R. Rich Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Since when are there dinosaurs in King Kong? 372728[/snapback] Since about 1933. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Fischer Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Ah, wow. Damn . . . that looks f*'in good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede316 Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Ummmm...HELL YEAH!!!!!...Looks like a must see!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Peter Jackson may be the next (better than) Spielberg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted July 1, 2005 Share Posted July 1, 2005 Since when are there dinosaurs in King Kong? 372728[/snapback] Since the first King Kong movie...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Peter Jackson may be the next (better than) Spielberg. 373346[/snapback] Blasphemy!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoker2Buffalo Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Peter Jackson may be the next (better than) Spielberg. 373346[/snapback] I don't think so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 What is QuickTime? 372686[/snapback] Gay mac app. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Looks like a great movie, but it won't be long before the remake police show up in this thread and call this movie trash before they even see it. 372520[/snapback] I definitely won't trash it. But the original is a bonified, atmospheric classic. It will be very hard to top it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede316 Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Notice I said "MAY BE". My point was the LOTR trilogy was very good and King Kong looks sweet. He may be the next great director of the genre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Looks good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 That is so frickin unrealistic! First, that Gorilla is Way too big! THe largest Gorilla on earth would only reach about 800lbs. Second, dinosuars! Aside from being unrealistic - it is cheesy. Dinosuars on an unknown island - hmmm. Is the Jane Goodall meets Jurassic Park? Third, what movie producer in the 30's would put everyone on a boat to film a movie in the middle of the Great Depression? Wouldn't the producers have something to say about the cost of that venture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 That is so frickin unrealistic! First, that Gorilla is Way too big! THe largest Gorilla on earth would only reach about 800lbs. Second, dinosuars! Aside from being unrealistic - it is cheesy. Dinosuars on an unknown island - hmmm. Is the Jane Goodall meets Jurassic Park? Third, what movie producer in the 30's would put everyone on a boat to film a movie in the middle of the Great Depression? Wouldn't the producers have something to say about the cost of that venture? 373467[/snapback] Yes. A movie based on an unrealistic plot. WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY THINKING? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philburger1 Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 That is so frickin unrealistic! First, that Gorilla is Way too big! THe largest Gorilla on earth would only reach about 800lbs. 373467[/snapback] There was a big ass ape that lived up until 500,000 years ago called "Gigantopithicus" or something like that, that could have been as big as twelve feet tall. Here is a photo of model that based on some old bones: http://www.bfro.net/images/sd_giganto_full.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeG Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 some of you that think this will be a great movie, are you really thinking that or just saying that because you think "you should"? I watched this trailer and along with everyone I personally know that has seen it, thinks this looks bad. I was optimistic, hearing Peter Jackson's name, Jack Black's name and all the great film and effects that was LOTR, I was really excited to see the trailer... and I must say, I won't be seeing this movie. It looks like Jurassic Park meets an oversized gorilla, with some Mud people thrown in. I hope the effects on the trailer aren't final, they looked really bad sometimes, like when that one guy kicks someting... all the digital effects that were mixed with live shots looked bad in my opinion. And I don't get the story from this trailer at all... how does this gorilla get back to NYC, there was one scene with him in NYC... all the others were with dinosaurs... DINOSAURS for chrissake!! sorry, in my opinion this looks dumb... but I think Ep. III was awesome and some on here do not... so we all have our own opinions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 some of you that think this will be a great movie, are you really thinking that or just saying that because you think "you should"? I watched this trailer and along with everyone I personally know that has seen it, thinks this looks bad. I was optimistic, hearing Peter Jackson's name, Jack Black's name and all the great film and effects that was LOTR, I was really excited to see the trailer... and I must say, I won't be seeing this movie. It looks like Jurassic Park meets an oversized gorilla, with some Mud people thrown in. I hope the effects on the trailer aren't final, they looked really bad sometimes, like when that one guy kicks someting... all the digital effects that were mixed with live shots looked bad in my opinion. And I don't get the story from this trailer at all... how does this gorilla get back to NYC, there was one scene with him in NYC... all the others were with dinosaurs... DINOSAURS for chrissake!! sorry, in my opinion this looks dumb... but I think Ep. III was awesome and some on here do not... so we all have our own opinions... 373818[/snapback] The storyline is taken straight from the original movie. Most of the original movie takes place on Kong's island and NOT NYC. And, yes, King Kong fought Dinosaurs back in 1933. So here, in 2005, if you're given a choice between: A - a movie where a giant gorilla fights a T-Rex and B - a movie where a giant gorilla does not fight a T-Rex YOU ALWAYS PICK CHOICE A! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Fischer Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 some of you that think this will be a great movie, are you really thinking that or just saying that because you think "you should"? I watched this trailer and along with everyone I personally know that has seen it, thinks this looks bad. I was optimistic, hearing Peter Jackson's name, Jack Black's name and all the great film and effects that was LOTR, I was really excited to see the trailer... and I must say, I won't be seeing this movie. It looks like Jurassic Park meets an oversized gorilla, with some Mud people thrown in. I hope the effects on the trailer aren't final, they looked really bad sometimes, like when that one guy kicks someting... all the digital effects that were mixed with live shots looked bad in my opinion. And I don't get the story from this trailer at all... how does this gorilla get back to NYC, there was one scene with him in NYC... all the others were with dinosaurs... DINOSAURS for chrissake!! sorry, in my opinion this looks dumb... but I think Ep. III was awesome and some on here do not... so we all have our own opinions... 373818[/snapback] Did you ever see the original King Kong? It was made in 1933 -- and yes, they did make movies before 1985. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OJ's Glove Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Am I the only person who finds it really disturbing the amount of people who don't know the details or haven't seen the 1933 King Kong, one of the iconic productions in the history of film? It was really groundbreaking and extremely important. I really want to slap my forehead every time I hear somebody blame Peter Jackson for putting dinosaurs in the movie, when Kong fighting the T-Rex is one of the most famous sequences in movie history. Sigh.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoker2Buffalo Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Am I the only person who finds it really disturbing the amount of people who don't know the details or haven't seen the 1933 King Kong, one of the iconic productions in the history of film? It was really groundbreaking and extremely important. I really want to slap my forehead every time I hear somebody blame Peter Jackson for putting dinosaurs in the movie, when Kong fighting the T-Rex is one of the most famous sequences in movie history. Sigh.... 373872[/snapback] Seriously! I've heard so many people ask why there's dinosaurs in this movie. I'm friggin' 16 and have never seen King Kong, and I at least knew there were dinosaurs! And by the way, MikeG, the effects are NOT finished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoker2Buffalo Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 There was a big ass ape that lived up until 500,000 years ago called "Gigantopithicus" or something like that, that could have been as big as twelve feet tall. Here is a photo of model that based on some old bones: http://www.bfro.net/images/sd_giganto_full.jpg 373701[/snapback] Look. he has a stylist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40+ Year Bills Fan Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 WoW!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts