-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
First shots of Peter Jackson's King Kong
- Thread starter Ninja Scooter
- Start date
- Status
ManaByte
Gold Member
DMczaf said:Oh! I thought he was making a new King Kong movie. I didn't know it was a remake. As you can see I'm REALLY not up to date with this stuff.
Well, it is "new", it's just based on everything in the original movie. So there's the T-Rex and the giant spiders that were later cut out of the 30's version because they scared audiences.
ManaByte
Gold Member
Ninja Scooter
Member
whytemyke said:
what are you talking about?
jackson is long overdue for a stinker. Cabin Fever or whatever he made was pretty bad, but not the way this film will probably bomb. It's just that when jack black is your most recognizeable star... well, historically it hasn't bode well for the movie. except school of rock...
Ned Flanders
Banned
I sincerely hope Jack Black doesn't ruin the sense of believability for the film. Not to say that he'll perform badly, but it's just always awkward when a comedic talent takes a dramatic role (a la Jim Carrey in The Majestic or Steve Martin in Novocaine). Here's hoping for the best..
I misspoke. I only looked at the pic of the girl on the website, not the blown up one here. Regardless, the pictures portray that guy from Law and Order or whatever (Some stupid prime time show), that woman (who is it, naomi watts?) and jack black. I just have a really bad feeling here.
Ninja Scooter
Member
uhhm, the guy is Adrian Brody...you know...the academy award winner?
Well, when Barbra Streisand turned down the opportunity of fighting Kong as Mecha-Streisand in the film, Jackson had to go with whatever star power he could.
Anyway, the film isn't going to be marketed as a star vehicle, and at this point I think Naomi Watts has some amount of star recognizability, though she obviously can't open a picture through name power alone - that privilege is reserved for women who can't actually act apparently, like Halle Berry.
Anyway, the film isn't going to be marketed as a star vehicle, and at this point I think Naomi Watts has some amount of star recognizability, though she obviously can't open a picture through name power alone - that privilege is reserved for women who can't actually act apparently, like Halle Berry.
The Majestic stunk, but Carrey did serious roles with The Truman Show and Man On The Moon really well beforehand.Ned Flanders said:
I have no idea how capable Jack Black is, but he's a good character actor, so he should be able to play a good straight man, just as long as he's directed to be such.
Hahahaha, someone insults jackson and everyone gets angry? Hahaha. Well, I know his name was tied to Cabin Fever, and being that I saw it bombing horribly at rottentomatoes, and the few friends who saw it said it was godawful, I steered clear.
Oh well, I guess you all will just have to choke on the fact that I think this film is going to bomb. After other crap that's been hyped-- Van Helsing, Troy, Alexander, Day after Tomorrow, etc-- I'll believe that this film is good when I either see it myself or go to RT and see that it's above an 80 percent.
Oh well, I guess you all will just have to choke on the fact that I think this film is going to bomb. After other crap that's been hyped-- Van Helsing, Troy, Alexander, Day after Tomorrow, etc-- I'll believe that this film is good when I either see it myself or go to RT and see that it's above an 80 percent.
Considering Peter Jackson is getting $20 million and, if I recall right, 20% of the backend, I'm thinking Universal thinks it's Jackson's name and direction that will be the real star, right alongside King Kong and then the main three cast members.
Duke Juan the Beast
Member
Worth the price of admission just to see
.
Jack Black get smooshed by a giant gorilla
Angry? No. Shit, I thought The Two Towers and Return of the King were pretty weak.whytemyke said:
Some people just don't take kindly to a newbie spouting off nonsensical shit and backing it up with factually incorrect arguments.
Hmm, Troy was wildly successful, if not quite so in the US but very much so overseas. Van Helsing and The Day After Tomorrow made out pretty damned well too all in all. Only Alexander is close to a bomb. Oh, wait, you mean "bomb" referring to critical acclaim? Riiiight... 'critics' will eat stuff like this right up. And then further, people are going to be upset if you don't like it? Get over yourself.
Me, I'm stilling waiting for my original King Kong DVD set. After TTT and ROTK, Peter Jackson isn't high on my list for blockbuster movies.
Ned Flanders
Banned
Yeah, Kong himself is enough to get people in theaters, as will be the "it's the fucking guy who did LoTR" wind address. Kato Kaelin and Tawny Kitaen could be the leads and people would still pack the theaters just to see Kong bash in some dino skulls.
Manabanana
Member
Drozmight said:oh, damn... he sure looks like JB. The leads aren't bad actors...
Edit: Jackson made Cabin Fever huh... lol. okaaaay.
No man, it's Black. It says right under the picture
Ned Flanders
Banned
Socreges said:
Well, as I said, I'm not even so much concerned with his performance (I'm sure he'll do fine), but more with the fact that he's someone you're used to never taking seriously. So when he delivers dramatic lines, I'm just worried that thinking of him being an assclown in virtually all his other films will take me out of the overall experience. Small gripe, but a valid concern if the film is shooting for genuine credibility beyond the summer popcorn flick scale of critique.
Ned Flanders
Banned
Socreges said:
[Adelgary] Bigger than Colin Farrel???[/Adelgary]
Assumptions don't prove anything. I went into it with NO expectations as I saw it for free at an industry showing at the Edinburgh International Film Festival over a month before it opened in the US. I knew nothing about it, just that some of the people I was over there with thought it had sounded cool so I went along. I still thought it sucked in just about every respect.XS+ said:
Yeah, I probably should have looked a little closer, but regardless of the fact that it's Adrian Brody and Naomi Watts starring, this thing is still going to bomb.
Sorry Dan, but the fact that I'm a newbie really doesn't have anything to do with the fact that people who cream their pants this long before a movie are idiots who should probably be shot. I was wrong about the actors, and I'll admit it, but like I've already said, it's not like this thing has a lot of drawing power (edit= star power). Naomi Watts only receives critical success when she's copying someone else's work (Ringu) or riding other peoples coat tails (i <3 huckabees). Adrian Brody won the Oscar for The Pianist, if I'm not mistaken, but we're talking a person with a single blip on the radar. Halle Berry won an Oscar, too.... does that mean you think she's a capable actress? Anyone who's seen Xmen will testify to the opposite. This leaves Jack Black, and while I love the guy to death, we have to be realistic. This guy has the biggest name draw in the movie (aside from Jackson, as someone mentioned), and he's not exactly talented enough for Watts to ride to success.
As for prior movie success rates, I assumed we were talking about critical success, not financial success. I'd be an idiot to argue that this movie won't make a shitload of money... the fact is that it probably won't have much critical success. The four movies I listed were all hyped to hell, and not one of them reached a "passing grade" with a whole of the critics, and only one of them even made the fifty percent mark in critical praise-- Troy-- and that was only because Brad Pitt is arguably one of the most talented actors in Hollywood (anyone who can't admit this has never seen Seven or Snatch). For a reminder of how well remakes fare, one needn't look further than Godzilla or Roller Ball for glaring examples of why remakes of old movies rarely succeed critically.
Sorry for messing up a few names of the actors here, but my argument still stands solid.
Yeah, she was in 21 Grams, but even still, the drawing power for that movie was Sean Penn and Benecio Del Toro. Sean Penn, primarily, as he was riding the heels of Mystic River, still.
Edit: And yes, she was really awesome in 21 Grams when I think about it, but an awesome performance does not a superstar make. You can't assume her talent will carry over into critical success for every movie (i.e. Cuba Gooding, Jr.)
Edit: And yes, she was really awesome in 21 Grams when I think about it, but an awesome performance does not a superstar make. You can't assume her talent will carry over into critical success for every movie (i.e. Cuba Gooding, Jr.)
Manabanana
Member
whytemyke said:
What!?
Naomi Watts is only acclaimed when in Japanese remakes or when alongside bigger stars? What the fuck? Yeah, sure buddy, whatever. All but two of her recent films have had fresh ratings at Rotten Tomatoes, and one of the rotten ones was a glorified cameo. And what does star power have to do with critical acclaim?whytemyke said:
Sorry buddy, but if you think the critical love of Naomi Watts's work is only due to her co-stars and the origins of the films, then you're pretty damned mistaken.
And again, this movie doesn't need superstars, so what the hell are you talking about? King Kong + the guy that did LOTR = huge box office and probable critical acclaim, whether deserved or not.whytemyke said:
And why do you keep trying to argue that critical acclaim is only possible after something else has been acclaimed? And why are you linking drawing power to critical acclaim? Your arguments are all over the place.
Manabanana
Member
I just can't believe you feel so strongly about people who anticipate a movie. "He likes something and it's not even out yet! BUST OUT THE GUNS." Somehow reading an article about a movie in production and liking it translates into a deserved permanent injury or death to you. This arguement went from "I don't think it looks too great," to "Shoot everyone who likes the idea of it."
I think that despite the fact that it's a remake... the movie will get great reviews. The actors are good, and when you look at what Peter Jackson was able to do with some of the lesser known nobodies in LOTR...
The fact that it's a remake doesn't really mean anything as far as I'm concerned. Almost any remake I've seen that has sucked, sucked because they tried to change the story somehow. This one looks very true to the original... not that the original was really any good.
At any rate... I haven't seen a Peter Jackson movie I haven't liked, and I've seen them all (Meet the Feebles, Dead Alive, ect..). I'm sure he can take the original King King and make it completely awesome somehow. At that point, I won't even care what the reviewers think anyway.
The fact that it's a remake doesn't really mean anything as far as I'm concerned. Almost any remake I've seen that has sucked, sucked because they tried to change the story somehow. This one looks very true to the original... not that the original was really any good.
At any rate... I haven't seen a Peter Jackson movie I haven't liked, and I've seen them all (Meet the Feebles, Dead Alive, ect..). I'm sure he can take the original King King and make it completely awesome somehow. At that point, I won't even care what the reviewers think anyway.
Ned Flanders
Banned
Shinobi said:
Roy. Roy Scheider. Also of "Blue Thunder" fame (an old school fav of mine).
- Status