movies, movies, we got movies...
Dec. 29th, 2005 08:26 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lagilmanHave seen KING KONG. Have echoed the opions of (seemingly) most of the world in saying that had it been half an hour shorter, it would have been near perfection. There were a number of nitpicks, yes, but overall, quite enjoyable, and you can tell that Someone had been watching the silverback at the local zoo before putting Kong into motion. Dude, research is always so appreciated. Thank you. Had Kong struck off notes, the entire thing would have fallen apart.
I do wish, however, that they had spent less time playing Jurassic Ape and more time setting up the logic of Kong being on that island, seeingly without any others of his kind. Was he the last of? Or an exiled or rogue silberback tossed from his tribe? (That would certainly explain a lot of his actions, fom the rage to the desire to bond...). Yes, the writer in me was working on backstory, even as I watched. Also, the historican in me was trying to parse the evolution of the islanders' culture, from piercings to dietary habits to religious appeasement ceremonies...
That griped, it was muchfun, and I'm glad we got to see it on the large screen.
Have also seen NARNIA. Less to say on this, except that the things that annoyed me as a young Jewish child reading the books were still there, although much reduced, and save for one scene (you know the one, I'm sure) I was able to sweep them aside as "archetypal building blocks" to a wonderfully told story, with just the right amount of storyline added to make it understandable by those few who haven't read the books. The actors were all nigh perfection, Lucy was just the right amount of adorable without being annoying, and although I always picture Edmund as being shorter and rounder, it wasn't enough to knock me out of the story. Oh, and That Voice for Aslan was, as expected, perfectly cast. Yum.
The CGI were close to perfectly done, by the way, with better battle scenes than LotR. Heresy, perhaps, but no less true. And yes,![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
dianora2, the tactics were very much informed by the Blitz.
And WANT a gryphon, damn it. Merchandisers, are you listening?
I do wish, however, that they had spent less time playing Jurassic Ape and more time setting up the logic of Kong being on that island, seeingly without any others of his kind. Was he the last of? Or an exiled or rogue silberback tossed from his tribe? (That would certainly explain a lot of his actions, fom the rage to the desire to bond...). Yes, the writer in me was working on backstory, even as I watched. Also, the historican in me was trying to parse the evolution of the islanders' culture, from piercings to dietary habits to religious appeasement ceremonies...
That griped, it was muchfun, and I'm glad we got to see it on the large screen.
Have also seen NARNIA. Less to say on this, except that the things that annoyed me as a young Jewish child reading the books were still there, although much reduced, and save for one scene (you know the one, I'm sure) I was able to sweep them aside as "archetypal building blocks" to a wonderfully told story, with just the right amount of storyline added to make it understandable by those few who haven't read the books. The actors were all nigh perfection, Lucy was just the right amount of adorable without being annoying, and although I always picture Edmund as being shorter and rounder, it wasn't enough to knock me out of the story. Oh, and That Voice for Aslan was, as expected, perfectly cast. Yum.
The CGI were close to perfectly done, by the way, with better battle scenes than LotR. Heresy, perhaps, but no less true. And yes,
dianora2, the tactics were very much informed by the Blitz.And WANT a gryphon, damn it. Merchandisers, are you listening?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-12-29 02:11 pm (UTC)In fact, Andy Serkis, who did the body-motion for Kong, went to Rwanda (http://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/0512/whats_new/king_kong.html) to observe the gorillas. From what I hear, it was against the advice of everyone involved in the film, but he wanted the veracity that seeing the real thing would bring to the part.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-29 02:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-29 04:03 pm (UTC)This is all explained in The World of Kong. ;) I think he is supposed to be the last of his kind -- in one shot you see a giant ape skull which is supposed to hint at that. But yes, could have been clearer, to be sure.
and although I always picture Edmund as being shorter and rounder
Hee! Me too. I wonder if it's because of that old animated version, he was quite round in that.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-30 07:09 am (UTC)Yeah, I agree it was well cast, and I was relieved that Edmund was toned down, so he wasn't such a putz as he was in the book.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-30 07:17 am (UTC)Father Christmas. Yes, it was toned down, and yes the kids had to get their gifts from somewhere -- but not being there didn't seem to stop Edmund from acquiring a sword...
no subject
Date: 2005-12-30 09:21 am (UTC)Besides, if they didn't have him, Bill o'Reilly might have accused the authors of this movie to be enemies in the War on Christmas!(tm). :P
no subject
Date: 2005-12-30 05:24 pm (UTC)No.... but to a Jewish child reading the books (or seeing the movies) it's another bit of 'this isn't for you, you can't pretend to be like Lucy or Susan or Peter or even Edmund' to deal with...