MovieMusic.com Message Boards: King Kong

Message Boards

Movie Soundtracks

King Kong (Page 1)

Archive of old forum. No more postings.

Please visit our new forum, The MovieMusic Lobby, to post new topics.

This topic is 2 pages long: 1 2

Author	Topic: King Kong

sean Standard Userer	Just got back from watching King Kong and it's quite the film! Great introduction and set-up; pretty boring mid-way through for the journey on the boat; and it just kicks a-s-s from the arrival at Skull Island until the end in New York. The best moments by far in the film is the T-Rex fight with Kong and the Empire State Building sequence; easily some of the best special effects of the year (and ever, for that matter), perhaps even topping some of ILM's work in Revenge Of The Sith. Although, Sith doesn't really have any big jarring moments with visual effects, there are some problems with the Brontosaurus effects in Kong, they're not very convincing and the Raptor's look is lame. Wait until you see the vines in the "Tooth and Claw" battle, that's a real attention-grabber ... and how the action is cut and shot for the Empire State Building plane sequence is something to watch for! Howard Shore is in the film. Look for him at Kong's premiere at the stage theatre. He's conducting Max Steiner's original King Kong music; it's pretty cool. What's also funny is that Kong kills Shore, sweeping him and the orchestra away ... it's hilarious watching Shore trying to conduct like mad while all hell is breaking loose in the theatre. Very funny! As far as length and how much of James Newton Howard's music is not on the album, it doesn't really matter. The meat of his music is on the album and there are no standout pieces, action or otherwise, that should have been included on the disc. Much of the remaining action music in the film seems to rehashed versions of "Head Towards The Animals" and JNH's Batman Begins-sounding theme in "It's Deserted" (05:55—06:05) is repeated numerous times throughout the film for some of the heroic moments; I imagine it's just an edit of that section mixed in, rather different recordings. That said, JNH's score works very well with the film and it made me appreciate the score much more than on my first listen almost a week ago. I do wish he'd had more time, but what he's delievered is sufficient and complements Peter Jackson's epic very nicely. Hats off to the both of them! NP: King Kong (JNH) ***/***
posted 12-14-2005 01:32 PM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	Couldn't agree more Seanie (except I had no problems with the pacing in the middle) and it was quite a treat to see Shore conducting Steiner's music on Broadway . . . only to be killed by the King himself; fitting end for glasses-wearing-one. I just typed up my brief reveiw in the other Kong thread (iTunes, King Kong, You Know....). The vine sequence with the Rexes and Kong was one of the most spectacular and inventive action set-pieces I've seen since anything in Raiders of the Lost Ark (hey, still my favorite film to this day after inspiring me to be a filmmaker; but don't worry, I have no intentions of remaking it ). My favorite scene was the Central Park ice skating scene, though. It was simply sublime and well-crafted. [Message edited by nuts_score on 12-14-2005]
posted 12-14-2005 06:16 PM PT (US)

Bond1965 Standard Userer	Hey Sean...how about a flippin SPOILER WARNING. Yeah...we know the basic story, but we don't know details like the one you mentioned w/ Shore. Jaems
posted 12-14-2005 07:08 PM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by Bond1965: Hey Sean...how about a flippin SPOILER WARNING. I'll take care of this one, Sean. GUYS, SPOILER WARNINGS!!!!! =O
posted 12-14-2005 08:12 PM PT (US)

sean Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by Bond1965: Hey Sean...how about a flippin SPOILER WARNING. Yeah...we know the basic story, but we don't know details like the one you mentioned w/ Shore. Jaems HAHA! Well if it's any comfort, I don't feel bad for revealing that Kong kills Shore, it's not that important—just damned cool. And of course I was gonna mention it, this is moviemusic.com after all there, "Jaems." nuts-score I wear glasses you freak! (The Howard Shore glasses wearing death comment LOL!) Did you catch the Sumantra Rat Monkey!?! I gotta huge kick outta' that. So because Peter Jackson remade King Kong since it was his favourite childhood film, does that mean in 30 years I can remake Star Wars and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan?
posted 12-14-2005 10:23 PM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by sean: nuts-score I wear glasses you freak! (The Howard Shore glasses wearing death comment LOL!) Did you catch the Sumantra Rat Monkey!?! I gotta huge kick outta' that. First off, you're always confusing me with you doppelganger photos of you and your friend, SPOILER WARNING Ras al Ghul. But the glasses comment was meant to be directed towards Mr. Shore, not yourself young Padawan. And I did catch the rat monkey in the bowels of the Venture as Englehorn directed "The Nose" Driscoll towards his sleeping cage. Very cool indeed. Hey, and that emoticon is wearing glasses too, calm yourself.
posted 12-14-2005 11:50 PM PT (US)

rkeaveney Standard Userer	KONG was brilliant. It reminds me why I love real movies and filmmakers, and hate shite ones like John Woo, Michael Bay and the cadre of crapmasters working these days. Ryan
posted 12-14-2005 11:58 PM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	Don't you know it, Ryan.
posted 12-15-2005 01:11 AM PT (US)

Gae Standard Userer	I'm off to see the film soon.....cant wait! Gae
posted 12-15-2005 04:09 AM PT (US)

lancer Standard Userer	sometime this weekend I will see it, with all the freakin buzz sinc its been out I can hardly wait!!!!
posted 12-15-2005 04:17 AM PT (US)

sean Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by rkeaveney: KONG was brilliant. It reminds me why I love real movies and filmmakers, and hate shite ones like John Woo, Michael Bay and the cadre of crapmasters working these days. Ryan Weren't you one of those racist freaks who liked Bad Boys 2? Crapmaster, indeed. BTW, what did you think of the Digital Intermidiate, speaking of love for film-makers.
posted 12-15-2005 08:25 AM PT (US)

Scorro Standard Userer	"sweeping him and the orchestra away" Wow, when Jackson rejects a score he doesn't kid around.
posted 12-15-2005 10:13 AM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by sean: So because Peter Jackson remade King Kong since it was his favourite childhood film, does that mean in 30 years I can remake Star Wars and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan? And yes Sean, you can remake the prequels; I'm sure you and your brother could fasten a great geek-love script. But you can only do so after I've had my chance at The Bride of Frankenstein. See you on the remake channel!
posted 12-15-2005 10:18 AM PT (US)

PeterK FishChip	quote: Originally posted by Scorro: "sweeping him and the orchestra away" Wow, when Jackson rejects a score he doesn't kid around. That's pretty funny. After a moment of thought, this whole thing could be a very funny stunt. Composer gets rejected professionally. Composer gets rejected cinematically. I mean, Shore was paid handsomely for his work (he'll miss out OST royalties, but in the end, Kong royalties will be nothing compared to LOTR's, so no big loss). We'll see if Jackson picks up Shore for the next project as if nothing happened. This is pushing the limits of life imitating art imitating life. Whooo-eeeee!
posted 12-15-2005 10:39 AM PT (US)

Camillu Standard Userer	Loved every minute of it, and while I agree that 3hours is long, there wasn't one sequence I felt he could have done without. Each one was great for various reasons. Was very impressed by Kong himself. There wasn't a single moment when he didn't look 100% believable. It was like they trained a real ape and shot him like Gandalf and Frodo. As mentioned elsewhere, 2 particular highlights were the ice scene and the vines scene. Genius. Score-wise I thought it sounded fine on-screen. I'm still very curious about what maestro Shore could have envisioned which Jackson didn't like, but JNH delivered, and I love his eerie main theme/motif which works well in various circumstances, most notably the departure of the Venture. The finale was great too. They should give Jackson tonnes of cash and let him make whichever movies he want and give him total freedom, becuase the guy has rare talent. Actually I think that's what they're doing already...
posted 12-15-2005 05:49 PM PT (US)

Camillu Standard Userer	Oh by the way... Wilhelm Scream! Listen out for it when a brachiosaurus knocks a guy off a cliff.
posted 12-15-2005 06:02 PM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by Camillu: Oh by the way... Wilhelm Scream! Listen out for it when a brachiosaurus knocks a guy off a cliff. Yep, caught that as well as many other tips of the hat to either '33 Kong or classic cinema. "What about Fay? Is she available" "No; she's shooting a new picture at RKO with Cooper." "Cooper, huh? I should have figured."
posted 12-15-2005 09:34 PM PT (US)

lancer Standard Userer	Finally seen it, and loved it. The natives in this flick freaked me out, which is a good thing considering it usually takes a lot to get to me. CGI kong is aw-inspiring, and naomi's performance was great!!! While the first little bit of the movie was a bit slow, it was necessary for character development. A couple of minor effects glitches, but nothing major. JNH's score was good as well, very fitting to the visuals. All in all a very enjoyable experience.
posted 12-17-2005 12:20 AM PT (US)

Mark Olivarez Standard Userer	Got back from the film and all I can say is bravo Peter Jackson. The film flew by, didn't notice the length at all. The only problem I had with the bronto sequence is how it ended, that was kinda silly and I really never bought Driscoll and Ann's love. It was a beautiful film visually and well cast in my opinion. It certainly took the bad taste out of my mouth from the 76 garbage
posted 12-18-2005 09:49 PM PT (US)

Dinko Standard Userer	Yeah, but the 76 garbage had nice music. ;p Other than that, this Kong is pretty much the best remake I've ever seen of any movie.
posted 12-19-2005 07:15 PM PT (US)

Marian Schedenig Standard Userer	Just saw it - amazing. I've always been saying that remakes are not a bad thing per se, except that most of them aren't good. This is the very case of a movie that really proves it. (Or dare I say, it might even be better? It has pretty much everything the original has, but there's so much more.. and I'm not talking about the effects in this case). quote: Originally posted by nuts_score: "What about Fay? Is she available" Not to forget the scene they're shooting on the ship, which seems to be a direct copy of the same "real life" scene in the original. I didn't notice the PJ children, or PJ himself. I did notice the Wilhelm scream and Shore (but I knew about Shore's cameo). The pacing is wonderful. For me, there wasn't a single sequence that seemed to long. The lengthy introduction was great, and the character development makes many wonderful later scenes possible. I loved the ship journey and the suspenseful island discovery. The natives were, surprisingly, really creepy. The long dino chase was very over the top (just like all the dino stuff in the original) - and yet, it worked, and very well so. Some of the dino effects weren't entirely convincing, but if they looked a bit flat in some shots compared to the JP dinos, they still looked heavy, which always was the single thing that bothered me about some JP effects. The centipede scene is among the most disgusting-creepy things I've seen. And the finale was just beautiful. The ice scene could easily have been the most ridiculous thing I've seen; the fact that it isn't and instead moves you to tears shows how well the movie sets everything up. Kong effects - some of his jumping looked fake. His face was incredible. With Gollum, you could tell he wasn't real, not because he looked fake but because you knew he was artificial. But fully knowing that Kong's face was CGI, I couldn't find the tiniest thing about it that didn't look 100% real. Score was great. I haven't heard it on CD yet, but it works very well in the movie and sounds like it should make a very enjoyable album as well.
posted 12-20-2005 04:59 PM PT (US)

rkeaveney Standard Userer	PJ's kids appear early in the film, during the opening NYC sequence. The daughter is shown clutching a doll, the son is a newspaper boy. Ryan
posted 12-20-2005 05:15 PM PT (US)

BMikeJ Standard Userer	I saw Kong this evening and I'm still overwhelmed by the whole experience. Marian, I think your comments sum up my feelings. Some people I've talked said the first hour was too long and could have been cut but I wouldn't have dropped a thing. Kong was so absolutely amazing that I never questioned that he wasn't real.
posted 12-20-2005 08:54 PM PT (US)

Gae Standard Userer	Got the Kong score on continual loop at the moment and I'm loving it after not listening to many soundtracks recently. The themes are starting to come through nicely now and I love the ominous Kong/Skull Island motif. The drum beating "The Last Blank space on the map" is a real suspensful and heartpounding cue...excellent! Gae King Kong **/**
posted 12-21-2005 07:14 AM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	Just so it's known, a very reliable and respectable source let me on the knowledge that the person that Kong flings through the opera house is not Mr. Shore; just some innocent bystander in a tux. Next time you see the movie (or if you have yet to see it) watch for it and you'll (hopefully) see what I mean. But this score is still so great! NP> JNH's King Kong **/** (should win the Golden Globe, but it won't - sadly) [Message edited by nuts_score on 12-22-2005]
posted 12-21-2005 09:20 PM PT (US)

franz_conrad Standard Userer	When I saw this film on its cinema release, I wasn't sure what to make of it, largely because it came in between the two halves of one of the most painful arguments I've ever had with someone, and we spent the three hours in awkward silence next to each other watching this film. So I sat down to watch it on DVD the other night. Observations 1. Jackson makes some scenes last an eternity. Consider the scene where Kong is captured. How many times do we need to cut back to Naomi Watts' in distress to communicate her discontent in this scene? When people said this film needed an editor on its release, it was surely referring not so much to the additional subplots Jackson and Co. had added (though the bugs scene and cabin boy stories would have got the chop from me), but more to the unnecessary elongation of every scene that WAS in the original film. Sure, draw out a couple - the Trex fight was worth exploring - but the scene where Kong meets Watts again in the streets of New York... how on earth did that run on so long? It introduces redundancies as well - the capture of Kong is made as much of a tragedy as the death of Kong, even down to the same music. The film should not have reflected on the sadness of Kong until well after he was back in New York and it was too late for it to turn out any other way. 2. Night-time New York in Time Square looks really good in this film. 3. Peter Jackson refused to face up to the limitations on Jack Black's acting. I say this because there's not a lot going on in Black performance, and yet Jackson holds on his reaction shots and (worse) moments of self-reflection at every opportunity. Did Jackson not see how empty that face is? That the crossing of those beady little eyes couldn't possibly cover the gamut of scheming, confusion and remorse? In my 90 minute edit of this film, less emphasis would have been placed on this weak heel of the cast. 4. Kong's fur looks quite real. 5. Newton-Howard's score may be fun for those who want to play 'here-a-motif-there-a-motif', but he again proves he's a composer who writes music of pretty variable substance. None of it feels like it couldn't have been improved. This was the same year that gave us the scores for CHRONICLES OF NARNIA and GOBLET OF FIRE. Pretty significant disappointments all round for me. Sorry to those who love this film. I just can't think of a better argument for keeping a film short than this one.
posted 03-16-2008 04:30 PM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	Wow, my thoughts two years and some change later are much, much different. I f**ing hate Jackson's Kong* now. Haha. I agree with everything you put onto page here, Michael. Sure, the film and sets looks great, but damn that movie is much longer than it has any right to be. Thanks for bringing up the points about Jack Black's vapid performance. I enjoyed his work as a comedian/musician in his early days, but people keep on mentioning him as a candidate to play Ignatius J. Reilly in the long-gestating film version of one of my favorites books, John Kennedy Toole's A Confederacy of Dunces. I would absolutely hate that. Oh, and JNH's music sucks in this one.
posted 03-16-2008 07:26 PM PT (US)

BackToTheFutureFan Standard Userer	I am addicted to the cue "Beautiful" though. The cue is very....well....beautiful.
posted 03-16-2008 07:28 PM PT (US)

Gae Standard Userer	The biggest problem with King Kong is its length. He has taken a Classic 105 minute movie story and doubled its length to turn it into a real over the top totally indulgent monster flick. There are elements of "King Kong" that I like, usually concerning the more restrained special effect scenes, the capture of Kong on the Island and some of the scenes in new York. There are just too many moments though where you feel that Jackson is in the middle of his giant sweet bag, totally indulging himself. The T-Rex fight is totally over the top and in the end yawn inducing as it feels like we are watching a tag fight on WWE. Also, I hate it when mortal humans are computerised and then thrown and tossed around in an impossible gravity-defying way and without any damage to them. The finale on top of the Empire State Building, rather than leaving me feeling totally sorry for the Ape (as in the original) just made my head spin and gave me vertigo. I was just glad to get through the scene in the end. King Kong is an OK remake with some great effects, when used in a restrained way, but some totally over the top unbelievable action and a way too long running time. One other thing. If jackson had cut out all the moments where Naomi Watts stares in wonder at the "off camera" marvel that he has created, he would have shortened the film by 20 minutes alone. Overall * out of * as opposed to the original which is still * out of *** and still has the power to enchant 75 years later. Gae [Message edited by Gae on 03-17-2008]
posted 03-17-2008 06:28 AM PT (US)

Scorro Standard Userer	I think the biggest problem with the movie is that Jackson inserted comedic elements into the screenplay. The original was not a comedy and the remake would have been much better off to play it straight. The casting could have been much better as well. Regarding length, it's true there is junk in the film that has no place... like 'should Billy join the island rescue effort or not' (absolutely no bearing on plot whatsoever). The film is a mess compared to the LOTR productions. Everything is totally over the top when a more controlled approach could have made it a true classic.
posted 03-17-2008 12:22 PM PT (US)

sean Standard Userer	I wonder if "Bond1965" is still fuming at me for revealing Howard Shore's shocking death scene. HA! This movie is stupid, in hindsight. James Newton Howard's score is a complete write-off, for me, given the insanely short amount of time he had to score this thing.
posted 03-17-2008 12:27 PM PT (US)

StarlessWinter Standard Userer	Geez, did everyone's opinion really change THAT much? I wonder why...? I still like this film...it's good fun, but not great by any means. It's not a movie you can take out and watch all the time, and it is simply way too long. The sets are fantastic and the effects are great (in most cases, but definitely not all). However, there are far too many action scenes and staring into people's eyes. What's interesting about the movie, though, is it's potential. As much as I adore the LOTR films, I think that Fran Walsh (writer of the film and Jackson's wife), not Jackson, is responsible for many of the truly great scenes in LOTR. I read many interviews and "making of" things before and after King Kong came out, and Walsh's ideas about the emotion of the story were often profound and beautiful. They, however, were buried under all the weight of the action and filler of the final film.
posted 03-17-2008 03:25 PM PT (US)

franz_conrad Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by StarlessWinter: Geez, did everyone's opinion really change THAT much? I wonder why...? The hype has faded a little, perhaps? Enabling more clear-eyed assessments? While I've no desire to watch the extended version, now that I've seen the film a second time, I can't imagine how he could have made the film longer for an extended DVD.
posted 03-17-2008 04:24 PM PT (US)

gkgyver Standard Userer	King Kong is by no means a perfect film. But at the very least it's a well-written, well-directed blockbuster with a soul; and that's a lot more other so-called epics can say about themselves.
posted 03-17-2008 08:24 PM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by gkgyver: King Kong is by no means a perfect film. But at the very least it's a well-written, well-directed blockbuster with a soul; and that's a lot more other so-called epics can say about themselves. I do agree with this statement. If this much time and dedication had gone into Bay's Transformers, and if Bay had any respect for the source material, then we might have something pretty interesting.
posted 03-17-2008 09:53 PM PT (US)

StarlessWinter Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by nuts_score: <BLOCKQUOTE><font size=1 face=arial>quote:</font><HR size=1>Originally posted by gkgyver: [b]King Kong is by no means a perfect film. But at the very least it's a well-written, well-directed blockbuster with a soul; and that's a lot more other so-called epics can say about themselves.<HR size=1></BLOCKQUOTE> I do agree with this statement. If this much time and dedication had gone into Bay's Transformers, and if Bay had any respect for the source material, then we might have something pretty interesting.[/B] It's well-written, well-directed, and has soul, but you f-ing hate it? I don't mean to be rude or anything, but what do you mean?
posted 03-17-2008 10:22 PM PT (US)

nuts_score Standard Userer	I think that the screenplay has some wonderful moments, but the script needs an editor. I don't think anything of the acting in the film. I dislike the music. Peter Jackson is a competent director, and he does well here, but not his best work (he still has yet to top Heavenly Creatures, IMO). It all comes down to how self-indulgent it is, and I think Jackson's King Kong is one of the prime contenders. Now can I please go back to f***ing hating this film?
posted 03-17-2008 10:35 PM PT (US)

Timmer Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by nuts_score: I think that the screenplay has some wonderful moments, but the script needs an editor. I don't think anything of the acting in the film. I dislike the music. Peter Jackson is a competent director, and he does well here, but not his best work (he still has yet to top Heavenly Creatures, IMO). It all comes down to how self-indulgent it is, and I think Jackson's King Kong is one of the prime contenders. Now can I please go back to fing hating this film?* I still quite enjoy the film though I totally agree that it's incredibly self-indulgent with many of the Dinosaur scenes being OTT ridiculous ( it probably doesn't help that I'm a Dinosaur fanatic and can't help picking holes in their depiction in this movie ). I agree with you on Heavenly Creatures, a great film and a truly horrific true story. p.s. Barry's 'Kong' score is still easily the tops for me!
posted 03-18-2008 08:46 AM PT (US)

gkgyver Standard Userer	If directors weren't overly self-indulgent from time to time, we would be devoid of many classics. Star Wars, anyone?
posted 03-18-2008 10:17 AM PT (US)

sean Standard Userer	quote: Originally posted by nuts_score: I do agree with this statement. If this much time and dedication had gone into Bay's Transformers, and if Bay had any respect for the source material, then we might have something pretty interesting. Andrew, Transformers is retarded no matter which you way you cut it, time or not, the origins of it are just ridiculous: No one could shine that turd.
posted 03-18-2008 10:29 AM PT (US)

Old Infopop Software by UBB