Review of King Kong (2005) by Georger. — 20 Dec 2005
It would seem the only two reasons to retell this story would be to show-off improved visual effects (including a better looking fay wray) or to examine the story in a new intellectual light (i.e. kong as islam or some such), but except for the stunning scene atop the empire state building (i've never been more afraid of heights - praise to the background artists), there was no motivation to make this movie again.
kong still moves like the stop-motion animated creature from the 30's (too sharply or too laboriously), naomi watts looks like a bucktoothed flatchested hillbilly, and kong is kong is kong - no new insights.
why were all these non-elements worth three hours of my life? if for whatever reason I ever taught a class in editing at an elementary school I would assign students this movie and ask them to make a one hour and 50 minute version.
it would undoubtedly take them all of a half hour to do so.
This review of King Kong (2005) was written by Georger. on 20 Dec 2005.
King Kong has generally received positive reviews.
Was this review helpful?
