Off Topic Messages

I saw the commercial for King Kong!

Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:32 am

It looks really good folks. I can't wait until December.

Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:45 am

I'm with ya Pete!!! I haven't seen the trailer yet, but I'm a big fan of King Kong (did you know his first name was Scatter??). Maybe we can find a midpoint theatre between Palm Beach and NC??? Popcorn's on me :D

Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:45 pm

After LOTR...i was surprised he took this film on ( a film he has wanted to make for years),i think he will do a great job with it.

Just a view.

Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:39 pm

Looks pretty cool!

http://www.kingkongmovie.com/ef23952443 ... large.html

Tom

.

Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:58 am

Enjoy my fellow friends of Skull Island.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:24 pm

The Special Effects suck.

Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:25 pm

Spanish_Eyes wrote:The Special Effects suck.


The film is in post-production. How can you say this??

Tom

Fri Jul 01, 2005 12:08 am

Tom in North Carolina wrote:
Spanish_Eyes wrote:The Special Effects suck.


The film is in post-production. How can you say this??

Tom


Because my opinion is based upon what I´ve seen in the trailer. If they imrpove, I won´t have any problem at all in aknowledging it

.

Fri Jul 01, 2005 1:02 am

Spanish_Eyes wrote:The Special Effects suck.


YOU SUCK!

As matter of fact you suck King Kongs Nuts!

Re: .

Fri Jul 01, 2005 3:00 am

Blue-Gypsy wrote:
Spanish_Eyes wrote:The Special Effects suck.


YOU SUCK!

As matter of fact you suck King Kongs Nuts!


Well, great reply :roll:

.

Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:41 am

Why thank you Spanish, I am sure my comments are echoed by several on this board.

Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:54 am

Tom in North Carolina wrote:
Spanish_Eyes wrote:The Special Effects suck.


The film is in post-production. How can you say this??

Tom


Spanish Flies specializes in speaking out of his ass, that's how :roll:

Fri Jul 01, 2005 9:57 am

Scatter wrote:
Tom in North Carolina wrote:
Spanish_Eyes wrote:The Special Effects suck.


The film is in post-production. How can you say this??

Tom


Spanish Flies specializes in speaking out of his ass, that's how :roll:


Please, don´t use bad jokes as usually and try to give an argument :roll:

Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:08 pm

No joke intended.....your posts are normally uninformed, and this is just another example. You see under 30 seconds of a clip and proclaim the effects to "suck". Typical.

Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:29 pm

I proclaim that the SFX in the trailer suck. Is that true or not?

Keep it going

Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:09 pm

thanx for link to trailer, Tom.

I like what I see so far.

I like the retro-1930s setting, and redoing of the
Carl Denham-makes-a-movie-needs-an-actress storyline.

I love how the famous "Scream Ann Scream!" scene
was moved to the island itself (instead of on ship enroute)

hearing the growl following her scream is intense.

I look forward to seeing this film.


IMO< the Kong story can't work set in 2005 modern-day.
With GPS satellite tracking and the entire planet mapped by now,
you can't have a mysterious never-before-discovered island.

The suspense and romance of that "discovery" factor is possible tho
in past low-tech time periods.

Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:51 pm

Spanish_Eyes wrote:Keep it going


I'd let it go, friend.

Tom

Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:12 pm

Graceland Gardener wrote:thanx for link to trailer, Tom.

I like what I see so far.

I like the retro-1930s setting, and redoing of the
Carl Denham-makes-a-movie-needs-an-actress storyline.

I love how the famous "Scream Ann Scream!" scene
was moved to the island itself (instead of on ship enroute)

hearing the growl following her scream is intense.

I look forward to seeing this film.


IMO< the Kong story can't work set in 2005 modern-day.
With GPS satellite tracking and the entire planet mapped by now,
you can't have a mysterious never-before-discovered island.

The suspense and romance of that "discovery" factor is pos
sible thoin past low-tech time periods.


The action happens in the 30´s, dude.

Fri Jul 01, 2005 11:22 pm

no sh*t sherlock.

I know that.

Sat Jul 02, 2005 5:58 am

I was initially unsure about Jack Black in the role of Carl Denholm. The original actor, Robert Armstrong, was very distinctive in the role. But after seeing the trailer I think Black will pull it off. I also think the lovely Naomi Watts is an excellent choice!

I'm pleased that their doing this as a 1930's period piece. This is a remake of the original - not a contemporary re-telling.

I've read that Peter Jackson was so exhausted by the project that he called X-Men director Bryan Singer to direct some of the action sequences. uBut hey, that's understandable. To go from the major under-taking of the Rings trilogy right to another big production film in Kong has got to be exhausting!

Sat Jul 02, 2005 10:23 am

Spanish_Eyes wrote:I proclaim that the SFX in the trailer suck. Is that true or not?

Keep it going


To what end?? Your unfailing negativity towards everything would render it an exercise in futility. No matter the subject......you have something negative to add, usually(as in this case) based upon flawed or incomplete information(ie.....there are other considerations here......the film is in post production. The effects are likely not cleaned up as yet, the editing is likely not done either.Then there is the fact that the effects weren't meant to be shown on your black and white rabbit-eared TV :wink: )

You must be a real joy to live with :roll: .

Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:53 pm

When I went to see the Fantastic Four this past Saturday they showed the King Kong preview. It looks terrific up on the big screen. I think this movie is gonna be huge at the box-office!

Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:08 am

The new slim line Peter Jackson pointed out on our local radio that he wasn't pleased that the trailer had to be released at this stage as the SPECIAL EFFECTS TWEAKING had hardly begun!

Apparently the distributor wanted it to screen with the hoped for box office hit The War Of The Worlds - uh oh!

Our local newspaper published a extra large still featuring a New York street. But all the cars appeared as Right hand drives - the NZ norm. I suspect this will be a tweak!

A work mate of mine is a street crowd extra - he couldn't get the detailed attention paid to the period wardrobe - much more than "Rings" he said.

The good news is that Jackson's next movie is well into pre-production. He is not putting his feet up!

Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:57 pm

I actually agree with Spanish_Eyes(*GASP* SHOCK*).

This is my first impression designed SOLELY on the trailer. There is a incredible amount of ghosting on figures set up against CGI. This is a true problem when it comes to lighted situations. Very difficult to maintain. So in effect Spanish's comment IMO is warranted.

The City and Ship scenes are fine, but the figures look FAKE. The Dinosaurs running look as fake as the Sharks in Erasure which are quite bad indeed.

Also the acting looks rediculuous. Namoi Watts seems to be at a stagnate time in her career. She hasn't made the next step IMO and Jack Black is not far behind. Maybe I am completely wrong about this, but this is my first impression.

Though I hope this isn't the case because KING KONG being a slam dunk will help him get The Hobbit.

Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:04 pm

Someone did tell me that the first part of the film is based on true facts.

There was an island that had a gorilla over 50ft and a tribe that worshipped it but the part where it was taken to New York was made up.

Apparently, the real story was from the 18th century and the bones were found as well.The island does exist and the wall is still standing.

Recently the same island was used for an experiment where they took the DNA of dinosaurs and brought them back to there original form but they got out of control and had to be destroyed, so i was told.

Sean