f13.net

Was just on all the NBC and related channels simmultaneously.  Looked pretty cool.

That did look pretty cool, though I don't know why they actually showed King Kong being that this was the first trailer.

I just saw it on the big screen (it came attached to our prints of War of The Worlds), and I must say, it looks fucking incredible.

It looks amazing though I too was shocked that they showed Kong so much. I expected teases. Maybe an eye. A glimpse of a hairy arm. But nope. I've seen it all.

And I am there on opening day.

Bad sign when there are no teases... expect the next trailer to show every decent effects scene in the entire movie.

Besides, no authentic Fay Wray screams? Pfft.

SufD,

Have you seen War of the Worlds yet?  I'm torn on that one.

That trailer looked great. All I needed to see was King Kong vs. a goddamn T-Rex and I am so there.

http://www.kingkongmovie.com/ef239524432ba87f1ca8f70eed4b1fa7/en_splash.html

Holy fucking christ. All fear gone. Peter Jackson is truly a god among.....unkempt geeks. King Kong looks brilliant. If he can make Jack Black huge, even better.

That movie looks amazing.

Amen. I had forgotten he was even working on this, til TiVo kindly prompted me to tape the trailer. Wow. Looked awesome. I like the twisty re-telling they are giving it. Can't wait!

"You didn't tell me Sasquatch... ugh... was a dude..." -- Brock Samson

It's a big ape, not a xenomorph.  We know what he will look like.  I assume.

I really have no interest in this movie.

The Jeff Bridges/Jessica Lange/Charles Grodin version was one of the first movies I remember going to with my Dad (the other was the Legend of Boggy Creek, which scared the fuck out of me!  :oops: ). We tried to go to a matinee, but there was a line around the block (this was the 1970's- before the dawn of the multiplex). My dad decided to let my brother and I stay up late, and we went and saw the late evening show.

Strange what you remember from being a kid.

Wasn't there a 3D version of King Kong on TV back in the late 70's early 80's? Or am I just mis-remembering?

Was that the first in the series that included Boggy Creek II: The Legend Continues that was so mercilessly skewered by MSTK3?

Yep. The first one was a retelling of the stories of the Fouke Monster, which had been terrorizing residents in and around Fouke, Arkansas. It is filmed as part documentary, part re-creation. It is relatively cheesy, but pretty fucking scary for a 3 year old! I still loved it though.

The Fouke Monster is supposedly a Bigfoot/Sasquatch critter- there are tons of stories about it on the 'Net if you are so inclined. Between TLoBC and being a life-long resident of one of the 'hotbeds' of Bigfoot sightings/reports, I have always found the whole idea of Bigfoot really interesting (implausible, but interesting). Probably deserves its own thread if anyone wants to discuss it- apologies for the derail.

Looks like Jack Black can handle a dramatic role well. That, and the seemingly cool "Prehistoric Isle" setting will bring me into the theater.

But, really, some of that ape-handling ought to have snapped her neck.

Unfortunately, I have not.  I was working last night when they screened the one copy, and they made me watch the trailer pack to ensure it was assembled properly.  We still have 3 more prints to screen before wednesday however, so I may catch one toninght.

You guys are acting as if you never saw the original one. It used to play every Thanksgiving weekend when I was a kid. Jackson seems to be doing a true remake using modern tech instead of a re-hash. I salute the man!

(http://www.omelete.com.br/imagens/cinema/news/diversos/jack_black.jpg)

"Even when I'm not 100%, I still kick ass."

Jack Black = Andy will watch.

I don't either.

Bring The Hobbit, bitches.

The trailer linked to in this thread is itself better than War of the Worlds by a factor of about ten. Kong looks like it'll be good, and the fact that I like Jack Black in it suprises and intrigues me. WotW on the other hand should have been titled "Spielberg shits medicrity and Tom Cruise into your mouth". If you like paying people with way more ego than any sort of talent to shit  diarrhea into your mouth, you'll enjoy War of the Worlds. And I mean that literaly. If you liked War you are a shit-eater, a latent one at the very least. And no, the special effects are not enough to save the movie or make it worth watching.

Can you guys please give Bob a column already?

WotW is a tribute to mediocrity in filmaking and an incredible circle-jerk of previously seen Spielberg footage.

It's not great.

War is good right up until the end. There is a certain scene with Tom Cruise and one of his kids that has "test audience demanded this" written all over it. It totally blows believability out of the water.

Er, not so much.  The original Novel had the scene you are referencing.  But it's probably not a good idea to start a spoiler thingy this early.

It wasn't great for other reasons, though that could have been done better.

War was ok.  By no means a block buster to me.  The beginning was its strongest point.  They should have spent more time building on that.

Bah - the summer block buster for me is Batman.

Kong looks somewhat interesting.  For some reason, I still think of the old black and white Mighty Joe Young.

I think my review of WotW is going to be up on the frontpage today. So far, it seems my concerns were your concerns.

Wow.  Ok, I wrote off a King Kong remake soon as I saw the title, but the trailer has me interested.  It looks like Jackson is giving the same level of detail to visuals as he gave to LotR.  I love his move away from special affects as the focus to the setting being the focus.  No way this'll be as big as LotR, but it can still do well, and if it does Jackson won't be taken as a one trick pony. 

His existing productions should convince people he's not. Just to pick two very non-LotR movies: The Frighteners (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116365/) and Heavenly Creatures (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110005/).

No. War was good, despite horrid internal logic flaws and poor editing, until Tim Robbins showed up. At which point it went south. Way, way, south. The scene you reference was simply the icing on the cake of wretchedness that was the third act.

One trick pony HA he I believe was the director for Dead Alive go go PJ.


kaid

I'd rate war as half-decent. I like that it stuck to the story, and I had no real problems with the acting. The scenes that were supposed to be tense were, well, reasonably tense. I think it could have used a little something more just to get that mood across though. I never really felt scared for the characters.

Surprisingly, Cruise didn't bother me in this.

I'm aware that he's done other work, but since most of the world hasn't seen any of his work outside LotR, that's all he's really recognized for.  New Line obviously looked at his credentials, and it was part of their decision to invest so (so, SO *SO*) much money in the trillogy.  But, it's yet to be seen whether he can pull off another hundred million dollar project, or whether he's better suited to Sundance.  It's not like bad career moves haven't been made before (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114898/), in spectacular fashion.  Nothing is for certain in Hollywood.

Peter Jackson is capable of making a blockbuster. And simply not fucking up. He's worth throwing good talent at whether it be script writers or actors or producers or DPs. He can do another hundred million dollar project. He's a fatassed pimply geek. It's what he does. Personally, I'm proud of him for being able to go from tiny budget nothing movies to that.

Unfortunately, over time such things always become diluted as he's juts going through the motions. While his motions may be better than those from the old school, it'll seem formulaic. The question is can he make an excellent drama when the time comes (like Catch Me if you Can or Lost in Translation) or will he fall short. He may be pigeonholed as a Bay and Bruckheimer done Better.

As I think he himself said on the DVD, LOTR is his masterpiece and he can only go downhill from there. When he does "The Hobbit" it just can't be as epic, movies like that only come along every 10-20 years.

Hell, you couldn't make Hobbit epic if you tried.  It NEEDS to be more downbeat, more of a kids movie, anyways.