Definitely going to see this one.. Partly because Peter Jackson is the director, and partly because the trailer looks awesome.

^-^

I'm not much of a Peter Jackson fan, but it looks well done and entertaining so I'll probably check it out.

i would like to see this film

Hell yes. This movie looks great. Does Adrien Brody ever use his massive nose as a weapon?

this film doesnt appeal to me

I cant wait for this one, Ive seen a few shots of King Kong, and he looks awesome.

There's like dinosaurs and sh-t in this movie.

i would see it three times if I had the money.

Oh, look! Another REMAKE.

there was a dinosaur in the first one.

why are you suprised?

i can't wait to see the finished CGI King Kong.

I saw the trailer at the movies, looks like a pretty good movie.

Jack Black? In a serious movie?

Kong 2005 will end up the same way as Godzilla 1998.

I don't remember dinosaurs from the first one. It was a while ago though. Huh.

There were a few dinos in the first one, now there are a few in the second. The dinos don't look as good as Jurassic Park's though.

I can't believe Howard Shore was fired with just five weeks until the release date. That gave the new composer about 28 days to write a new score. No way is it going to succeed. And the original was such an important composition, it really is a shame.

Also a 3 hour monster movie? Something tells me Jackson is going to try and make us care about many unimportant characters. I'll go see it as a lover of King Kong 33, but I highly doubt Jackson will top it with this Epic style.

This looks awesome.

I love the TV trailer with "Fix You" in it. I may go see the movie just because that pulled me in.

'King Kong', alas, is hugely disappointing.

It has it moments...but, it's overlong, overdone, and not very engaging. Although a lot happens at times, it gets rather ho-hum because there's little depth.

On the plus side, though - Kong himself is a great character, and Naomi Watts made a very likeable Ann Darrow. The final battle above New York is both very exciting and moving - Jackson did do great work there.

wow just saw the movie, and for the 1st half hour (or maybe it was the first full hour) i was pretty bored, but it picked up. I think it was a little bit over-rated, but it was still a good movie

It was good.
I really liked it.
Except for that assh*le who laughed when Kong falls off the Empire State Building, it was nearly perfect.

On 12/9/2005 5:37:18 AM Mr Bungle wrote: I can't believe Howard Shore was fired with just five weeks until the release date. That gave the new composer about 28 days to write a new score. No way is it going to succeed. And the original was such an important composition, it really is a shame. Also a 3 hour monster movie? Something tells me Jackson is going to try and make us care about many unimportant characters. I'll go see it as a lover of King Kong 33, but I highly doubt Jackson will top it with this Epic style.

I read that Shore and JAckson agreed to disagree on this one and left. Nobody was hurt.

Also, JAckson wanted Naomi Watts last line to be told by Fay (the original) in a cameo; unfortunatly the actress died.

I'd like to begin by saying I've never seen any other version of King Kong, nor have I read the book. I knew what the plot was just from pop-culture throwing it in my face. I had absolutely no interest in this movie, but agreed to go anyway and waste three hours.

For me, it wasn't a waste at all. I though the movie was exciting, funny, moving, heartbreaking and hopeful.

Adrian Brody and Kong were awesome, everyone else was pretty good. Naomi Watts is far less annoying than usual.

I really enjoyed it, and would give it an B+/A-

i'd give the movie an A. I guess my only problems is the excitement in teh middle surpasses anything at the beginning or the end of the film

the bugs, oh the bugs