 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.108.139.144
So I broke down and saw it. Did not enjoy it. Most basic level- instead of a feel-good movie, this is a feel-awful movie. The grim conclusion goes on for probably 1/2 hour. Only Jesus, in Mel Gibson's movie, suffers more, but at least he'e got a resurrection to look forward to.The ending is bloated, everything is bloated. There is no reason in the world why the first hour needs to be an hour before they even reach Skull Island. This would have been a lot better at 1/2 the length.
The visual effects are indeed marvelous. But it was about the time when our hero and heroine grabbed the leg of a convenient flying monster, who then conveniently flew low enough over a river that they could drop off, that believability went out the window. Of course it's a fantasy, but even a fantasy can maintain a level of credibility. This becomes about as credible as a Roadrunner cartoon.
For all that, Kong is a beatufully created character and Naomi Watts is perfect. There could've been a good movie here. Maybe when the DVD comes out, some amateur editor can pare this down to what it should've been.
Follow Ups:
"But it was about the time when our hero and heroine grabbed the leg of a convenient flying monster, who then conveniently flew low enough over a river that they could drop off, that believability went out the window."It happened long before that.
... the point you made about credibility is not, in my estimation, a very good example; here's your quote:> > > "The visual effects are indeed marvelous. But it was about the time when our hero and heroine grabbed the leg of a convenient flying monster, who then conveniently flew low enough over a river that they could drop off, that believability went out the window. Of course it's a fantasy, but even a fantasy can maintain a level of credibility. This becomes about as credible as a Roadrunner cartoon." < < <
The truth is that it was a matter of size and weight distribution. The flyng bat/terradactyl thingy was about twice the size of the hero & heroine. It couldn't maintain altitude supporting their combined weight and was dragged down straing to remain aloft. That scene, to me and my wife anyway, was entirely plausible, and far from "Roadrunner-like" in execution. In fact, that scene was more plausible than the one in the original, where they jump and plummet hundreds of feet into the river after Kong pulls the vine back up. Who could survive that?
AuPh
I will argue just for the sake of argument. OK you have a point, the creature would have dropped due to the weight. But consider this...this island was full of hungry and murderous creatures. How long would a flying creature live if a mere human can reach up and grab hold of its leg? It's survival time would probably be a few minutes at most.
... that these animals were used to prey that didn't put up much of a fight or rather fought back in numbers greater than one. As a group they appear to be scavenger-like, but even scavengers will attack and try to injure prey animals.AuPh
"That scene, to me and my wife anyway, was entirely plausible"LOL. You are putting us on; right?
Even the premise of an animal like that might seem far fetched to someone not enamored of the special effects it takes to bring the vision to life, but then why would one go to a classic fantasy/adventure film like King Kong if that person isn't able to suspend disbelief?AuPh
I doubt her weight was much of a factor.
"Where are we going? And what am I doing in this hand basket?"
:o)
...I like the roadrunner cartoons.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
