King Kong with Henning Sebastian Jahre - yup he`s the one you should call for in case of an emergency hehe(C)(P)121208. All Rights Reserved. Thanks Jimmy-boy
many pictures from http://www.pulpanddagger.com/canuck/kongpage.html#pictures
many pictures from http://www.pulpanddagger.com/canuck/kongpage.html#pictures
Fay Wray at the Empire State Building
Naomi Watts(2005), Fay Wray(1933) and Jessica Lange(1976) are the heroines of the three Hollywood films concerning King Kong...
Fay Way 1907-2004
At the 1998 Academy Awards with Billy Crystal introducing Matt Damon & Ben Affleck.
http://kingkongdvds.com/
KING KONG 2005
5 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
What?????, February 16, 2006
By
Henning Sebastian Jahre "Judy-Viv"
What a lovely 90 minute film that lies within these 187 minutes...... To me the 2005 film only works when it sticks close to the original of 1933. The cast is great though, but sadly Kong is just one of many monsters on the island and the most exciting scene is the escape from frightened dinosaurs.... The excape from the insects were cut in 1933 because it took attention from Kong. Why didn`t they learn??? In 1976 Kong is a great beast with almost human qualities - sort of a missing link. Here he is back being a gorilla of oversize and it is a puzzle why Ann is not killed by his rough treatment of her early on. The Jimmy-Hayes relationship goes nowhere and they could easily have been omitted. The 1976 film has great locations, while this is a blue-screen effort and u see it much too often. I mean several cliffs and stones in the shape of a gorilla? It's enough with Skull island... Ann`s vaudeville tricks and their Bambi-moment in New York is BAAAAAAAAAAD... The New York sequences should have been better, but the Empire State Buidling-scene survives... The sacrifising of Ann is both good in 33 and 76, here - it's dramatic, but the first sight of Kong is just shadow.......And magical moments are far between because Jackson doesn`t dare to slow down... In the 1976 film we get to love Kong.... Here... well we don`t.... It`s a great actioner, but I wish Jackson could have relaxed a bit.... It's funny the way Denham refers to Fay Wray early on("but she`s shooting over at RKO") Many people feel Kong is a racist. But that`s insane... Of course he warms up to a whiteperson - she`s a novelty - a new thing to him..... He is just curious and collects her as a prized possession. But it is an OK contribution to the myth of Kong. It's NOT the best Kong, but it's OK in a trilogy of the giant....
King Kong
1933
THE BEST, Aug 11 2001 KING KONG! Just taste that name. It s t i l l is a household name. I`m gonna be brief: 2 think that it is made 5 years after Hollywood was transformed 2 sound is amazing. The camera moves, the sound is good(as are the soundeffects), the music, the story and most of the actors are all good. The production values? Stunning. Compare it with CLASH OF THE TITANS from 1981 if u don`t believe me. Fay Wray i s a good screamer but not that much as an actress. After numerous videotapes I now own it on DVD. Of course it is great but it DOESN`t include the "making of". Hmmm. Last friday I watched JURASSIC PARK III and went straight home and saw KONG. Well. Hello? In 1933 they at least had something called WRITERS and story developers. A job that may be overlooked by Hollywood these days. KING KONG? A forever treat though his first appearances is difficult to frighten of these days. PLEASE REMAKE IT a`la Gus Van Sant`s "PSYCHO". I`ve heard a remake is on the way for years. Truth in that?
King Kong
1976
JESSICA LANGE `S DEBUT - MMMMM, Jun 19 2000 This was the first film of KING KONG that I saw. I immediatly fell in love with it. Over the years I have been infuritated by critics who doesn`t seem to dare liking this film. They always compare it unfavourbly to the -33 classic. Right. It doesn`t have the thrills and excitement of the original. BUT. This is a low key fable. A telling of the Beauty and the Beast... A lovely score by John Barry, great photography and the debut of the greatest actress in American movies of the 80s: JESSICA LANGE. She demonstrated further abileties in FRANCES, THE COUNTRY, THE MUSIC BOX, TOOTSIE(Oscar Best Supporting Actress) and BLUE SKY(Oscar Best Actress). I really do hope that the 1976 version of KING KONG will find peace with some critics and I`m delighted that so many others here like it
http://kingkongdvds.com/
KING KONG 2005
5 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
What?????, February 16, 2006
By
Henning Sebastian Jahre "Judy-Viv"
What a lovely 90 minute film that lies within these 187 minutes...... To me the 2005 film only works when it sticks close to the original of 1933. The cast is great though, but sadly Kong is just one of many monsters on the island and the most exciting scene is the escape from frightened dinosaurs.... The excape from the insects were cut in 1933 because it took attention from Kong. Why didn`t they learn??? In 1976 Kong is a great beast with almost human qualities - sort of a missing link. Here he is back being a gorilla of oversize and it is a puzzle why Ann is not killed by his rough treatment of her early on. The Jimmy-Hayes relationship goes nowhere and they could easily have been omitted. The 1976 film has great locations, while this is a blue-screen effort and u see it much too often. I mean several cliffs and stones in the shape of a gorilla? It's enough with Skull island... Ann`s vaudeville tricks and their Bambi-moment in New York is BAAAAAAAAAAD... The New York sequences should have been better, but the Empire State Buidling-scene survives... The sacrifising of Ann is both good in 33 and 76, here - it's dramatic, but the first sight of Kong is just shadow.......And magical moments are far between because Jackson doesn`t dare to slow down... In the 1976 film we get to love Kong.... Here... well we don`t.... It`s a great actioner, but I wish Jackson could have relaxed a bit.... It's funny the way Denham refers to Fay Wray early on("but she`s shooting over at RKO") Many people feel Kong is a racist. But that`s insane... Of course he warms up to a whiteperson - she`s a novelty - a new thing to him..... He is just curious and collects her as a prized possession. But it is an OK contribution to the myth of Kong. It's NOT the best Kong, but it's OK in a trilogy of the giant....
King Kong
1933
THE BEST, Aug 11 2001 KING KONG! Just taste that name. It s t i l l is a household name. I`m gonna be brief: 2 think that it is made 5 years after Hollywood was transformed 2 sound is amazing. The camera moves, the sound is good(as are the soundeffects), the music, the story and most of the actors are all good. The production values? Stunning. Compare it with CLASH OF THE TITANS from 1981 if u don`t believe me. Fay Wray i s a good screamer but not that much as an actress. After numerous videotapes I now own it on DVD. Of course it is great but it DOESN`t include the "making of". Hmmm. Last friday I watched JURASSIC PARK III and went straight home and saw KONG. Well. Hello? In 1933 they at least had something called WRITERS and story developers. A job that may be overlooked by Hollywood these days. KING KONG? A forever treat though his first appearances is difficult to frighten of these days. PLEASE REMAKE IT a`la Gus Van Sant`s "PSYCHO". I`ve heard a remake is on the way for years. Truth in that?
King Kong
1976
JESSICA LANGE `S DEBUT - MMMMM, Jun 19 2000 This was the first film of KING KONG that I saw. I immediatly fell in love with it. Over the years I have been infuritated by critics who doesn`t seem to dare liking this film. They always compare it unfavourbly to the -33 classic. Right. It doesn`t have the thrills and excitement of the original. BUT. This is a low key fable. A telling of the Beauty and the Beast... A lovely score by John Barry, great photography and the debut of the greatest actress in American movies of the 80s: JESSICA LANGE. She demonstrated further abileties in FRANCES, THE COUNTRY, THE MUSIC BOX, TOOTSIE(Oscar Best Supporting Actress) and BLUE SKY(Oscar Best Actress). I really do hope that the 1976 version of KING KONG will find peace with some critics and I`m delighted that so many others here like it
KING KONG 1976
10 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
GREAT GREAT GREAT, 17 Jan 2006
By
Henning Sebastian Jahre "Judy-Viv"I must say that after reading countless articles about what FLOP this film was in the 70s, I must came to rescue...
I saw the film at the theatrical release and IT WAS huge crowd to see it. Never mind what Peter Jackson experienced in New Zealand. It`s sad - but at the moment it is popular to give it the trash-treatment...
What is is.... it is a beautiful, strange, telling fable about love between a beauty and a beast. It`s that simple. It stands firmly on it`s own feet and while I love the 33 classic and espcially the color version which I bought yersterday, this is a more quiet, sober chapter to the myth of Kong.
I love this dvd and Peter Jackson SHOULD have learned something from the 33 and the 76-films... He found it necessary to OPEN the film(he tries to stick to the 33 version), but only succeeds when he is reworking the classic. It`s overlong and it takes tooo long to get to Skull Island.... he even tortures us with characters that are NOT essential to the plot(Jimmy and his friend)...
KING KONG 1976 have beutiful locations from Hawaii, while the 2005 film remains a computer game - too often we laughed at the blue screen and special effects - I MEAN C`MON....... THIS IS 2005!!!!!!!!! Movie kingdom has indeed come to an end if one is to film an entire film like KONG with blue screen(watch the making of th 2005 film)...
The 1976 film has a BEAUTIFUL SCORE and BEAUTIFUL locations and I don`t care if Rick Baker wore an apesuite.... HE`S SPLENDID IN THE JOB.... As far as I rememember the 2005 Kong also covered a certain actor?
Jessica Lange is as good as it gets and I MUST SAY; many viewers agree with me that the 1976 is an IMPORTANT tribute to the Kong myth. Unlike the 33 and 76 version, Jackson made Kong as just another monster on the island and the New York sequences(only the Empire State Building sequence survives)are boring.... Another letdown is when Ann entertains Kong with vaudeville tricks and they have a Bambi-moment on ice in New York....
Nope... Ignore articles about what flop this film was - and experience a great film with great performances and with the KING KONG of 1933 - the best film ABOUT KONG:-)
10 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
GREAT GREAT GREAT, 17 Jan 2006
By
Henning Sebastian Jahre "Judy-Viv"I must say that after reading countless articles about what FLOP this film was in the 70s, I must came to rescue...
I saw the film at the theatrical release and IT WAS huge crowd to see it. Never mind what Peter Jackson experienced in New Zealand. It`s sad - but at the moment it is popular to give it the trash-treatment...
What is is.... it is a beautiful, strange, telling fable about love between a beauty and a beast. It`s that simple. It stands firmly on it`s own feet and while I love the 33 classic and espcially the color version which I bought yersterday, this is a more quiet, sober chapter to the myth of Kong.
I love this dvd and Peter Jackson SHOULD have learned something from the 33 and the 76-films... He found it necessary to OPEN the film(he tries to stick to the 33 version), but only succeeds when he is reworking the classic. It`s overlong and it takes tooo long to get to Skull Island.... he even tortures us with characters that are NOT essential to the plot(Jimmy and his friend)...
KING KONG 1976 have beutiful locations from Hawaii, while the 2005 film remains a computer game - too often we laughed at the blue screen and special effects - I MEAN C`MON....... THIS IS 2005!!!!!!!!! Movie kingdom has indeed come to an end if one is to film an entire film like KONG with blue screen(watch the making of th 2005 film)...
The 1976 film has a BEAUTIFUL SCORE and BEAUTIFUL locations and I don`t care if Rick Baker wore an apesuite.... HE`S SPLENDID IN THE JOB.... As far as I rememember the 2005 Kong also covered a certain actor?
Jessica Lange is as good as it gets and I MUST SAY; many viewers agree with me that the 1976 is an IMPORTANT tribute to the Kong myth. Unlike the 33 and 76 version, Jackson made Kong as just another monster on the island and the New York sequences(only the Empire State Building sequence survives)are boring.... Another letdown is when Ann entertains Kong with vaudeville tricks and they have a Bambi-moment on ice in New York....
Nope... Ignore articles about what flop this film was - and experience a great film with great performances and with the KING KONG of 1933 - the best film ABOUT KONG:-)
Ingen kommentarer:
Legg inn en kommentar