Universal Pictures | Release Date: December 14, 2005
7.3
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 1409 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,009
Mixed:
155
Negative:
245
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
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)
10
JayDec 15, 2005
Amazing movie, suspended belief is required for 99% of movies and it seems some reviewers here haven't quite grasped that concept yet. The first hour is long, but the rest of the movie is well worth the wait and long running time. Kong Amazing movie, suspended belief is required for 99% of movies and it seems some reviewers here haven't quite grasped that concept yet. The first hour is long, but the rest of the movie is well worth the wait and long running time. Kong is amazing and the movie as a whole is inspiring and amazingly well done. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
TaylorS.Dec 16, 2005
I saw this and my friends were amazed. I thought it was good, but something was missing. I couldn't put my finger on it, until reading other reviews. The movie was out of propotion: the ship scene was way too long, and not enough time I saw this and my friends were amazed. I thought it was good, but something was missing. I couldn't put my finger on it, until reading other reviews. The movie was out of propotion: the ship scene was way too long, and not enough time was spent in the end at New York. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ConradS.Dec 16, 2005
Ignore all the criticism, Peter Jackson might just walk away with another couple of Oscars.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DanielT.Dec 17, 2005
Ignore the po-faces who use words like "excessive", "indulgent" and "clunky", do these people even like movies? King Kong is a spectacular mega-event movie that should not be missed on the big screen. With over three hours of thrills, Ignore the po-faces who use words like "excessive", "indulgent" and "clunky", do these people even like movies? King Kong is a spectacular mega-event movie that should not be missed on the big screen. With over three hours of thrills, action, comedy and compassion, it's the perfect antidote to the banality of modern cinema. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
BudS.Dec 17, 2005
The original King Kong is the motion picture equivalent of the cotton gin: a groundbreaking, technical marvel in its time that's now an obsolete relic. With that in mind, I wasn't excited about a remake, but this exceeded my The original King Kong is the motion picture equivalent of the cotton gin: a groundbreaking, technical marvel in its time that's now an obsolete relic. With that in mind, I wasn't excited about a remake, but this exceeded my expectations. Frank O. is right, the first act is slow, "Jurassic Park" is a unimaginative knock-off of Kong...but I think this new Kong is really uneven. The second act just pounds you senseless with overkill (let's have one...no two...no three...no FOUR dinosaurs!...and before that a STAMPEDE!...) The third act, when Kong gets loose, that's the best part. The action is more impressive, there's some very graceful filmmaking (particularly the quiet moments and the way they're interrupted), and the look of 1930's New York during December is GORGEOUS. (Naomi Watts has also never looked better.) Jackson also does a good job of recreating the memorable climax - justifiably the most famous part of the original Kong. Jackson even achieves more emotion and some deep pathos in this remake. The movie's still hokey in a lot of spots and I'm no fan of cheese. In fact, the movie's final line is taken straight from the original, and half the theater groaned when they heard it. Not a great picture, but the third act saved it for me. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JohnK.Dec 17, 2005
Before rating this movie, I tried something that Metacritic voters usually don't try...I saw the movie. [Ed: Hey now...] It was great, honestly, and if you can't take the length, skip it; while you're at it, skip The Godfather Before rating this movie, I tried something that Metacritic voters usually don't try...I saw the movie. [Ed: Hey now...] It was great, honestly, and if you can't take the length, skip it; while you're at it, skip The Godfather and The Aviator and every other great movie that bulldozed past 2 hours. This is an action classic. The CGI was fantastic, the script was great (besides a few missteps early on). Bad reviewers, have fun being a niche and a trendster. Everyone thinks you're smart because you can't have a good time. Enjoy the self importance. We'll be over here on the rollercoaster. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MCDBDec 19, 2005
This film is is just great. The effects are incredible, the acting great. Serkis was brilliant as a gorrila and Black balanced funny and serious perfectly. However I do think it is racist. The view of "The native" dates back to the time of This film is is just great. The effects are incredible, the acting great. Serkis was brilliant as a gorrila and Black balanced funny and serious perfectly. However I do think it is racist. The view of "The native" dates back to the time of the book Robinson Crusoe, the idea was that if you were not Christian, you were some horrible cannableistic savage. However I do think it is possible that it was less a race thing, just the idea that this was a world still in the past, and it could be more era-bashing as opposed to racism. Apart from that, great. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
NetraceDec 19, 2005
Great flick. I was riveted the entire time. I am able to do something called suspension of disbelief, so I didn't have the problem that most of the folks giving low ratings had. Thank you Mr. Jackson. And on a side note. I am not a Great flick. I was riveted the entire time. I am able to do something called suspension of disbelief, so I didn't have the problem that most of the folks giving low ratings had. Thank you Mr. Jackson. And on a side note. I am not a racist, nor did I notice any racist undertones. I would have to agree with the other poster that mentioned something to the effect that if you can see racism where it is not, then you are a racist. An ape is an ape. How often have you seen a white ape? Mr. Jackson could have changed it to a white ape and then made it King Abominable Snowman instead of King Kong. That would have made everything better right? You people crack me up. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
BenG.Dec 19, 2005
Okay, if you think that this movie is unrealistic, why did you go see it? You already know what it is about! If you look past the fact that it is unrealistic and the fact that it is too long, you'll see that the acting is awesome and Okay, if you think that this movie is unrealistic, why did you go see it? You already know what it is about! If you look past the fact that it is unrealistic and the fact that it is too long, you'll see that the acting is awesome and the effects rock! I loved this movie! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
BennyB.Dec 21, 2005
A great movie that is perhaps a bit too drawn out. All the Skull Island sections are strong, the build-up sections in NY are good, but the NY sections with Kong at the end are a bit weak at times and felt drawn out. 3/4 of an hour could have A great movie that is perhaps a bit too drawn out. All the Skull Island sections are strong, the build-up sections in NY are good, but the NY sections with Kong at the end are a bit weak at times and felt drawn out. 3/4 of an hour could have been shaved off this. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
RaulJ.Dec 21, 2005
Old fashioned blockbuster entertainment. Yes, it may be a bit over-done in certain ways, but this does not hurt the movie. I do sypathize with those who say there are too many effects and too little heart. I would revise that to say over the Old fashioned blockbuster entertainment. Yes, it may be a bit over-done in certain ways, but this does not hurt the movie. I do sypathize with those who say there are too many effects and too little heart. I would revise that to say over the top effects and marginal character development. Overall, very good entertainment. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
GarethD.Dec 22, 2005
Didn't seem like 3 hours.....entertaining viewing.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
CKongDec 22, 2005
Very entertaining movie experience - some parts better then others - but well worth the money - Peter Jackson could make a movie about a lump of poo interesting.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
WilliamT.Dec 23, 2005
The new David Lean has arrived. What a movie... greatest love story since Dr Zhivago.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
ScottH.Dec 23, 2005
Great story and effects, just TOO long!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JayF.Dec 24, 2005
Peter Jackson pulls off yet another epic although this isn't a fantasy world with wizards and hobbits but with prehistoric creatures and a mysterious island. Jackson really does deliver his promise that he had always wanted to remake Peter Jackson pulls off yet another epic although this isn't a fantasy world with wizards and hobbits but with prehistoric creatures and a mysterious island. Jackson really does deliver his promise that he had always wanted to remake the original film ever since he was a kid and he did a great job with it. Naomi Watts handles the character very well. Adrien Brody turns the rugged sailor Jack Driscoll and makes him into an unlikely hero, a simple playwrite. Jack Black is not a funnyman in this picture but a filmmaker gone rouge instead of an adventurer like in the original. The natives of Skull Island are not the natives from jungle movies of the 30s but something out of a modern day zombie film! Of course, what would the film be without its title character Kong. Kong is very ferocious on one side but on another he is a very emotional beast. Peter Jackson and WETA have breathed life back into one of the most influential monster films of all. Had there not been any King Kong to begin with we wouldn't had monsters like Godzilla or Jaws. So thank you Peter Jackson for remaking a classic monster film and remaking it right and lets hope other filmmakers will remember this movie when they have to remake another classic movie monster. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ElleR.Dec 24, 2005
This is without a doubt the best film of the year. It is terrific, will have you on the edge of your seat, has a magnificent cast- naomi Watts, for example is in deserving of an oscar with her take on Ann darrow. It was just fabulous.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
RahulP.Dec 20, 2005
This is no Titanic or even compares to the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Peter Jackson's last directorial effort. However, as a stand alone, ambitious project that it was, it nearly delivers. Some plot holes are exposed, but then again, This is no Titanic or even compares to the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Peter Jackson's last directorial effort. However, as a stand alone, ambitious project that it was, it nearly delivers. Some plot holes are exposed, but then again, with a Gorilla as the main character, that's a given. The sets, production design and the cinematography are amazing. Kong on top of the Empire State Building is an amazing scene...King Kong itself is realized in amazing detail, however, the dinosaurs and the bugs and creatures of Skull Island I didn't see the reason for. The Captain of the ship, the stowaway kid and the first mate all had character development in the first hour, but you didn't really care and then I think PJ forgot about them as well :-) Naomi Watts was good, Jack Black was amazing as a mad director willing to stake everything on the line and Adrien Brody might as well have sleep-walked through the movie. Some silly sequences, notably the fight with the dinosaurs and the ice-skating scene! In the end, I compare this to Titanic and you realize that the reason Titanic was such a monster hit was because you cared for the characters and CGI/special effects were part of the movie, not the stars. King Kong was spectacular in the CGI/special effects, but lacked credibility in story realization and the character development. I didn't really care about King Kong in the end as he plunges to his death as I cared for what happened to Jack and Rose on the Titanic... Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
ZoeDec 25, 2005
The first hour was great; perfect for getting us hooked into the time period, the characters and their motivations. Unlike "War of the Worlds," which gave us no connection to the characters, the fact that Jackson gives us this time is The first hour was great; perfect for getting us hooked into the time period, the characters and their motivations. Unlike "War of the Worlds," which gave us no connection to the characters, the fact that Jackson gives us this time is laudable, although I could have done without the "Heart of Darkness" duo. Doesn't Jackson know that in an action flick like this you only have time to care about a couple of characters? Trying to force in more "heart" always feels...er...forced. Ironically, as the action speeds up in the second third, my interest fell. Some fabulous action scenes are overshadowed by some gratuitous action scenes. I wish there had been more time spent here developing the chemistry between Anne and Kong rather than throwing in every cool effect they could think of. The final third was brilliant. Loved it. In the end, this movie is flawed simply because as an audience we're not naive enough to appreciate the whole vision. But, don't wait for home video. This one is definitely worth seeing on the big screen. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JamesM.Dec 20, 2005
To say that this film is a masterpiece is an understatement. King Kong has a sense of majesty and wonder that you will not experience for a very long time, so make sure you see it. Also, all of those people who are saying it is too long To say that this film is a masterpiece is an understatement. King Kong has a sense of majesty and wonder that you will not experience for a very long time, so make sure you see it. Also, all of those people who are saying it is too long obviously have attention spans that are far too short. These are probably the same people that said Pulp Fiction had too much talking or The Godfather didn't have enough action. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
NickK.Dec 26, 2005
A solidly entertaining movie. Although a little long for my taste, every epic movie has to break the two hour time limit. For those of you who think it's crap, you need to learn to sit back and take it for what it is: entertainment.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JonathanL.Dec 27, 2005
I agree that there can be some editing, but for everyone who overly critizes Kong's length what particular scenes should be left out? Although flawed watching King Kong can be the greatest movie experience of all time. Even if the movie I agree that there can be some editing, but for everyone who overly critizes Kong's length what particular scenes should be left out? Although flawed watching King Kong can be the greatest movie experience of all time. Even if the movie didn't have any storyline the visual and detailed 1930s New York street scenes are worth the admission ticket. Anyone who is bored by King Kong, and can't find anything to draw their attention too, probably shouldn't be wasting their time watching any movie. King Kong is the reason movies are made and Peter Jackson is the King of big budget movies Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
RossN.Dec 27, 2005
Interesting to see such a broad range of opinions and ratings. Some of those who've dismissed it I believe are missing the point and probably need to relax a little more. I was enthralled and thought it was wonderful escapism - I Interesting to see such a broad range of opinions and ratings. Some of those who've dismissed it I believe are missing the point and probably need to relax a little more. I was enthralled and thought it was wonderful escapism - I thought Kong delivered far more depth of character than I would have expected and I didn't have a problem with the characterisations generally. My expectation was that this would be big, over the top and a thrill and I was satisfied on all counts. Great stuff. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
OLGUNS.Dec 28, 2005
Wonder.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
WarmongerDec 20, 2005
A very impressive and totally enjoyable experience!!... if you are in any way a fan of the classic King Kong, then you will appreciate this version as well. It elaborates on so many aspects of the originall...Don't listen to the nay A very impressive and totally enjoyable experience!!... if you are in any way a fan of the classic King Kong, then you will appreciate this version as well. It elaborates on so many aspects of the originall...Don't listen to the nay sayers who probably liked the original about as much as they liked this version!!! it's a great flim, destined to become another King Kong classic! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
TomB.Dec 20, 2005
This could have easily been a big disappointment for me as I am such a big fan of the original 1933 film. Face it; When you go remaking such a classic you are playing with fire. Peter Jackson has cited the original Kong as a major This could have easily been a big disappointment for me as I am such a big fan of the original 1933 film. Face it; When you go remaking such a classic you are playing with fire. Peter Jackson has cited the original Kong as a major inspiration to him one which lead him into film making and has stated that he wanted to bring the beloved story to the younger generation which is reluctant to watch old movies. He has said that he wanted to use modern effects and technology to tell the story and bring some freshness to it while retaining spirit of the original. I think he succeeded. I want to say right up front that the ads and trailers for the movie really don't do the CGI effects justice. I really expected the giant gorilla to look a bit like a character from a video game ala Jar Jar Binks or The Hulk but the effects are very believable and really do set a new standard in terms of intermixing computer generated characters with live ones. The few changes Jackson made don't take away from the original characters or the plot at all, in fact, they enhance them; The heroine, Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts), and the fast talking Carl Denham (Jack Black) are given back stories which explain some of their motivations and I felt they were nice touches. I only have a few very small criticisms of the film and they primarily revolve around scenes that are either too long or unnecessary. Jackson could have easily trimmed 20 minutes or so out of the 3+ hours and I think the movie would have been better for it. Still, this is as good of a remake as I've ever seen. As with Sam Raimi and the Spiderman films, Peter Jackson has demonstrated what a difference it makes when director has a true love of the source material he is working from. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
GabrielD.Dec 30, 2005
This movie was great!! I dont see how anyone could give it a zero!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
FilmbufsJan 11, 2006
Sometimes, even in epic adventures, it is the subtle moments that stand out. Although the efx are outstanding (for the most part) it is the relationship between Kong and Anne Darrow that remain memorable. When dialogue occurs, however, we Sometimes, even in epic adventures, it is the subtle moments that stand out. Although the efx are outstanding (for the most part) it is the relationship between Kong and Anne Darrow that remain memorable. When dialogue occurs, however, we see Kevin Jackson's unmistakable weakness. He can direct special efx sequences but appears to have difficulty with actors. Thankfully, there are many, many moments that rely on unspoken emotions and all of them between Kong and Darrow. The movie is bearable during the first hour as they attempt to give motivation for going on a boat trip to an uncharted isle. This three hour tour does get rough as plot points and characters are essentially sketched in but we all know what's in store. Thankfully, there is a noticeable shift as the second hour begins. The creepy fog settling on the boat cleanes our palate as we approach Skull Island. We're not in Kansas anymore, nor are we in the technicolor, dilluted, depression-era NY where overacting reins king. The adventure finally begins and never eases up. King Kong is not without flaws, even in the special efx department, but overall everything is forgiven as we gladly latch on to a ride for the remaining two-thirds of the movie. Some plot points are laughable, more than a few characters are on-screen without proper motivation (a huge, consistent problem with Jackson's movies) and some of the efx look unbelievable or unfinished. But it's the quiet moments as we see the expressions revealed in Kong's eyes that drive the story and make us believe. Andy Serkis once again provides more emotion and depth in digital form than several of the live actors. It's a sad statement really, but quite the accomplishment for Mr. Serkis. King Kong lives up to the hype and you should definitely see this on the big screen. At least the last two-thirds. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
SammyZeeJan 1, 2006
Pretty damn good. no wonder it was one of the most expensive moves ever made. one word: Wow.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KondaR.Jan 11, 2006
This movie needs 10...It has action, mystery with adventure,emotinal turnout Though a sad ending my score is 10 For this epic.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
MichaelO.Jan 10, 2006
Really, most of this movie was quite good. The story isn't much, but it's an action flick. The special effects were pretty good, although some of them seemed silly. The huge downside to this movie is that it's about 60 minutes Really, most of this movie was quite good. The story isn't much, but it's an action flick. The special effects were pretty good, although some of them seemed silly. The huge downside to this movie is that it's about 60 minutes too long. Some scenes just drag on and on. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
FredG.Jan 1, 2006
A little too long, and parts of it were unnecessarily drawn out (esp. near the end) - but as a remake scenes in this were just incredible to watch. It would have been perfect if he had saved some of the extended scenes for the DVD and cut A little too long, and parts of it were unnecessarily drawn out (esp. near the end) - but as a remake scenes in this were just incredible to watch. It would have been perfect if he had saved some of the extended scenes for the DVD and cut the movie shorter. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
DimitrisB.Jan 11, 2006
It a good remake.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
Alfa2005Jan 12, 2006
O.k. stop of discussing!, what are u looking for into a movie theater?, quality of story and a visual travel?, this movie works!, good.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DennisB.Jan 1, 2006
what makes this movie great is also what most detractors are complaining about; it is a non-stop onslaught of adrenaline. there are, in fact, reports of people coming out of the theatres feeling physically exhausted, not bored or tired, what makes this movie great is also what most detractors are complaining about; it is a non-stop onslaught of adrenaline. there are, in fact, reports of people coming out of the theatres feeling physically exhausted, not bored or tired, EXHAUSTED. nobody who gives this movie a "5" or lower rating can even be taken seriously here, as anybody who knows anything about filmmaking can tell you that the special effects alone are revolutionary and deserving of respect. naomi watts is beautiful and engaging, showing incredible skill considering much of her scenes were shot against blue screen. jack black shows charming restraint in his subtle villainy, and adrien brody is an understated leading man who comes across as a real human, not cut from the typical action hero mold. simply stated: this is a great film that will be remembered as a classic in the vain of "raiders of the lost arc," "titanic," and the original "star wars" trilogy. the question potential viewers need to ask themselves is, "can i handle a marathon that feels more like a sprint?" Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MovieeaterJan 13, 2006
Hey, I dont believe to some people, why give less than 5 to this enormous and excelent movie, feel envy?, whatever, the best for me since trilogy Lord of the rings.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RharoKongoJan 13, 2006
Big, great, excellent, wonderful, one of the wonders of 2005, but not the eight, maybe the second or one, yes for me is the ONE.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
GalanChisJan 13, 2006
Many comments here !, dont say more, just that this kong is the best Kong of all, and the movie is perfect cause it searched the excelence. That is more than notorius.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DanielV.Jan 15, 2006
Better than Star wars when the story looses and you can only remember the visual effects after see it, but this is not the case, is a Big monkey, a big budget yes, and a Big Picture.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
PatrickB.Jan 15, 2006
Outstanding movie IF they would have stopped at Skull Island. If they would have just gotten away and killed Kong in the process it would have been a perfect ending. Unfortunately, in staying true to the original, he New York ending seems Outstanding movie IF they would have stopped at Skull Island. If they would have just gotten away and killed Kong in the process it would have been a perfect ending. Unfortunately, in staying true to the original, he New York ending seems tacked on and contrived. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
GeorgeG.Jan 16, 2006
I think that king kong is a super film becuase of it's amount of thriling prats that is has in it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BelindaT.Jan 21, 2006
Para mi el cine es diversion, y si está repleto de arte como esta pelicula, pues es genial, como para verla una y otra vez!, no es perfecta como no lo es ninguna cinta pero le doy mi máximo...10
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BiBIL.Jan 21, 2006
Gladiator, Titanic, Lord of the rings, Cinderella man, The sixth sense and King kong are GREAT!.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
RyanD.Jan 21, 2006
Any one who is not entertained by this movie, I hear Cheaper by the Dozen has a squel out, you might want to check that out. Peter Jackson's vision truly comes alive in this movie, that is more that just explosions and special effects. Any one who is not entertained by this movie, I hear Cheaper by the Dozen has a squel out, you might want to check that out. Peter Jackson's vision truly comes alive in this movie, that is more that just explosions and special effects. It is an entertaining story that makes the three hours worth it. I'll agree that it was a touch long, but almost necessary when you have to develope a main character that is a CGI ape who can't talk. Grab a bucket of popcorn and enjoy. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
CharlesL.Jan 2, 2006
This movie was simply amazing. All the people who give it 1s or 0s have no opinion at all, and are here by banned from voting again. You can't simply give a movie a 0 or 1 because it was too long, or YOU didn't like it. Its about This movie was simply amazing. All the people who give it 1s or 0s have no opinion at all, and are here by banned from voting again. You can't simply give a movie a 0 or 1 because it was too long, or YOU didn't like it. Its about what other people like, and that is great story telling, terrific acting, a great plot, and amazing special effects. Sure, some scenes felt a little cheesy, but those were followed up by scenes of magnificent perfection, scenes that star wars or lord of the rings could never show, scenes of love, with out words. Ann didn't say she loved kong, but you could feel it, and a movie that lets you feel emotion is perfection. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
KevinM.Dec 6, 2006
This was by far the best version of Kong that I have seen. Jack Black was great and after watching the film couldn't pick a better person for that role. Great flick and a great job by the crew.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
GerronKJan 26, 2006
Excellent!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MarkB.Jan 3, 2006
If I really wanted to dig deep to find a complaint, I suppose I could point out that Peter Jackson's depiction of Skull Island as the ultimate untamed frontier--replete with dinosaurs that cause more damage bumping into each other than If I really wanted to dig deep to find a complaint, I suppose I could point out that Peter Jackson's depiction of Skull Island as the ultimate untamed frontier--replete with dinosaurs that cause more damage bumping into each other than attacking you, bugs the size of kitchen toasters, and not a single smooth-surfaced rock in sight--inadvertently reinforces the Cheneyesque view that ALL of nature needs to be controlled, dominated and bulldozed. But that argument is strictly academic (not to say facetious); Jackson, whose Lord of the Rings films I've admired at arm's length without actually loving, has made a grand entertainment that's deeply respectful to Merian Cooper's and Ernest Schoedsack's 1933 classic when necessary, improves on it when even more necessary, and is among the speediest three hours I've ever spent in or outside a theater. First up for praise is the picture's truly spectacular production design, which elevates computer work to an uncharted level; not only is the aforementioned Skull Island the ultimate outdoor charnel house waiting to happen, but even more astonishing is Jackson's depiction of both economic ends of Depression-era New York. (I've seen hundreds of early 1930s films and other depictions of the time, and was floored by how accurately Jackson got every detail--right down to the style of poster lettering at the burlesque house where Ann Darrow considers working.) The technical excellence wouldn't register nearly as sharply without the human element, and the central performances wonderfully flesh out what were strictly one-dimensional characterizations in the original: Andy Serkis makes the big ape more recognizably human than most human actors playing human beings made them this year; Adrien Brody satisfyingly portrays the best kind of movie hero--an unexpected one; and Jack Black so amusingly and pungently conveys the carny-act sleaziness of filmmaker Carl Denham that it may disappoint some viewers that his character doesn't get more of a comeuppance than he does. The real breakthrough, however, is Naomi Watts: she's previously been impressive in everything she's done (Mulholland Drive, 21 Grams, I Heart Huckabees) but responding largely to greenscreen and Serkis, truly becomes a great actress here, transforming a role that was previously trademarked by Fay Wray's wall-to-wall screaming into a stunning portrait of childlike wonder and adult compassion; only Amy Adams in Junebug is Watts' recent equal in depicting a genuinely good person without making her unbelievable or saccharine. (Time magazine film critic Richard Schickel's cranky assertion that Watts' Ann Darrow has the hots for Kong has got to be the most ridiculous statement that Schickel has made in a mostly honorable 50-year career, but then the gleeful schaudenfraude exhibited by some of the press over the fact that Kong will end up doing healthy Batman Begins business, rather than unprecedented Titanic box office is equally childish and disgraceful.) Watts' characterization of Ann, and its conception on the script level, mark the point where Jackson's Kong transcends Cooper's and Schoedsack's; not only does it make infinitely more dramatic sense for Ann to NOT want anything to do with Kong's exploitation and degradation, but her complex, multifaceted tenderness towards him far surpasses Fay Wray's bling, one-note terror, which for me was the most annoying and frustrating aspect of the original; Watts transforms this Kong into a far more emotionally resonant and heartwrenching experience. Everyone laughed when the 1976 Dino DeLaurentiis-produced remake (a misguided effort marked by badly-conceived social commentary, newcomer Jessica Lange's amusing spin on the heroine, and lots of footage of a guy in an ape suit) touted itself as the "most original" film of its time; what's really amazing nearly 30 years later is that in a movie year that seemingly featured more movie remakes than ever (mostly unnecessary or worse), Jackson, in brilliantly and beautifully reimagining what for many movie fans is inviolable, has made a film that's truly deserving of that claim. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
PaulF.Jan 3, 2006
Worst part to the whole movie was that it was all of three hours. This film could have easily been two great films instead of one almost really good film. The first part was almost two hours and was very entertaining but it was too much of a Worst part to the whole movie was that it was all of three hours. This film could have easily been two great films instead of one almost really good film. The first part was almost two hours and was very entertaining but it was too much of a jarring to cut straight back to New York. The relationship with King Kong and the blonde beauty almost seemed more romantic than a platonic love. It was conveyed really well and left her love for the writer out in the cold. It was a choice that was interesting but could have been more balanced. It was hard for me to take Jack Black seriously but overall I think he did better than expected. The best aspect to this film was the special effects, the best I have ever seen, and that's saying a lot. The only problem was the action was at times over the top for too long. My adernals were on overload and eventual numb to the experience. It's definitely worth a see but sad that it could have been so much more. I preferred the version with Jeff Bridges better. King Kong seemed much genteler at first and the blonde beauty seemed to truly love her man as well as her beast. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BB3RJan 4, 2006
Many people hate this movie, thats because they dont know how to enjoy fantasy or... dont have any idea about quality of movies, just relax men and enjoy the picture, one of the best this year. AMAZING !!.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DanF.Jan 5, 2006
Don't listen to the whiners here. Hands-down, this is the best popcorn movie I've ever seen. A thin storyline and long running time was more than made up for by the relentless action, scares, and just plain FUN. The last line of Don't listen to the whiners here. Hands-down, this is the best popcorn movie I've ever seen. A thin storyline and long running time was more than made up for by the relentless action, scares, and just plain FUN. The last line of the movie was pretty silly, but that's all that kept it from a 10 to me. If you're looking for story, see Munich or Syriana. But if you want fun, Kong is king. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MarcelG.Jan 6, 2006
Well made and lot of action. Great attention to detail. Focus to much on lady-gorrilla relationship! Very emotional and powerful.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
YoliKnightJan 7, 2006
I went to see this movie recently and now I love it. Excellent!.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
LuxyPichusJan 7, 2006
Hey only one word!, GREAT!. Dont go see it if u dont enjoy fantasy. Because this is big!!! BIG.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DavidMOct 7, 2006
My jaw still remains open, my eyes still wet with tears. You can choose to take it literally, or symbolic, either way...magnificent.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ChapixJan 8, 2006
No words for this fantastic movie, because then I can not stop... all here is Geat!. Excelent !.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
MathewA.Jan 8, 2006
An amazing experience with little techincal flaw. Jack Black's performance was the only real element that hurt the film, however he is easily forgiven as the majority of Kong involves.. well, Kong.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
TomD.Jan 9, 2006
Absolutely worh your money. Yes, slightly overlong, but you might as well complain that Tchaikovsky used string instruments too often. If you're looking for a film that is a quick and punishing monster flick, you're better off Absolutely worh your money. Yes, slightly overlong, but you might as well complain that Tchaikovsky used string instruments too often. If you're looking for a film that is a quick and punishing monster flick, you're better off reviewing the original. If, instead, you want to see great performances, stunning visual effects and a polished story and plot that leave you feeling satisfied but still wanting more, then this would be your film. I hope it makes a shitload of money - when held up against the lesser and weaker Narnia film, it certainly deserves to. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
jamesbondageJan 9, 2006
A very impressive movie that proves, at times, there can be too much of a good thing. The acting was good, and was impressed by Jack Black but they could have cut a few of the action sequences. They tended to go on a little long. But to the A very impressive movie that proves, at times, there can be too much of a good thing. The acting was good, and was impressed by Jack Black but they could have cut a few of the action sequences. They tended to go on a little long. But to the people who hated it, just be glad it was Jackson and not Michael Bay who re-made Kong, or there would have been zero character development and would have been a huge steaming pile of monkey crap. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BombitoJan 9, 2006
Very, very Goooooooooood movie!, just for poeple who seriously loves Cimena.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MonserrattheniceJan 9, 2006
Please!. Dont hate this movie for being so good!, dont be afraid !, it wont win best picture at Oscars, but some yes!!, maybe 4 for technical, but for me its the best of the year!.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MarkosT.Jan 9, 2006
Few words... Great and Fantastic !
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SaboCatchKongJan 9, 2006
Critics and me are agree, this movie is one of the best of 2005, the ride is unforgettable in the Skull island, kong ( andy serkis ), excelent again like Gollum in LOTR, Naomi good enough in her role ! , Excelent movie, only recommended for Critics and me are agree, this movie is one of the best of 2005, the ride is unforgettable in the Skull island, kong ( andy serkis ), excelent again like Gollum in LOTR, Naomi good enough in her role ! , Excelent movie, only recommended for real movie lovers. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AdalR.Jan 9, 2006
Hey!, que traen tantos amargados!, una pelicula como esta no merece menos de 6, es buenisisma mejor que la original en todos sus aspectos, presume de buena hasta en el guión, aunque con ciertas y aparentes fallas, resultan Hey!, que traen tantos amargados!, una pelicula como esta no merece menos de 6, es buenisisma mejor que la original en todos sus aspectos, presume de buena hasta en el guión, aunque con ciertas y aparentes fallas, resultan innecesarias mas explicaciones obvias ?. Le quedó de lujo al Director Peter. OK, aunque algunos envidiosos ya le temen, excelente pelicula, muy recomendable amigos. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SlyK.Jan 9, 2006
Stunning and Spectacular ! is the movie. Fool of criteria those who hate it. Poor of them , is only fantasy and a big ape !, Dont be so serious , just relax and anjoy an amazing world of creativity that this incredible director Jackson is Stunning and Spectacular ! is the movie. Fool of criteria those who hate it. Poor of them , is only fantasy and a big ape !, Dont be so serious , just relax and anjoy an amazing world of creativity that this incredible director Jackson is able to do for everyone. Got it ?. The movie is simply brilliant and made with intelligence. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SamFeb 21, 2006
For all the people bickering about Adrian Brody being miscast, think about this. What is Jack Driscoll's job? Is it finding mummies, saving the world, destroying our enemies? No, it's simply being a script writer, and he's For all the people bickering about Adrian Brody being miscast, think about this. What is Jack Driscoll's job? Is it finding mummies, saving the world, destroying our enemies? No, it's simply being a script writer, and he's perfect as that. Now for the rest of the movie, in one short sentence, there are movies, and then there is the epic that is King Kong. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JoziC.Mar 31, 2006
One of the best movies from Jackson. I liked the dinosaurs fighting King Kong. [***SPOILERS***] I like how Kong discarded the girls who were not Anne. I especially enjoyed the ending - I cried.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
TimH.Mar 5, 2006
This is a great movie, no question. The special effects are almost always convincing (save for a corny looking brotosaurus stampede), and it has a deep emotional wieght. Also, the soundtrack is very well done, and it gets stuck in your head. This is a great movie, no question. The special effects are almost always convincing (save for a corny looking brotosaurus stampede), and it has a deep emotional wieght. Also, the soundtrack is very well done, and it gets stuck in your head. However, it's just TOO FRICKING LONG.... It jumps around from subject to subject, sometimes with no rhyme or reason. This and some of the cornier special effects dock a point from the rating. Overall, King Kong is a slightly flawed gem. Go see it. (And fans of the original, keep your eyes peeled for homages in the costumes, props, music, ect.) Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AndrewApr 1, 2006
Was it not Oscar Wilde that said "talent borrows, genius steals". This film is pure genius, but the humour is the defining edge. Pure tongue in cheek!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DWP102589Apr 1, 2006
Peter Jackson is quite the perfectionist wit his movies, and King Kong is no exception to this.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ChristineT.May 22, 2006
Awesome movie! I love the love story coz it felt deep. Also, I'm a romantic at heart.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
LeeC.May 5, 2006
Extremely Great Movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MattOJan 28, 2007
I hate to give it a 100% score, but to score it anything less would be wrong. What Peter Jackson was able to do with the Lord of the Rings books, he was able to do with an undisputed movie classic. Bringing to light the beauty, wonder, I hate to give it a 100% score, but to score it anything less would be wrong. What Peter Jackson was able to do with the Lord of the Rings books, he was able to do with an undisputed movie classic. Bringing to light the beauty, wonder, power, and the "Beast" or the story do to a more modern interpretation, Jackson truly captured the true story of what King Kong was about. This beast of brute strength that has seen only conflict and turmoil is able to be "handled" by Watts character who provides him the meaning of being loved or wanted. And in the same concept Kong was able to provide Namoni's character with something she always wanted but never have, love, a love that would always be there, and die for her. And that is what the original film tried to show, the story how a power, savage force can be swooned by love and beauty. And that is what Peter Jackson was able to do better then what the original could. Great movie for couple to do see. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
DanB.Feb 11, 2007
Film's too long by far. But if the end gets you, it'll get you good (though I could've written the last line better ).
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
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
10
Jacobp.Dec 12, 2005
The best monster movie since 1933.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
PaulB.Dec 13, 2005
Best Movie I have ever seen Period.....and Bob P youv'e got to be kidding me its only a Movie Duhh.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JohnsonR.Dec 13, 2005
Amazing and awesome! all i can say is that this is the greatest movie ever made.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DavidEZDec 13, 2005
Monumental.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
KharaghDec 14, 2005
WoW ! An incredible movie experience!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SpanxMcBDec 14, 2005
This movie was amazing! It sweeps you away.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
IkeE.Dec 14, 2005
Peter Jackson is the best Director ever! This movie is amazing, excellent effects and a great story.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JesseM.Dec 14, 2005
This movie was amazing. The best movie of the YEAR. The first hour was a draaagggggg though. After that it's awesome. It was easily worth the money.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
TonydannieDec 14, 2005
This Film was amazing! I prepared myself and watched the original 1930's version before The midnight premiere on Dec 13. As I watched this old Black and White Film, With it's jerky special effects, I began to Love it. Although The This Film was amazing! I prepared myself and watched the original 1930's version before The midnight premiere on Dec 13. As I watched this old Black and White Film, With it's jerky special effects, I began to Love it. Although The Film used Stop Motion animation I was amazed not at the effects But the skill they had to resort to at the time to create a sweeping action adventure film. Now over 70 years later. Peter Jackson Uses Computer Technology to bring His retelling of this Classic movie to life. And It works!!! Kong Has a Personality (Andy Serkis actually who not only acts out Kongs Movements, He is also our heroes cook) And much more freedom then the old 1930's Kong. Peter Jackson Once agan delivered an Incredible film.And the reason why this film works for me is that he (Jackson) brought with him the same,if not more, Passion he had when he made the Now famous Lord Of the Rings Trilogy. Here is a man that when you hear him talk about the film he cant help but mention how much he loved the 1930's original. And He remains Loyal to the Original. 3 times loyal actually those who have seen both the original and Jacksons version would know what I mean when i say Three times! And I do not mean the length of the film. People complained It was to long (my wife for example) I say It was not long enough. just a bit longer!! But I loved this film. And I love the Original more due to Jackson's omages to it through out his version. This Film was a great Ride. Now stop reading my ramblings and go see this flick!! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SeanL.Dec 14, 2005
I feel obligated to post a comment because of one particularly dumb review. In his/her review, "Fantasy" writes: The brutality of the natives, which appeared racist, is not suitable for young children or preteens. Well it's a good thing I feel obligated to post a comment because of one particularly dumb review. In his/her review, "Fantasy" writes: The brutality of the natives, which appeared racist, is not suitable for young children or preteens. Well it's a good thing it appeared racist because that's what King Kong is about: racism! It has long been considered an allegory for the degradation of blacks, so if it came off as racist to you, then Peter Jackson did a good job. I can't say I empathize with the preteens and children either; the movie is rated PG-13 for "frightening adventure violence and some disturbing images." Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MozzM.Dec 14, 2005
Absolutely Stunning Filmmaking. The Film will be the classic Kong of the 21st Century, not only does it pay homage to the original, it gives it a heart, it illuminates it, and stands proudly next to it as one of the best movies of all time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ShaneCDec 15, 2005
Aventurous, magical, romantic, if just a trifle overdone - a masterpiece of modern cinema nonetheless.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
AdamDec 15, 2005
Movie magic. It's long and overstuffed, sure, but it swept me along with it as no other CG action movie ever has. Every shot has emotion or sinew or both, in spades. The stampeding brontosaurs were neat, then ridiculous, then pure Movie magic. It's long and overstuffed, sure, but it swept me along with it as no other CG action movie ever has. Every shot has emotion or sinew or both, in spades. The stampeding brontosaurs were neat, then ridiculous, then pure slapstick genius (made me kind of queasy though). Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
CoreyR.Dec 15, 2005
Yes, it's too long. Yes, the segue between the 2nd and 3rd acts is too abrupt. But what Jackson accomplishes is nothing short of magical; he gives a special effect the death scene most actors would kill for, and pulls it off with a Yes, it's too long. Yes, the segue between the 2nd and 3rd acts is too abrupt. But what Jackson accomplishes is nothing short of magical; he gives a special effect the death scene most actors would kill for, and pulls it off with a grace and dignity that no actor could pull off. There is no denying it, Jackson is a genius filmmaker. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JeremyS.Dec 15, 2005
This movie will appeal to an adult at all of his/her ages through life. It really has it all. The cinematography is stunning and exhilarating.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
LukeS.Dec 15, 2005
Overwhelming in every sense of the word. See it NOW!!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ChaseP.Dec 15, 2005
I loved this movie!!! After the first 30 minutes the movie bagan to pick up speed and nothing slowed it down. This on is a keeper!!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SpartacusDec 15, 2005
Why are so many people here racist? You PC idiots, It's a film! With Heart of Darkness as a ref! If you people knew anything about real racism, you'd cry yourself to sleep.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ConorL.Dec 15, 2005
I was absolutely stunned by this movie. it must surely appeal to every age of human possible from grandma to wee baby boy. when you catch yourself with your legs up infront of your face hiding from the action and half an hour later meltingI was absolutely stunned by this movie. it must surely appeal to every age of human possible from grandma to wee baby boy. when you catch yourself with your legs up infront of your face hiding from the action and half an hour later melting into the sombre eyes of the female lead.... you know this movie ticks all the boxes. film of my year. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JackD.Dec 16, 2005
All these bad reviews!!! Go ahead, make a better movie, you guys couldn't even make a movie as good (or bad) as Uwe Boll, because if you could you wouldn't be sitting around complaining about it on your PC. You are all a waste. All these bad reviews!!! Go ahead, make a better movie, you guys couldn't even make a movie as good (or bad) as Uwe Boll, because if you could you wouldn't be sitting around complaining about it on your PC. You are all a waste. Don't get me wrong, I don't like most Hollywood blockbusters (Independance Day or what have you), they are awful. But if you really think Peter Jackson is a hack, watch Heavenly Creatures. And if you think LOTR is bad, well several Oscars and many other awards given by people who do other things besides complain about movies on the computer seem to think otherwise. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AlexDec 16, 2005
Considering the films that critics have been raving over lately, I'm surprised King Kong got such great reviews even though Kong wasn't a dead author or a queer cowboy. I guess this movie must be good. It was just pure Considering the films that critics have been raving over lately, I'm surprised King Kong got such great reviews even though Kong wasn't a dead author or a queer cowboy. I guess this movie must be good. It was just pure entertainment.....think about it...did you really expect this movie to explore the forbidden love of beastiality? Come on.....just because a movie is made merely to tell an entertaining story doesn't mean it's shallow and over-hyped....P.S. I didn't even realize the movie was so long until i got up after the closing credits rolled and i realized my legs were asleep. If Pete Jackson can make me forget that I even have legs, I'd say he's a master of the craft. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
LanceM.Dec 16, 2005
Great remake of a classic movie. Peter Jackson has once again shown that he has an eye for the story as well as action. Would definitely see it again.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
TracyB.Dec 16, 2005
Visually stunning, moving in arts but the story was streched to long. Should have been cut by 1 hour, at least 30 minutes. I really wanted to love it but the length minimized the impact.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
BakracM.Dec 16, 2005
Great movie almost perfect!
0 of 0 users found this helpful