King Kong Review

This year's King Kong was much improved from the original movie and is clearly the better version. Unlike some movie remakes, Peter Jackson's product was probably necessary (I haven't seen the Jessica Lange 70's version so I'm not counting it here). One example of a movie that didn't need a second version was Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (aka Charlie and the Chocolate Factory). Johnny Depp really showed an original character in his acting repertoire, but the souped-up special effects didn't add very much to a movie that really wasn't that old. King Kong on the other hand is just an ancient flick that was ahead of its time, before the age of color film and CGI. That being said, I understand the reason for the remake, but I really didn't get into the original King Kong story the first time I saw it.

Most of the changes were well done. Kong shows a lot more detailed expression, the scenes and creatures are much more frightening and the overall action is better, but it's just really long with a run time of 3+ hours. I have to admit that I nodded off for a minute or two at the end of the movie. The rest of the audience seemed to really like it and some even applauded when the credits rolled. The "word of mouth" review seems to be positive, but I definitely could have waited for DVD. Peter Jackson does a great job with the movie. Kong's actions, expressions, abilities and overall look were much improved, but in the end the story doesn't intrigue me too much and the lengthy 3+ hours is mostly due to the movie showcasing a bunch of frightening creatures on the island.

King Kong = Wait for DVD/Good Rental