final showdown is spectacular.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
bfoore90Apr 16, 2019
Never understood the flak this movie receives, Peter Jackson does a fantastic job staying faithful to the original film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
TyranianApr 11, 2019
This is an awesome film, Kong is exactly right and the film is very enjoyable.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
Chhinseavhong12Apr 1, 2019
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The show tells the story about group of animal in forest. One day, the beautiful woman was into the forest with her family and friends. When they walked into the long forest, suddenly they saw a lot of Dinosaur in front of her. All her family was die in the forest because of Dinosaur but on that time he want to killed her too, she tried to run away. After that, the King Kong was fight with all the Dinosaur because want to help her from them. They fight until Dinosaur died and then the King Kong fall in love with that girl because of her face that she so beautiful and she also in love with him as a girlfriend and boyfriend. In the end, when King Kong was win Dinosaur but he can not stayed with her because the people was killed him. Sometimes this story is hard to follow because it is about animal but some scene it easy to understand. One more things, I felt like this movie is predictable because of the characters and especially the story has sad ending that King Kong can not lived with his love. Eventually, I really love this movie because of the characters really be patience.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
jonslowJan 11, 2019
what a pity king kong. He just want to be loved. Great version of King/kong ever see.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
SaythatDec 8, 2018
After LOTR I just know Jackson is the great director. I also know he dreamed to cast King Kong. Well, let's assume he just deserves some space to embody his fantasies. But the movie is overfed with visual effects, the ape is grotesquelyAfter LOTR I just know Jackson is the great director. I also know he dreamed to cast King Kong. Well, let's assume he just deserves some space to embody his fantasies. But the movie is overfed with visual effects, the ape is grotesquely humanic and the end is jammed. The figure skating on the frozen pond is absolutely nonsense. Yeah, yeah, it looks soooo touchy and cheeeesy... and so odd.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
AndremaxJul 15, 2018
Amazing picture. Special effects are incredible and beautiful until nowadays. Story is classical, unquestionable, touching, with social criticism that works until present days, but with pinchs of gracefulnes. Actors choice doesn't leave to beAmazing picture. Special effects are incredible and beautiful until nowadays. Story is classical, unquestionable, touching, with social criticism that works until present days, but with pinchs of gracefulnes. Actors choice doesn't leave to be desired, being these one very competents in their playing, principally the charismatic Jack Black.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
hardcorekiddApr 27, 2018
Peter Jackson (for me) has created one of the greatest monster movies of all time. This is hands down the best King Kong movie I have ever watch. I'm going to give King Kong (2005) an A.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
sunoblakDec 27, 2017
No acabas teniendo compasión con Kong, es imposible, no de motivos, solo salva a la chica y en verdad nadie sabe por qué. Para ser una película larga me esperaba un mayor arco de personalidad no solo para los actores "secundarios" sino paraNo acabas teniendo compasión con Kong, es imposible, no de motivos, solo salva a la chica y en verdad nadie sabe por qué. Para ser una película larga me esperaba un mayor arco de personalidad no solo para los actores "secundarios" sino para los principales, el único personaje que me ha llamado la atención ha sido el interpretado por Jack Black y Adrien Broody, todos los demás incluido la protagonista (que vale, se muesta con principios básicos inquebrantables pero que sentido tiene que te capture una gorila gigante empieces a bailar para él, el se ría mientras te tira al suelo una y otra vez y acabes arriesgando tu propia vida por él?) me parecen mas planos y genéricos que una explosión en una película de Michael Bay.
El argumento de esta película es poco profundo, clásico y sin sentido teniendo en cuenta lo poco que simpaticé con Kong.
No gastes millones en crear a un Kong hiperrealista y semejantes paisajes para luego hacer una película así.
Bajo mi punto de vista una de las obras mas sobrevaloradas de nuestros tiempos.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
saccyindJul 29, 2011
Jackson's King Kong With Best THE BEST Action Sequences And Great Music By James Newton Howard It's Not A Film But An Anthology Of True Love.Great Film

10/10
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
BitashJul 23, 2017
I just saw the Kong skull island movie and made me realize I loved Jacksons version so much I need to leave a review. Great story line, Greta plot. Good character development, I felts for Kong. The movie triggers emotions in you, great CG . AI just saw the Kong skull island movie and made me realize I loved Jacksons version so much I need to leave a review. Great story line, Greta plot. Good character development, I felts for Kong. The movie triggers emotions in you, great CG . A must see. I will see again… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
66jdMar 26, 2017
Wasn't too sure what to expect from this film.
However I wasn't disappointed.
The special effects and story are extremely watchable.
The t-rex fight scene was memorable.
Top cinema offering. Big screen viewing required.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
ZerpnosMar 5, 2017
Sıkıcıydı, gerçekten sıkıcıydı. 3 saatlik bir film yapıp her saniye ne olduğunu göstereceklerine, 2 saatlik bir film yapıp saçma kısımları geçerek izleyiciyi sıkmadan, seyir zevki yüksek bir goril aşkı izletebilirlerdi. Maalesef bunun yerineSıkıcıydı, gerçekten sıkıcıydı. 3 saatlik bir film yapıp her saniye ne olduğunu göstereceklerine, 2 saatlik bir film yapıp saçma kısımları geçerek izleyiciyi sıkmadan, seyir zevki yüksek bir goril aşkı izletebilirlerdi. Maalesef bunun yerine 3 saatlik bir film yapmayı ve sadece 1 saatini New York'un eski zamanlarında ve gemide harcamışlar, izleyiciyi aşırı derece de sıkmışlardır. Ormanda ki yerlilerin saldırısı ve ayin kısımları sonrasında Kong'un kızı bulması ve 2-3 aksiyon sahnesinin ardından uzatmadan Kong'u yakalayıp, New Yorka götürüp ardından orada olanları izleyebilirdik. Hatta öyle olsaydı bu film 9 puanı bile alabilirdi fakat onun yerine dediğim gibi sıkıcı bir şekilde konuyu işlemişler ve izlerken insanın sıkılmasına sebep olmuşlar. Şu an 3 saatimin boşa gidişine üzülüyorum.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
darthbagginsDec 19, 2016
This is a one of a kind remake that actually is better than the original. The cast is excellent, the effects are groundbreaking and the emotion is strong. It is a very long film but it is three hours of brilliance.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
CalibMcBoltsMay 30, 2016
Okay, i totally understand why people would dislike this film, it is long, it has a lot of CGI, good and bad, the acting may be campy, but for people who truly treasure the original 1933 film, this movie was a dream come true. At least for meOkay, i totally understand why people would dislike this film, it is long, it has a lot of CGI, good and bad, the acting may be campy, but for people who truly treasure the original 1933 film, this movie was a dream come true. At least for me it was.
I'm a massive lover of the original stop-motion, brilliantly crafted 1933 King Kong, i think it's an absolute masterpiece, and too see Peter Jackson, clearly a fan too, recreate that film, with state of the art special effect to reinvigorate this story, was heartwarming for me. The movie is longer, bigger, even more interesting, and i just love everything about it, because i love the original soo much. The movie gives you more information on each character, and their backstories, as expected for a movie almost double the length of the original, which was great for a fan like me to get to know more about the characters i've grown to love.

King Kong was a total blast for me, and a heartwarming experience, seeing the awesome original stop-motion clay puppet fight between the T-Rex and King Kong, realised and beautified with pitch-perfect CGI was just one of many things i loved about King Kong.
(The CGI of King Kong was absolutely astounding, obviously my compliments to Andy Serkis who pulls off yet another fantastic CG character performance, as he also did with The Lord of the Rings, the CGI of King Kong itself was beautiful, the rest of the movie's CGI was severely worse, especially a dinosaur stampede as the film crew has to flee out of a canyon, in that scene in particular the CGI was pretty bad.)

Of course this movie lacks the beautiful simplicity and artistery the original film had, but the way PJ has done it, was truly incredible in my honest opinion

I'm sorry King Kong haters, i'm completely on the other side of the spectrum on this one.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
SpangleApr 12, 2016
Both incredibly racist and sexist, King Kong is a classic tale that so overlong it truly hurts. While entertaining and well acted, the film could have stood to be far shorter. Fortunately, it packs its overstuffed runtime with entertainingBoth incredibly racist and sexist, King Kong is a classic tale that so overlong it truly hurts. While entertaining and well acted, the film could have stood to be far shorter. Fortunately, it packs its overstuffed runtime with entertaining sequences and spectacular special effects. Naomi Watts is fantastic here and brings raw emotion to the role as the white woman whose beauty and whiteness tames the savage black man. While the overt racism inherent in the story suffocates it pretty good, racist films can still be quite good and King Kong is a perfect example of this. There is a seriously epic feel to the film and it is well handled by Jackson who knows his way around an epic. If the film was shorter, then the overall film would be far more enjoyable because the extravagant set pieces and scenes pack the right amount of power, but the filler winds up stunting that excitement. Heck, the film could keep all the scenes, but they could be just a touch shorter. Yet, the pay off was quite solid admittedly. Appropriately emotional and stirring, the ending really rips your heart out and makes you hate the people who did this to Kong. Overall, an appropriately epic blockbuster that entertains and thrills, but packed too much into just one film.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
MovieMasterEddyApr 6, 2016
Among the reasons "King Kong" - the old 100-minute black-and-white version, that is - has retained its appeal over the years is that it reminds audiences of the do-it-yourself, seat-of-the-pants ethic of early motion pictures. In 1933, whenAmong the reasons "King Kong" - the old 100-minute black-and-white version, that is - has retained its appeal over the years is that it reminds audiences of the do-it-yourself, seat-of-the-pants ethic of early motion pictures. In 1933, when RKO released it, sound film was in its infancy, and film itself was in the midst of a coltish, irrepressible adolescence. Merian C. Cooper and Ernest Schoedsack, who directed the first "Kong," understood the alchemical convergence of gimmickry and sublimity that lay at the heart of the medium's unrivaled potential to generate spectacle and sensation.

That potential still exists, but it may be harder to find these days, given how much bigger and more self-important movies have become. In his gargantuan, mightily entertaining remake, "King Kong," Peter Jackson tries to pay homage to the original even as he labors to surpass it. The sheer audacious novelty of the first "King Kong" is not something that can be replicated, but in throwing every available imaginative and technological resource into the effort, Mr. Jackson comes pretty close.

The threshold of sensation has risen drastically since the 30's, when movies were still associated with older, somewhat disreputable forms of popular culture. Unlike the 1976 remake, which tried to drag the story into the corporate present, Mr. Jackson's version returns it to the Great Depression, reminding us that the road to the multiplex stretches back through the music halls and burlesque houses of those bygone days.

Of course, this new "King Kong" (written by Mr. Jackson and his frequent collaborators Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens) cost more than $200 million to make and can hardly be called scruffy. It arrives burdened with impossible expectations and harassed by competition from all sides. The director, who not so long ago was making low-budget monster movies in his native New Zealand, clearly wants to hold onto the artisanal, eccentric spirit of the past - his own and that of the art form he loves. But at the same time he must live up to the success of his "Lord of the Rings" trilogy and prove to a glutted, gluttonous audience that large-scale, effects-driven filmmaking is still capable of novelty, freshness and emotional impact.

He succeeds through a combination of modesty and reckless glee, topping himself at every turn and reveling in his own showmanship. His "King Kong," though it has a few flourishes of tongue-in-cheek knowingness - including references to Cooper and Fay Wray and shots that directly quote the original - never feels self-conscious or arch. And though it presents the interspecies love story between Kong (Andy Serkis, who also plays a shipboard cook named Lumpy) and Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts) with touching sincerity, the picture wears its themes lightly, waving away the somber, allegorical sententiousness that too many blockbusters ("Lord of the Rings" included) rely upon to justify their exorbitant costs. The movie is, almost by definition, too much - too long, too big, too stuffed with characters and over-the-top set pieces - but it is animated by an impish, generous grace. Three hours in the dark with a giant, angry ape should leave you feeling battered and exhausted, but "King Kong" is as memorable for its sweetness as for its sensationalism.

After setting a nostalgic mood with Art Deco titles and James Newton Howard's old-fashioned movie-palace overture, "King Kong" plunges into a New York of vaudeville houses, soup lines and Hooverville encampments. Ann, a winsome, wholesome hoofer, is performing in a threadbare revue that shuts down just as Carl Denham (Jack Black) loses the star of his next movie. Somehow, he entices not only Ann, but also her favorite playwright, the Barton Finkish Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody), onto a rusty tub whose unsavory captain (Thomas Kretschmann) captures and transports exotic animals. Denham's plan is to take his film crew - which also includes his anxious assistant (Colin Hanks) and lantern-jawed star (Kyle Chandler) - to Skull Island, where they will discover Kong.

The rapport between Ms. Watts and Mr. Serkis is extraordinary, even though it is mediated by fur, latex, optical illusions and complicated effects. Mr. Serkis, who also played Gollum in the "Lord of the Rings" movies, is redefining screen acting for the digital age, while Ms. Watts incarnates the glamour and emotional directness of classical Hollywood. Together they form one of the most unlikely and affecting screen couples since Anthony Quinn and Giulietta Masina did their beast and beauty act in "La Strada."

The climax of "King Kong" - one of the most familiar sequences in movies, and one that never grows old - exemplifies both tendencies. It is shameless and exalted, absurd and sublime, vulgar and grand. It's what movies were made for.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
AliceofXFeb 7, 2016
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. In many ways King Kong is a great film. It's cinematic, it's epic! The beginning gives you the feel that you're in for a great film. But alas it's all down hill from there.

The biggest failure is in the action scenes that happen during the middle. There they fight a number of weird creatures and prehistoric beasts and it's all just so contrived and redundant. What was the point of all this? All it did was make me bored. It didn't help that it was very one toned so it was hard to tell what is going on. Plus the green screen was just terrible. Immersion in the world: zero.

The second, and by far the most awkward thing about this film, was the film makers attempt to create some kind of romance between King Kong and Ann. Like supposedly in her brief time as a kidnapee she falls in love with him and all the time as I was watching it I wanted to yell: „lady, you're weird!" The whole thing is just bizarre.

But it's all just a shame because the movie has a good story and interesting metaphors about film. The things that are not butchered are done well. It had the potential for greatness but it missed the mark.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
EpicLadySpongeJan 20, 2016
A good remake of the original. What's so bad about it? Jack Black's in it. Other than that, it's a gorilla taking down a plane holding a woman reminding you how 1933 went by so fast.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
Jollyjoe1000Nov 27, 2015
Most of the movie is enjoyable.But the ending completely ruins the movie.I want a good ending.King Kong should not be killed.Thanks a lot universal you made the most overrated movie ever.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
diogomendesJul 30, 2015
While some special effects (excluding King Kong himself) are lazily unfinished and its pace can sometimes be problematic, "King Kong" is a solid update of the 1933's picture thanks to talented performances and enthralling direction.

6.5/10
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
CineAutoctonoJul 21, 2015
Very good movie . a remake is not as famous as the 33 ' but even if errors scene brontosaurus stampede and participation of Jack Black in this action adventure movie and drama. This project has taken its format very well.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
darkbloodshed13May 22, 2015
"King Kong" is a good movie, not great, not bad, but good. Which arguably makes it worth the watch, since there vary view things to complain about, but also because there is a lack of stuff to be excited about. I wish I could say that this"King Kong" is a good movie, not great, not bad, but good. Which arguably makes it worth the watch, since there vary view things to complain about, but also because there is a lack of stuff to be excited about. I wish I could say that this movie was fantastic and you should go buy a copy, but you should only get this movie if your curious about, not if your looking for something to blow your mind.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
MovieManiac83Apr 23, 2015
By choosing to re-make King Kong, an American iconic masterpiece, Peter Jackson set a task for himself higher than the Empire State Building. Making this movie wasn't just following up The Lord of the Rings, it was the fulfillment of aBy choosing to re-make King Kong, an American iconic masterpiece, Peter Jackson set a task for himself higher than the Empire State Building. Making this movie wasn't just following up The Lord of the Rings, it was the fulfillment of a lifelong dream. And, as with all such personal projects, this one ran the danger of not working because the director was too close to the material. (Steven Spielberg's Hook and Atom Egoyan's Ararat fall into that category.) Fortunately, Jackson's passion for the material did not dim his creative senses. By combining the best elements of the 1933 and 1976 versions of the film with his own contributions, Jackson has made what many will consider to be the definitive King Kong. There's no need to try this story again; it's doubtful it can be improved upon.

f there's a flaw in King Kong, it's that Jackson spends a little too long setting things up. It's understandable that he wants to spend some time with the characters so we get to know them before the action starts, but the 70-minute build-up seems excessive. There is an impact to early momentum, and some audience restlessness can be expected. While it's true that the two earlier movies also devoted the first third of their running times to setup, that amounted to 35 minutes for the 1933 picture and 45 minutes for the 1976 editions.

Once the action starts, however, it's difficult to find something more energetic, more daring, and more touching than King Kong. This is roughly two hours of the best movie-making available today. It's worth every penny (and more) that was spent bringing it to the screen. As eye candy goes, only Revenge of the Sith equals it from 2005, and King Kong is overall a richer and more satisfying cinematic experience.

Despite three prominent human actors, the star of the movie, as one might expect from the title, is the giant primate. Kong has gone from being an 18-inch high clay puppet to a man in a monkey suit to a beautifully rendered CGI creature. His range of motion and ability to react believably have improved with each incarnation. This Kong uses an amazing range of facial expressions and, when you look into his eyes, you can't believe he isn't real. Andy Serkis, who helped Jackson by "playing" Gollum in The Lord of the Rings, lends his motion capture skills to Kong, and the results are so stunning that one is tempted to believe that Jackson went to a South Pacific Island and found a 25-foot high ape. Kong shows nearly every emotion across the spectrum: puzzlement, rage, amusement, bemusement, possessiveness, tenderness, and affection. And Kong does some things that couldn't have been accomplished using any other special effects technique. Try orchestrating the T-Rex battle another way.

The musical score is nondescript, but perhaps that's not James Newton Howard's fault. He was selected by Jackson late in the process to replace Howard Shore, and only had a couple of months to write and record everything. The best thing that can be said about the music is that it's never intrusive. Visually, as one would expect, King Kong is a marvel. The decision to do no location shooting allows the Skull Island scenes to be eerie and claustrophobic. And Jackson's re-creation of Depression-era New York, while not rigorously accurate historically, fits nicely into a nostalgia mold.

It is possible for an old-time monster to make a triumphant re-appearance. Jackson's King Kong casts a huge shadow over the history of this "movie monster" - not big enough to eclipse the 1933 or 1976 tellings of the same story, but impressive enough to remind us that, with a wizard at the helm, there are times when re-makes can be glorious things.

Would of been a lot better if it had been 40 minutes shorter.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
acaiberryMar 19, 2015
This is one of my first reviews for a movie because this is one of the first DVDs I bought as a kid. If you're looking to watch this movie, please know that the camera/directing is very good and that you could be out of your chair at someThis is one of my first reviews for a movie because this is one of the first DVDs I bought as a kid. If you're looking to watch this movie, please know that the camera/directing is very good and that you could be out of your chair at some scenes. It is a breathtaking experience served with a unique but memorable plot. As far as music (I always check out the music), it is solid, and Andy Serkis has become such a pleasure to watch. Also, as much as it is exciting to watch, pay attention as most of the scenes are symbolic and I appreciate that as a film-lover.

The picture is on point but I will say this movie did get lengthy and it was hard to focus a few times.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
calhouniteMar 11, 2015
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Depends on which cut.

Director's cut where Kong shows some signs of life, they're about to finish him off, but Beauty jumps down on his belly from the top story of the building, and negotiates a reapproachment with the city, where Kong agrees to work in construction to pay off the damage.

Then Kong and her human lover agree to a civilized duel. Kong suggests arm wrestling but the guy suggest a count contest to 2. Kong bangs two fists in the pavement, considered a tie. so Beauty becomes a Mormon and marries them both, and they take up residence back on the top floor and they all join the social circuit..

Then Kong takes a dump in Times Square and is shipped by to Skullsville.

That gets an 8, but if get the Beauty killed a beast line ... 3… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
homer4presidentMar 11, 2015
King Kong is Peter Jackon's big, bold remake of the revered 1933 original. Getting off to a slow - though not uninteresting start, this movie really begins to shine once the Venture arrives at Skull Island, where Jackson and his team onceKing Kong is Peter Jackon's big, bold remake of the revered 1933 original. Getting off to a slow - though not uninteresting start, this movie really begins to shine once the Venture arrives at Skull Island, where Jackson and his team once again prove their spectacular prowess in the world of visual effects. The choreography and execution of the action scenes are nothing short of stunning (particularly in the one involving Kong and 3 T-Rex, as well as another that can only be described as a bug-phobic's worst nightmare.) Kong succeeds on the emotional level as well, playing out the platonic love-story with surprising poignancy and depth.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
Le__XenomorphDec 29, 2014
A great King Kong remake with great acting and an especially terrific performance from Andy Serkis who's motion capture effects is the best CGI in the film as the dinosaurs looked fake. Overall, King Kong is a great remake and remains in myA great King Kong remake with great acting and an especially terrific performance from Andy Serkis who's motion capture effects is the best CGI in the film as the dinosaurs looked fake. Overall, King Kong is a great remake and remains in my top 10 monster flicks of all time. 8/10 (Great)… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
evtsoaresDec 17, 2014
It is the unexplained feeling of watching King Kong . It is epic , a film that merges all of the seventh art styles . In my opinion the best ever made so far.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
juliankennedy23Sep 5, 2014
King Kong 8 out of 10: Peter Jackson's Kong is a long love letter to the original movie that surprisingly turns into that rarest of crowd pleasers. A movie that both men and their gals will like. Like Titanic, Kong has enough action to keepKing Kong 8 out of 10: Peter Jackson's Kong is a long love letter to the original movie that surprisingly turns into that rarest of crowd pleasers. A movie that both men and their gals will like. Like Titanic, Kong has enough action to keep boys of all ages happy and a romance (complete with tragic ending) to get the ladies crying.

And what a romance. Kong and Naomi Watts light up the screen with that most famous of dysfunctional cross species parings. And while you may be mumbling Stockholm Syndrome at the beginning (Not to mention whiplash, jeez Jackson turn down the rag doll physics on the Naomi Watts CGI effect. The way Kong flings her around she should end the film in a body cast) the romance seems to win even the cynics (yours truly) at the end.

The rest of the cast is also top notch with Jack Black playing an Orson Wells style director so well it is almost freighting. Speaking of frightening many people wondered aloud how Jackson would handle the racist caricature (by today standards) of the island natives especially considering the whole disturbing white wizard versus the "dark forces" subtext of the LOTR films. Not to worry the embarrassing stereotypes of happy dancing black people are mocked in the Kong stage show putting that embarrassing Hollywood episode to rest. Instead the residents of Skull Island are some of the scariest people ever put on film. Pushing the PG-13 rating to the limit they put the can back in cannibal. Bashing skulls, going into voodoo trances and kidnapping white woman they invoke the much happier stereotype of the true island savage. Hell they are scarier than the ape.

Possible racial insensitivity aside Kong isn't perfect. The special effects are overall top notch but when people run with dinosaurs the limit of the blue screen show through (And could we get a moratorium on velociraptors in movies. They are really getting cliché and being a relatively new paleontological find really don't fit in a thirties era Kong movie. Yes I know that isn't logical but they kind of seem modern as if a character had a cell phone). The other problem is length. This feels like the directors cut. With an easy 30 minutes of film that could (and probably should) end up on the cutting room floor. We spend so much time in various Kong free Broadway theaters one might mistake this for a Yankee Doodle Dandy remake. All that said great action scary islanders and tragic romance make King Kong a winner.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
beingryanjudeSep 3, 2014
Peter Jackson's re-imagination of King Kong is a swell time to spend three hours. The new vision is stunning and heartfelt--he is influenced by the original work, but brings a new focus to the story.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
lukechristianscJul 31, 2014
there are so many king Kong movies like example the one that started from 1933 But this one is so much better then the 1933 version. King Kong is stunning it has creativity, imagination and talent.When you see this for the 100th or athere are so many king Kong movies like example the one that started from 1933 But this one is so much better then the 1933 version. King Kong is stunning it has creativity, imagination and talent.When you see this for the 100th or a million times you can understand that there's so much love that a beast and a woman and thats the love that the story on itself. you cant just watch this movie and skip the drama parts that watts love for the ape thats part of the passion and the story. You can understand that the love that a human and a animal thats part of kong's battle in the world. this movie would not be a huge hit if it wasn't for Peter Jackson even if he did not write the script it automatically it tells us he used his imagination in the screenplay or way it tells it adventure. Jackson its the new Steilberg he has a film makers eye with adventure, horror and its beautiful. Jackson has some movies that have a world of good imagination like the adventures of Titin. but there are some things wrong with his performance of directing like lord of the rings. Whats wrong with lord of the rings is its like a rush to the finish line. and we need to see it improve from Jackson thats the bad part of jackson that i dont like. kong is amazing movie. i hope theres king kong 2… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Critic0Jul 2, 2014
How do you make an alternative review of your favorite movie of all time by doing the remake of your favorite movie of all time? The answer is: you don't, but it must be done.

Surprisingly, this film satisfies fans of the original 1933How do you make an alternative review of your favorite movie of all time by doing the remake of your favorite movie of all time? The answer is: you don't, but it must be done.

Surprisingly, this film satisfies fans of the original 1933 classic by giving us a fine homage with familiar aspects while still giving us a fresh start. It may not attract new fans but it pleases any who watches it.

The films strongest suits are its leading lady, Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts) who delivers a strong performance that rivals that of the original Fay Wray by giving us a more likable and brave character rather than just a mere damsel-in-distress. The effects are also very well done, Weta Digital gives us a living and believable Skull Island and Andy Serkis' performance as Kong is top-notch.

The downsides are in the film's supporting cast, they are good characters but Adrien Brody is just boring, really boring, and Jack Black is kind of a jerk, but that's Carl for you.

In conclusion, King Kong is a faithful remake to probably the greatest movie ever made.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
Meth-dudeApr 26, 2014
Great cast,amazing acting and absolutely wonderful graphics.The movie is long but we don't see the time pass because the movie is so awesome.There is so many action scenes and the dinosaurs were realistic.I didn't like the original but this one wow!
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
FranzHcriticJan 26, 2014
Peter Jackson displays his talents with visuals, and a coherent storyline. While I still dislike and fail to respect remakes, 'King Kong' is one of those out a million that work, thanks to Jack Black and Adrien Brody. And Serkis is the onlyPeter Jackson displays his talents with visuals, and a coherent storyline. While I still dislike and fail to respect remakes, 'King Kong' is one of those out a million that work, thanks to Jack Black and Adrien Brody. And Serkis is the only person who can make motion capture work well. While the film still has his corny moments, especially at the ends, you can slowly forget the running time and be somewhat enthralled in the icon of King Kong… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
MovieGuysJan 17, 2014
King Kong is petty good in terms of story and acting, but its 187 minute runtime makes it feel like you're watching it for a month. While movies like Lawrence of Arabia and Gone With The Wind may be justifiably long, King Kong isn't.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
OfficialDec 29, 2013
Yes, "King Kong" is slightly overlong (theatrical: 187 minutes, extended: 201 minutes), but you cannot deny that it is an emotional and powerful epic. Director Peter Jackson, who also helmed the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, once again bringsYes, "King Kong" is slightly overlong (theatrical: 187 minutes, extended: 201 minutes), but you cannot deny that it is an emotional and powerful epic. Director Peter Jackson, who also helmed the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, once again brings us a memorable, visually stunning adventure.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
skyminsterSep 20, 2013
King Kong may not be as good as some of Peter Jackson's incredible works, but is still amazing. It requires patience to watch the whole movie, as it is very long, slow and progressive, but it's worth it if you sit through the whole thing. TheKing Kong may not be as good as some of Peter Jackson's incredible works, but is still amazing. It requires patience to watch the whole movie, as it is very long, slow and progressive, but it's worth it if you sit through the whole thing. The camera-work is fantastic and captures moments brilliantly, and the music perfectly blends in with whichever scene/moment it is played in, especially when it is an emotional scene. This film isn't overly long and I don't understand why people complain about it's lengh, as it's a good thing that it's long, because it lets you think about whats happening and it lets you make the most of the moment; it's like a progressive rock song. The character building is superb and the acting is fantastic. The progressive feel to the film makes the finale all the more amazing, as the action, story and characters come together to make something spectacular, emotional and immensely gripping.

King Kong is a brilliant blend of action, adventure, and suspence. It is the film equivalent of a fantastic progressive rock song. So I give this film a 94/100!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
BradySmithAug 26, 2013
A superb remake, and a thrilling adventure on its own terms, King Kong was one of 2005's most entertaining movies. It starts out slow, with a very 1930's vibe. I wouldn't consider the sections before the crew gets close to Skull IslandA superb remake, and a thrilling adventure on its own terms, King Kong was one of 2005's most entertaining movies. It starts out slow, with a very 1930's vibe. I wouldn't consider the sections before the crew gets close to Skull Island great filmmaking exactly, but Jackson has made good choice not to rush the story. Once they get to the island it proves that it was well worth the half hour wait. Believable performances, for the most part incredible special effects, Jackson's expert direction, and real emotion make this a must own. Granted, when I first saw the previews years ago I was hoping for a more surreal and out there vision of the story, but what we got was more than good enough. Almost forgot to mention how great the movie's score was. (That means the background music.)… Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
8
ScorpionMay 19, 2013
His technique is flawless part, bringing the screen one of the most beautiful scriptures that special effects can bring, but its history is truncated because there a lot of fantasy, and his cast is divided, on one side, Jack Black and JohnHis technique is flawless part, bringing the screen one of the most beautiful scriptures that special effects can bring, but its history is truncated because there a lot of fantasy, and his cast is divided, on one side, Jack Black and John goodmam sound naturally while A.Brodie and Naomi W. sound very theatrical because of the nature of their characters, but the film is still good, and shows that Peter Jacsom have a lot of creativity, even if it is not always for the good of the film.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
JamesCannonApr 8, 2013
many either love it or hate it....I found it way over serious at times for the material and the first hour just drags forever. The cast doesnt have that good chemistry and it looks like a lot of the actors spent a lot of time in from of amany either love it or hate it....I found it way over serious at times for the material and the first hour just drags forever. The cast doesnt have that good chemistry and it looks like a lot of the actors spent a lot of time in from of a blue screen making funny faces. The middle hour is good but nothing really connects through out the movie and the cgi comes to the point where its too much. It is a challenging movie to make but its pretty flat most of the time.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Trev29Mar 30, 2013
A lavish long-winded beautiful bore. Compacted with unnecessarily elongated scenes that take away from the central theme. A movie at first you enjoy but are then forced to endure.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
sil3nt_nickMar 24, 2013
Very good special effects although the plot line could have used a bit more.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
mds03Mar 3, 2013
This is probably the most anticipated movie of 2005. It was very entertaining and very unpredictable. Naomi Watts and Jack Black were fantastic for their roles. It's so entertaining that the 3 hours of it feels like 1 hour.
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
10
csw12Feb 14, 2013
Peter Jackson has done it again. King Kong is majestic, beautifully executed and a stunning love story. The movie is simple, but so effective, just a tragic story that holds you emotionally and visually from beginning to end. King KongPeter Jackson has done it again. King Kong is majestic, beautifully executed and a stunning love story. The movie is simple, but so effective, just a tragic story that holds you emotionally and visually from beginning to end. King Kong proves that Jackson is one hell of a director.… Expand
5 of 5 users found this helpful50
All this user's reviews
9
diego9901Feb 3, 2013
esta es una entretenida sofocante y excitante película llena de actuaciones espectaculares y ni que decir de sus efectos esta es sin duda otra obra maestra de peter jackson
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
MouthofSauronDec 19, 2012
"King Kong" is a wonderfully imagined retelling of a cinema icon. Perhaps it's an overlong adventure, but things start ratcheting up once Kong is finally introduced. Excellent filmmaking.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
axelkochDec 10, 2012
It's an awesome adventure speaking of special effects. The team around this movie created such a great world, all props go to the CGI team. But in other aspects, this movie is too long, the cast is only mediocre (Jack Black is bad) and it'sIt's an awesome adventure speaking of special effects. The team around this movie created such a great world, all props go to the CGI team. But in other aspects, this movie is too long, the cast is only mediocre (Jack Black is bad) and it's got a ragged editing. The succeeding of scenes is often poor and so is the whole script. Nonetheless those things, I enjoyed the fantasy world really much and it's an entertaining and cool picture.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
Compi24Nov 28, 2012
It may have dragged a bit in some parts but Peter Jackson's visually resplendent remake of "King Kong" still resonated well with me in the end.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
cameronmorewoodNov 8, 2012
King Kong opens up quietly asking questions and provoking thoughts. It then entrances us by plucking us from our chairs and throwing us into a dazzling and breath-taking fantasy world created with some incredible special effects. To seal theKing Kong opens up quietly asking questions and provoking thoughts. It then entrances us by plucking us from our chairs and throwing us into a dazzling and breath-taking fantasy world created with some incredible special effects. To seal the deal, in its last hour, it grows close to our hearts and then floors us.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
DuffladJun 30, 2012
The more I watch this movie, the crappier it gets. Why? Because half of it is just screaming.. The acting was crap for the most part, I hate to **** talk Peter Jackson, but sorry man, this one was good for its time, but it has died to me.
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
10
ZilcellMay 25, 2012
King Kong has very jaw dropping brawls with Kong. The story is everything that King Kong is and should be. Its a great remake and a very memorable story.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Critic2012Apr 21, 2012
With KING KONG, Peter Jackson has added yet another epic film to his resume'. Ground-breaking special effects, along with an excellent plot and cast, makes the film thoroughly engrossing, (and at times, terrifying). The only drawback is theWith KING KONG, Peter Jackson has added yet another epic film to his resume'. Ground-breaking special effects, along with an excellent plot and cast, makes the film thoroughly engrossing, (and at times, terrifying). The only drawback is the length. (And many agree on this point). The film could have intensified exponentially if only it was a good two and a half hours instead of three and change.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
watithink123Apr 15, 2012
Best King Kong by a long shot. Worth watching with a friend and much better than the other ones. King Kong 7.4
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
JuanoloMar 31, 2012
First off, this is a 9.5 out of 10. Effects are spectacular. To king kong, to environments, to dinosaurs, to epic airplane battles, this movies have awesome visual effects. Score is good, Acting well done, and story is good. Probably long andFirst off, this is a 9.5 out of 10. Effects are spectacular. To king kong, to environments, to dinosaurs, to epic airplane battles, this movies have awesome visual effects. Score is good, Acting well done, and story is good. Probably long and pulled on but still good. Overall, great movie. A great blockbuster.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
Nero97Jan 9, 2012
Great movie, nice soundtrack and environment, but way to long. The movie is really good, but so long that it gets quite boring after some time...and it gets exciting again at the ending.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
schwarz_kelloggDec 10, 2011
Quite good! The effects were tremendous. Even so is the fight scene between Kong & Dinosaurs!!! Very compelling!!! But after that, it's borin'... Too much effort in tellin' the Kong-going-NY story instead of the interaction between theQuite good! The effects were tremendous. Even so is the fight scene between Kong & Dinosaurs!!! Very compelling!!! But after that, it's borin'... Too much effort in tellin' the Kong-going-NY story instead of the interaction between the duo and the 'triangle'...… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
MrZeekoeNov 20, 2011
I dont care what other people say. For me it is one of the best movies ever! The action and graphics are awesome! Its just so sad that King Kong has to die so tragicly... I cry everytime I see the ending.... And im boy but i dont care...
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
FFStudiosNov 11, 2011
I'm honestly not sure how to start this off. First of all, lets get negatives out the way as usual: at over 3 hours long, the film feels bloated and stuffed with a noisy barrage of action sequences. Many of the creatures devised throughoutI'm honestly not sure how to start this off. First of all, lets get negatives out the way as usual: at over 3 hours long, the film feels bloated and stuffed with a noisy barrage of action sequences. Many of the creatures devised throughout the film (such as the V-rex) seem to go by the theory that 'the bigger it is, the scarier'. The film makes attempts at this cinematic intensity; with varying degrees of success ranging from surprising to plain flat. The action scenes are often disjointed and feel as if they are all competing to see who can make the most thrilling scene. Anyhow, rant over. The visual effects are admittitly very stunning, though sometimes overused. The acting is mostly solid and the underlying story isn't too bad, although the second act seems a complete jumbled narrative mess.
Overall, this is still a resonably made film that still manages to maintain its intensity and shock-and-awe moments when it needs to. Definately worth a look.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
imthecriticNov 11, 2011
Saw this movie once again after a long time, and i still love it. Though better CGI will come in future years the emotions portrayed by kong will never fail to enthrall. Its a true masterpiece and the best kong movie made up-to date, thisSaw this movie once again after a long time, and i still love it. Though better CGI will come in future years the emotions portrayed by kong will never fail to enthrall. Its a true masterpiece and the best kong movie made up-to date, this will always be in my list of all time greatest movies.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
Potter17Oct 9, 2011
It doesn't disappoint as a remake. Actually, Peter Jackson's vision of King Kong is more epic, passionate and unforgettable than the original.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
grandpajoe6191Sep 27, 2011
"King Kong" is a great summer blockbuster movie that will throw you out of your mind. However, that's as far as the movie can get to you.
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
5
harlthegr8Aug 24, 2011
Special effects were out of this world awesome, and the storyline was pretty good...BUT...it was about an hour too long! It spends a good 40 minutes of the movie before it even gets to King Kong! then we still have to witness hisSpecial effects were out of this world awesome, and the storyline was pretty good...BUT...it was about an hour too long! It spends a good 40 minutes of the movie before it even gets to King Kong! then we still have to witness his capture/relationship with Naomi Watts' character, and his tirade in New York City! I have only been able to watch it all the way through in one sitting once. Also, Jack Black just drags the cast down. There are SOO many other great actors in the movie that he sticks out like a sore thumb. Great "try" but I expected better.… Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
0
GreenlemonadeJul 3, 2011
This is my least favorite movie of all time.
In his attempt to make King Kong more like Lord of the Rings, Jackson has made an epic exposition of unbelievable events and stupidity. This movie is at least 1 hour too long and every actionThis is my least favorite movie of all time.
In his attempt to make King Kong more like Lord of the Rings, Jackson has made an epic exposition of unbelievable events and stupidity. This movie is at least 1 hour too long and every action scene is less plausible than the last, removing all tension and immersion. There are no likable protagonists, villains or heroes and the plot and character development are more childish than an episode of Sponge Bob.
I truly hate this pile of crap that King Kong himself could not excrete from his massive anus.… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
VaiKellyMar 24, 2011
First of all, a three-hour marathon is precisely what I expect from Peter Jackson. I really do! He makes movies like very few in the world - he's precise, thorough, immaculate, and needs a canvass that he can expand as much as he needs. KingFirst of all, a three-hour marathon is precisely what I expect from Peter Jackson. I really do! He makes movies like very few in the world - he's precise, thorough, immaculate, and needs a canvass that he can expand as much as he needs. King Kong is not at all boring or lengthy, it is just right for the way Jackson builds his characters up, lets the audience into Kong, into the overall evolution of the movie's plot. It is obvious that Jackson's major emphasis is on Kong and Ann (Naomi Watts), and he takes his time with them. Andy Serkis, who also played Gollum in the Lord of the Ring trilogy, is a chameleon and master of the fantasy-creatures theme. Serkis has given Kong a life of its own, and his interplay with Watts' character is the highlight of the movie. Now, what were Jack Black and Adrien Brody doing is a question that really got to me. I seriously wonder if Carl Denham had been played by, say, Tom Wilkinson, Denham might have been 'logical' for me. Black's too young to play Denham's treacherous, unethical, and callous personality, Wilkinson might have been a logical fit with his age and acting credentials, along with some serious bodyweight loss and a younger-looking make-up! But I'm running into Skull Island fantasy here! I enjoyed the action sequences, Kong's physical specimen is a sight to behold, though that ultimate fight between Kong and the before-mutation dinosaurs, when Kong rescues Ann, was probably too long and lengthy for me. As if Kong wasn't done with three monster dinos, he still has to fight his way through the labyrinth of those eerie vines and climb down to land to fight the 'mother' dino of them all! The final city scenes were captivating, the sound and urgency of the situation was just perfect. Perhaps, just perhaps, Jackson felt that if the audience were led to the 'beauty killed the beast, not the guns' part, the death of Kong would seem cathartic and logical enough. I enjoyed the background score by James Newton Howard who compliments Kong's physical rage with the softest piano and orchestral notes, and yet, elevates it a notch above when the action gets going. All in all, Jackson doesn't disappoint, and neither does Serkis or Watts. Black was the disappointment for me. He was much, much better and natural in his magnum opus, School of Rock. In King Kong, he's just a naturally-good comedy actor trying to portray serious and cunning. He's failed miserably. Which is surprising, because his Ned Schneebly/Dewey Finn was an amazing and finely-balanced performance.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
gm101Feb 15, 2011
While the ending wasn't really satisfying, overall, it was a fun ride. And I actually didn't mind the length of the movie, something I criticised Peter Kackson's LOTR trilogy for.
7 of 7 users found this helpful70
All this user's reviews
6
sreekiranDec 15, 2010
king kong is the remake of the original movie. there is no novelity in the script. the movie is just a remake.
execution is nice. enthralling and captivating. direction screenplay and technical values are the upper hand to the movie. castingking kong is the remake of the original movie. there is no novelity in the script. the movie is just a remake.
execution is nice. enthralling and captivating. direction screenplay and technical values are the upper hand to the movie. casting is nice and production values are worthy. the final grade of the movie is B+… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
MovieLonely94Oct 30, 2010
the minute length was way too longer when its resonant, but that didn't stop Peter Jackson for making this perfect hit.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
HarbingerAug 14, 2010
King Kong is one of the most memorable and celebrated stories of all-time. This remake or "re-envisioned" version of the original King Kongs is stunning, heartful, and simply unforgettable. Peter Jackson creates a remarkable and hauntingKing Kong is one of the most memorable and celebrated stories of all-time. This remake or "re-envisioned" version of the original King Kongs is stunning, heartful, and simply unforgettable. Peter Jackson creates a remarkable and haunting Skull Island. King Kong is arguably the greatest CGI character of all-time. Forget 'Avatar', this is CGI at its best. Kong has emotion, cuts, etc. You can practically believe he or any other creature of Skull Island are real, thanks to the superb visuals. Despite the huge runtime, Kong never falters and does justice to its source material-and then some. I truly believe that this version of Kong is the best ever released. Everything is damn-right perfect, and you can't help but cry at the end, even though you already know what is going to happen to Kong. This movie transcends all of its hype and truly engages us on all levels: visual, intellectual and emotional. A true masterpiece. Go see it-now.… Expand
16 of 18 users found this helpful162
All this user's reviews
8
JayH.Jun 14, 2009
I lives up to all the hype. This is one hugely entertaining film. Naomi Watts is great and the rest of the cast is fine as well. The special effects are some of the best I have ever seen. It hardly seemed three hours plus because the film I lives up to all the hype. This is one hugely entertaining film. Naomi Watts is great and the rest of the cast is fine as well. The special effects are some of the best I have ever seen. It hardly seemed three hours plus because the film was immensely engrossing. Peter Jackson did a great job. The sets, sound and editing are all first rate. The period detail of 1933 is fantastic. This is brilliant film making and has everything a great movie should have.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
StephenH.Aug 1, 2008
Generally an ok film, but i lost interest at certain points. I found the boat journey to the island the most enjoyable bit. Some fo the effects were very real, while others needed a bit more imagination and forgiveness, not that i'd Generally an ok film, but i lost interest at certain points. I found the boat journey to the island the most enjoyable bit. Some fo the effects were very real, while others needed a bit more imagination and forgiveness, not that i'd ever rate a film on special effects anyway. We have no idea where all the natives disapeared to, i guess they just weren't required for the film. Overall it was enjoyable, but a tad long and in some places defying the laws of physics and chance in a lot of the action sequences to a point even the most openminded of people couldn't forgive.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
EricK.May 11, 2008
A disgrace to the original, which is one of the greatest films of all time.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
8
ShaneB.Jan 12, 2008
This is my review of King Kong. Pretty much, it's about Ann Darrow, a woman who, after losing her job in 1933, is offered to be in a movie by a rebellious filmmaker, named Carl Denham, who trying to make a movie. They go on a ship and This is my review of King Kong. Pretty much, it's about Ann Darrow, a woman who, after losing her job in 1933, is offered to be in a movie by a rebellious filmmaker, named Carl Denham, who trying to make a movie. They go on a ship and end up at skull island, where Ann is sacrificed to the ape Kong. Now the only reason i wanted to see this movie was because it was directed by Peter Jackson. So, all in all, it was one of the best movies of 2005. the acting was okay, the action was spectacular. Yet the special effects was mixed. Some effects were awesome, like Kong. Yet others were no good at all. So this is a good film to see. I give Kong 2005 an 8/10.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
NickA.Oct 30, 2007
I
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
FrancoN.Oct 24, 2007
Like the big ape himself, this movie was bloated and flabby. They could have at least cut 45 minutes out of it.
5 of 8 users found this helpful
6
BalzacOct 7, 2007
Like the Big Ape himself, this movie is bloated with too much flab. Kong himself looks like Mighty Joe Young. They made him too small. The scene where Kong wipes the jungle floor with 3 T-Rexes is overkill an not believable. But hey, Like the Big Ape himself, this movie is bloated with too much flab. Kong himself looks like Mighty Joe Young. They made him too small. The scene where Kong wipes the jungle floor with 3 T-Rexes is overkill an not believable. But hey, it's a picture about a giant ape and his blond girlfriend.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
GregA.Aug 12, 2007
Just watched this on DVD last night and thought it was fantastic - only wished I had seen it on the big screen. Previous to that I was a bit wary of this film due to the length of it, but I was wrong, I didn't feel it was drawn out at Just watched this on DVD last night and thought it was fantastic - only wished I had seen it on the big screen. Previous to that I was a bit wary of this film due to the length of it, but I was wrong, I didn't feel it was drawn out at all - you may question the slow bits with Naomi and Kong but without it the purpose to the movie would be lost. It is a couple years old now, but if you haven't seen it and want to see some great special effects coupled with a solid storyline I highly recommend it.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AustinM.Aug 9, 2007
Kong's one the greatest movies ever, excellent special effects, I love every action scene in this movie. After those three hours, it felt like the movie was short, I know most people saw it's long, but I didn't, I wanted at Kong's one the greatest movies ever, excellent special effects, I love every action scene in this movie. After those three hours, it felt like the movie was short, I know most people saw it's long, but I didn't, I wanted at least another half hour.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MarkDJul 12, 2007
I see views and ratings vary wildly for this movie. Some criticisms are just; it was a teeny bit too long and some of the action scenes were poorly done and unnecessary. I get the impression, though, that some people are carping and nit I see views and ratings vary wildly for this movie. Some criticisms are just; it was a teeny bit too long and some of the action scenes were poorly done and unnecessary. I get the impression, though, that some people are carping and nit picking while choosing to ignore (or perhaps just not getting) the emotional and moral core at the heart of this movie. The key is in the very last line - and it's heartbreaking. If you don't get it I'm not going to explain it to you but to sum it up, this movie is both exciting and beautiful. This movie is Hollywood at it's very best.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
AndievJul 2, 2007
the movie was pretty good, i did cry a little at the end, when king kong fell off the empire state building, the actors and actresses were very skilled, naomi watts was excellent, the jungle insects scared me and i think my money didn't the movie was pretty good, i did cry a little at the end, when king kong fell off the empire state building, the actors and actresses were very skilled, naomi watts was excellent, the jungle insects scared me and i think my money didn't completely go to waste. peter jackson is an amazing director.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
BrendanD.Apr 20, 2007
The "King Kong" with Faye Wray was a horrible, schlocky story that, quite frankly, demeaned everyone who worked on it, Wray included. The "King Kong" with Jeff Daniels suffered from its own epic delusions, finally crumbling under the weight The "King Kong" with Faye Wray was a horrible, schlocky story that, quite frankly, demeaned everyone who worked on it, Wray included. The "King Kong" with Jeff Daniels suffered from its own epic delusions, finally crumbling under the weight of a horrible direction. But Peter Jackson's take on "King Kong" is the worst version of the most overrated story of all time. First of all, Jackson tries to approach this version with the same eye that Steven Spielberg used in the first hour or so of "Jurassic Park." At this point, however, you can't do that, because "Jurassic Park" did that awe-inspiring animated-animals moment better than any movie before or since -- it still sends a shiver up my spine when I watch the brontosaur jump up to grab the top leaves on the trees. There is no "wow" moment in Jackson's "King Kong" because Jackson tries to cram "wow" moments in every five or six minutes, completely obliterating their impact. Now, I've heard from both critics and members of my own family that the ape was beautifully animated. I say now what I said to them: WHAT?!? Through the entire damned movie, all I could think was, "Wow, that ape doesn't look real at all; it looks like a character from an XBOX-360 game." The world in which Kong lives is likewise hokey, looking like nothing but lame backdrops excised from "Return of the King" (easily the worst and most pretentious of the "Lord of the Rings" movies). Then there's the writing. The story of "Kong" is bad enough, but humanizing the animal only makes it worse. Let's make one thing clear: Kong is a giant ape who appears to have marked intelligence and emotion. But he is still an ape! A friend once told me that this is a stupid reason to dislike the film, but frankly, I don't know how anyone could put the obvious bestial implications out of his or her mind. To be fair, the movie never even comes close to touching the bestiality subject; but the fact that there's even a hint that Naomi Watts's character might be feeling something for the ape is a little bit nausea-inducing. If there bond between Watts and the ape had been more a mother-son kind of relationship, the film might've worked better; but as it stands, it straddles the love relationship without fully dedicating itself one way or the other whilst hinting at the obviously disturbing prospect of an affair between the two. Meanwhile, the script itself is horrendous. There is not one good piece of dialogue throughout the entire film. I'm not sure if Jackson allowed a herd of rabid, mentally-challenged Venusian cows to write it, or if he got so wrapped up in chase scenes and third-rate "Jurassic Park" tyrannosaur knock-offs that he forgot that what's being said is important, but either way, not even Jack Black can save some of the dumbest lines ever uttered in cinematic history. ...Which brings me to my next point: The acting was atrocious. I have to disagree with those who have been pseudo-apologists for Jack Black, Naomi Watts, and Andy Serkis. Each of the three has done brilliant work in the past, but "Kong" is not something they should put on their resumes. Black spends the entire movie looking lost, and Serkis, who deserved a million awards for the Gollum-schizophrenia scene in "The Two Towers," does not make the big ape any more realistic. Even Watts, who at least attempts to bring something to the table, ends up crumbling under the weight of an overwrought, underdeveloped, underwritten script, and her performance suffers precisely because of it. Then there's Peter Jackson. After "The Two Towers," which I still believe was his crowning achievement as a director, I was willing to forgive the tedious final hour of "Return of the King," especially because the final two scenes were so emotionally powerful. "King Kong," however, is a directorial mess. He switches camera angles at all the wrong times, and he doesn't focus on what he should when he should. For example, the penultimate scene, the famous one in which Kong is assaulted by mighty fighter jets, gets lost in its own action; rather than using the beautiful backdrop of New York City as its focal point, it uses Kong, and Watts gets lost. This is no good, especially when the skyline of New York is dolled up to look like something out of "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." And here's another problem: the scale of everything changes when Kong gets to New York City. Kong was easily the largest thing on Skull Island; yet he is all-of-a-sudden minuscule when he climbs up the Empire State Building. This scene actually worked in previous incarnations of "Kong" because the ape wasn't meant to look too real, giving the (admittedly dumb) story a kind of fairy-tale feel to it. Here, however, Jackson has made a lot of attempts to show Kong's fur waving in the wind, his eyes twitching and blinking like a human's, his mouth occasionally twisting up into a man-like smile. You can't have it both ways! The ape has more distinct mannerisms than any Kong before it, and yet the Empire State Building looks like it could reach the Cloud City from "The Empire Strikes Back." Finally, as many have pointed out, there's the running time. Yes, about a good hour could've been trimmed off the movie and still gotten Jackson's point across, potentially better. But the first forty-five minutes are a snore, too, even though there's lots of plot happening; likewise, the return to New York City, before Kong shows up, is a snoozer, although it contains the entire setup for the Grand Finale. And that's not even counting the hour and a half (or so) Jackson spends on all the different weirdo Skull Island creatures. The point is, the movie plods along rather than meanders; and the action sequences, far from advancing the plot, make the story come to an absolute stand-still in favor of bang-bang-bang action. Honestly, I cannot fathom what possessed critics (or anyone else) to recommend this film. It is one of the most pretentious, boring, stupid movies ever made, and Jackson ought to issue a bigger apology for this than George Lucas needs to for "The Phantom Menace." We live in a digital age, which could've given Jackson the chance to bring something new to the Kong mythos. Instead, he simply rehashes what's already done (and actually kind of dumbs it down), crafting a movie that might've looked good in 1933, but that now just makes me want to throw popcorn at the screen and sit there for another three hours demanding that Jackson compensate me for the time spent watching this awful mess.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
10
SocoFeb 28, 2007
Excellent movie. Very intense and thrilling.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
MattY.Feb 11, 2007
The most amazing thing about King Kong is its consistency. This film delivers something genuinely idiotic every 10-15 seconds. After 3 hours of horrible dialogue, flat stock characers, and implausible action scenes, my throat was sore from The most amazing thing about King Kong is its consistency. This film delivers something genuinely idiotic every 10-15 seconds. After 3 hours of horrible dialogue, flat stock characers, and implausible action scenes, my throat was sore from scoffing. Generally, I would not waste my time railing about a Hollywood action movie.. but the amount of MONEY dumped into this movie makes the result more profane than the typical big-budget drivel. Man, you could change the world with $300,000,000... or you could make a few bucks and lower the worlds collective IQ.. Great choice Peter.… Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
prev
Page:
More From This Movie

81 Critic Reviews

7.4 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 81 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple
2 77 Project Hail Mary
3 75 Send Help
4 73 Hoppers
5 71 The Sheep Detectives
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL