So...anybody seen it yet?

If so...


Was it worth the money?


Did it live up to the Media Hype?

This Movie makes me cry.....

Im not gunna put myself through the heartache.....

:(

I'm not going to see it. sure, it's peter jackson, but I dont think it should have been made.

I'm not sure it's a good movie. As for LOTR, I'm afraid Jackson has done another "rollercoaster" stuffed with special effects but lacking humor and poetry.

Just by seeing the movie posters and trailers you can see everything is shown in detail - no room for imagination or ambiguity.

This said, I'm probably going to see it and enjoy the "rollercoaster" ride.

I think it was brilliant. More enjoyable than the original. But then I am not one to get sentimental when it comes to classics. Some get better with age, others CAN be surpassed by a brilliant remake.

In any case I think no other movie currently in the theaters is more worth your $. Narnia, Memoir, Dick & Jane, even Syriana and Pride & Prejudice--no way they even come close. Of course, I haven't seen Brokeback Mountain yet, or this new Spielberg flick Munich...they are both supposedly great.

Yes Dio, Kong is definitely more entertaining than the other movies you will find at the theater; even Narnia. It was a well-made film, but the script wasn't exactly intelligent. Still a fun experience that if you see a movie this season, see it.

I haven't seen Dick and Jane yet, and don't really plan on it. But Pride was another Jane Austen movie that played out well, although caters near exclusively to the female audience. Syriana and Memoir are "artsy" films for a smaller audience, as for Munich---I plan to see that as soon as possible. :D

I saw King Kong yesterday. It was better than I expected - actually, I really enjoyed it.

But it's too long. Most scenes should have been cut : the t-rex fight, the shipwreck, the dino highway, king kong chasing cars and the final - all could have been reduced by at least 30%. And the giant bugs scenes was not really necessary (a bit too gore maybe). As a film director, Jackson is like a kid cooking his own pizza : it seems he wants to add every ingedient he likes in huge proportions, not knowing when to stop.

Anyway, I liked the fact that he set his movies in the 30's rather than today, like the bad remake of 1976 did. It gives a very special mood to the movie and avoid many stereotypes like helicopter fights and high tech gadgets that make most recent action movies look the same.
NY 1930 is as fascinating than Skull island !

I've heard from others it is tooo looooonnnnggg and that the special effects are way overbearing. This seems to be the case with many movies today major turn off:(

A lotta remakes, only a very FEW that are as good or better than the originals...



Ask yer dentist if HIS plastic caps is as good as the originals...




Then, later...




...check the film on yer teeth...




;)

Well guys,

I finally got up of my duff and went to see it today. I have to admit that it was very entertainnig and alot better than I thought it would be. I give it 3 stars out of 5 :corn:

Ooops!! Double post :o

My friend saw it. She told me it was good...only an hour too long. She said it was 3hrs and 7mns. Sure, Naomi Watts is hot, but when I want to watch something big and hairy for 3 hours, I'll go rent some Colin Farrell movie.