Review of King Kong

King Kong (2005)
7/10
It gives you the spectacle you're in here for
28 September 2021
Peter Jackson's next film after The Lord of the Rings trilogy. A second remake of the original 1933 film of the same name. Briefly the most expensive film ever made.

Quite grand achievements for a film even before you start to watch it. And the end result doesn't disappoint. This is cinema with a capital C. Jackson's grandiose shooting style combines with an epic story, which meets an era when dreams were made.

And yes, it is long. Over three hours long. Which can be off-putting for some viewers. And while I do feel that some action scenes are a bit... longish, I cannot deny that I was thoroughly entertained by 95 percent of it. There are some scenes on Skull Island that I would have personally left out all together, but those are minor nitpicks in the grand scheme of things.

The acting is also very nice. Jack Black was just about perfectly cast as the eccentric director and Adrien Brody was born to play the down on his luck poet slash writer. And you can never go wrong with stuffing Andy Serkis in a mocap suit and having him jump around.

Naomi Watts also gives us a much more relatable and dynamic main female lead and love interest for the giant killer gorilla. Which is a very specific role to play, now that I say it aloud. But she pulls it off flawlessly.

Aside from the length of the film, if there's one thing I'd change, it's perhaps the final act in New York. It's not bad, but at times it feels more like spectacle for spectacle's sake. Just a little bit, admittedly, but the feeling is there.

Nevertheless, this is a very fine film. The reason why motion pictures were invented, I'd argue. It's grand, it's epic and it's definitely a film you're not going to forget in a hurry.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed