Yep it's finally here,well in December anyway.I'm surprised I have'nt read more on this on this forum about this highly anticipated release. I've never before been as anxious to see a movie than this remake of the original 1933 RKO version,a truly awesome story,I've always hoped this would come to pass.As great as the original was,a great story like this needs to be remade and with todays special effects,only the likes of LOTR Peter Jackson will have the correct vision to make it right. So HERE is the official thread--I hope others will be as excited as I am. By the way,is'nt it this month that some of the merchandise is getting released? COME ON DECEMBER!

So, who plays the screaming Fay Wray this time?

Can't wait to see this film also!

Do you know when the original will be available on DVD?

MMM

seeing the trailer to this movie really got me excited about it . gonna be some good dino effects , on a par with Jurassic Park .
the original KK is one of my all time favorite flicks .
hb

As long as it doesn't suck.

Eh. Jackson has too much of a modern sensibility. I would have preferred a different director for LOTR, so I'm not really looking forward to KK. I'll probably like it for what it is, but it's not exactly the same as being what I want.

Some company named Playmates has the licence. I think some of it is out now. According to the guys on the Spawn board they are disappointing. Good for kids they said. To bad PL didn't get the new kit done.

James :)

Playmates did the Star Trek ships and action figures a few years ago. The figures were small and soft-featured, and the ships were covered with visible screws.

Naomi Watts plays Anne darrow this time around. She looks good in the role, very much like Fay did. Jack Black play Carl Denham. I had doubts about him, but he looks and sounds good in the trailer.

The trailer is pretty awesome, actually.

Best of all it's a period piece, set in the 1930s.

Do you know when the original will be available on DVD?
MMM

I know it's due out in November, just can't remember the exact date. I'm thinking November 22nd.

The original is being released on dvd in November,in three different types of sets.Check out dvd releases on net.

Yes, it is Nov. 22nd.




http://search.deepdiscountdvd.com/search?p=Q&ts=custom&w=king+kong&search.x=54&search.y=7

Here's a Kong with sound:

http://www.bigbadtoystore.com/images/af1236big.jpg

$32.99

James :)

^^^ What.................I didn't here nuttin'. ;)

I'm eagerly anticipating the new Kong. Of course, you can never improve on a classic, but it'll be interesting to see the timeless story set in its original 1930s period with modern FX. Anyway, it's got to be better than the godawful 1976 remake by Dino di Laurentiis — the picture that started and almost finished Jessica Lange's film career. Can't possibly be worse!

^Altough, you really can't say anything bad about Rick Baker's Kong suits. He was and is the master of ape suits and makeup. Too bad the movie itself blew gorilla chunks. :)

Seems Peter Jackson and "Kong" composer Howard Shore have parted company over "creative differences." James Newton Howard has been announced as Shore's replacement.

While it's not all that unusual for a composer and a director to reach this sort of impasse, it is very unusual to do so this late in the game (in order for the film to make its December release date prints will have to be struck at some point within the next six weeks).

Rumors have been swirling that "Kong" was seriously behind schedule, but this is the first solid indication that something may be genuinely amiss.

^Altough, you really can't say anything bad about Rick Baker's Kong suits. He was and is the master of ape suits and makeup. Too bad the movie itself blew gorilla chunks. :)

Peckinpah was offered the movie but turned it down. If he hadn't, it might have blown graphically visceral chunks instead.

Peckinpah was offered the movie but turned it down. If he hadn't, it might have blown graphically visceral chunks instead.




Perhaps "Kong Of Iron" or "The Wild Kong"? ....sorry Man the One Sheet Poster for "Cross Of Iron" is an intense piece of Art. I've never seen the Film is it good?


John/Lonfan

Perhaps "Kong Of Iron" or "The Wild Kong"? ....sorry Man the One Sheet Poster for "Cross Of Iron" is an intense piece of Art. I've never seen the Film is it good?


John/Lonfan

Cross of Iron is an excellent movie that - like many of Peckinpah's films - was somewhat cursed on the financial end. It was made late in Peckinpah's career - it was produced by a German who's background up to that point had been soft-core skin flicks - and the production kept running out of money. Peckinpah ended up sinking more than $100,000 of his own funds into the film to keep it going. It got no distribution or promotion when it was released in '77 and basically sank without a trace. It's still one of the best anti-war movies ever made, but the DVD currently available is awful - bad print, butchered edit, full frame, etc. As time goes by, I feel confident the film will be restored and presented with the respect which it deserves.

Oh yeah, on the same day Peckinpah was offered King Kong, he was also offered Superman:The Movie. I get images of Ben Johnson as Perry White, L. Q. Jones as Lex Luthor, Warren Oates as Otis, and Bo Hopkins as Jimmy Olsen. I don't know who would have played The Man of Steel or Lois Lane, but everybody dies at the end in a glorious bloodbath.

King Kong,[/i] he was also offered Superman:The Movie. I get images of Ben Johnson as Perry White, L. Q. Jones as Lex Luthor, Warren Oates as Otis, and Bo Hopkins as Jimmy Olsen. I don't know who would have played The Man of Steel or Lois Lane, but everybody dies at the end in a glorious bloodbath.

Don't forget William Holden as Pa Kent! Or maybe Michael Parks...

Don't forget William Holden as Pa Kent! Or maybe Michael Parks...

Strother Martin as Jor-El. Slim Pickens and Katy Jurado as Ma and Pa Kent.:)

I hate to admit it but I was hard pressed to come up with scores that James Newton Howard had done - I have none in my collection. We checked up on IMDB and saw he was pretty prolific, sometimes doing 4-5 scores a year. I hope speed isn't his primary qualifying quality...

Considering he's got about four weeks to write the score he'll have to work pretty damned fast.

Considering he's got about four weeks to write the score he'll have to work pretty damned fast.

Yup.

At times like this I think about Carl Stalling writing the scores to Warner Bros. cartoons not by watching the animation but by reading the beats on the dope sheets... he'd be done when before the cartoon.

The toys are in the stores. A more savage looking Kong, big bugs, and some new dinosaurs.

I must admit I'm looking forward to this one (the trailer put the hook in me). Any chance it'll make its Dec. 15 release date? Seems like we should have seen a poster up by now...

I must admit I'm looking forward to this one (the trailer put the hook in me). Any chance it'll make its Dec. 15 release date?

Those who've seen the most recent rough-cut are wondering the same thing. Suffice it to say there's still A LOT of green screen and animatic filler that has yet to be replaced with completed FX footage, and the clock is ticking.

Thing is, given the vast sums of money involved in the tie-ins and cross-promotions for "Kong" it pretty much has to make its release date.

Post production on FX-heavy pictures is always crazy, but Peter Jackson is cutting it very close.

Seems like we should have seen a poster up by now...

They're being printed as I type this. A new trailer is supposed to go out with "Jar Head", but... well, we'll see.

It'll get done, even if they have to open with wet prints.

Perhaps "Kong Of Iron" or "The Wild Kong"? ....
Or "Straw Gorillas". . .

This just in...

A Big Gorilla Weighs In
By SHARON WAXMAN (http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=bylL&v1=SHARON WAXMAN&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=SHARON WAXMAN&inline=nyt-per)
LOS ANGELES, Oct. 26 - In hiring Peter Jackson (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/filmography.html?p_id=95689&inline=nyt-per), the Oscar-winning director of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, to remake the monster classic "King Kong," (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/titlelist.html?v_idlist=289249;27391;27392&inline=nyt_ttl) Universal Pictures took a daring leap, paying him $20 million to direct, produce and be the co-writer of the film.

With seven weeks to go before the movie's release, the risks are becoming clearer. After seeing a version of the film in late September at Mr. Jackson's studio in New Zealand, Universal executives agreed to release "King Kong" at a length of three hours.

The film is substantially longer than Universal had anticipated and presents dual obstacles: the extra length has helped increase the budget by a third, to $207 million, while requiring the studio, owned by General Electric, to reach for the kind of long-term audience interest that made hits out of three-hour movies like "Titanic" (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/titlelist.html?v_idlist=158894;174347;113936;15890 5;50122&inline=nyt_ttl) and the films in Mr. Jackson's "Rings" trilogy.

Hollywood blockbusters have increasingly relied on big releases that bring in as much as half of their ticket sales on the first weekend. But long films receive far fewer showings per day, and the most successful ones, like "Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" (2001) by Mr. Jackson, which took in $315 million at the domestic box office for New Line Cinema, have remained in theaters for well over half a year.

The film industry and Universal could use a big seller.

Hollywood has been struggling this year at the box office, with overall revenue down more than half a billion dollars, about 8 percent, from last year's total, according to Box Office Mojo, an online tracking service. Industry experts attribute the decline to a migration of audiences to other forms of electronic entertainment, whether television, DVD's, video games or the Internet. Universal has had a mediocre year at the box office. The studio had a hit in the summer with the comedy "The 40-Year-Old Virgin," but has endured disappointments, like the drama "Cinderella Man," (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/titlelist.html?v_idlist=290416;87270&inline=nyt_ttl) and has had lackluster results with films like "The Perfect Man," (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/titlelist.html?v_idlist=134460;307153;160448&inline=nyt_ttl) "Kicking and Screaming" (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/movie.html?v_id=135655&inline=nyt_ttl) and "Doom," (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/movie.html?v_id=314254&inline=nyt_ttl) which opened last week to a tepid $15 million.

Asked about the length of "King Kong," Universal executives said they saw it as an advantage in an era when jaded moviegoers are hungering for something extraordinary.

"This is a three-hour feast of an event," said Marc Shmuger, vice chairman of Universal Pictures, who described the film as a tragic love story between the ape and Naomi Watts (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/filmography.html?p_id=75056&inline=nyt-per), who plays Ann Darrow, an actress. "I've never come close to seeing an artist working at this level."

Set for release on Dec. 14, "King Kong" retells the classic beauty-and-the-beast tale first filmed in 1933, with its lasting image of Kong atop the Empire State Building, and remade in 1976. Along with Ms. Watts, it stars Jack Black (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/filmography.html?p_id=195232&inline=nyt-per), Adrien Brody (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/filmography.html?p_id=8639&inline=nyt-per) and a 25-foot, computer-animated gorilla.

This time around, the picture depends upon another oversize talent in the person of Mr. Jackson, who was granted an unusual degree of control at a time when studios are trimming costs and tightening their grips on most productions. Not only did Mr. Jackson produce and direct, and also write with his longtime partner, Fran Walsh, and Philippa Boyens, but his companies Weta Digital and Weta Workshop also created the physical and computer special effects in the film at Mr. Jackson's studio in New Zealand.

Twentieth Century Fox and Paramount took a risk in granting the director James Cameron (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/filmography.html?p_id=10397&inline=nyt-per) a similar degree of control over his famously overbudget 1997 film "Titanic," and eventually came up winners. In that case, Mr. Cameron's three-hour epic, a love story set in the midst of the ship's sinking, went on to break box-office records and win 11 Oscars. With "King Kong," Universal executives say they are convinced that they have an epic of comparable worth, even though they were surprised by the length.

"I anticipated it would be long, but not this long," the Universal chairwoman, Stacey Snider, said. As recently as late September, she expected about two hours and 40 minutes, she said. But on Wednesday she expressed delight with the picture she's got: "This is a masterpiece. I can't wait to unveil it."

The increased length, Ms. Snider said, means that the movie will cost $32 million more than planned, adding to expenses that had already gone up $25 million from an original $150 million production budget.

Who will pay for these budget overruns has been the subject of intense negotiations over the last two weeks, with representatives of the studio and the director haggling over who was responsible, according to those involved in the negotiations.

Ms. Snider said that as of Wednesday, all had been resolved, with the studio more or less splitting the $32 million expense with Mr. Jackson.

In an e-mail message, Mr. Jackson appeared to disagree, saying instead that he would be paying for those expenditures, which were mainly associated with extra digital-effects shots. Referring to his partner, Ms. Walsh, Mr. Jackson wrote: "Since Fran and I believed in the three-hour cut and wanted to take responsibility for the extra length, we offered to pay for these extra shots ourselves. That's what we're doing." He did not say how much that would be, but said the extra effects shot would cost "considerably below $32 million."

A spokesman for Universal responded, "We are working together to cover overages."

In granting Mr. Jackson immense latitude, Universal relied not just on his skills, but also a huge fan base, much of which has followed the production through the director's frequent communications on a Web site, www.kongisking.net (http://www.kongisking.net/).

But few elements of the film have been seen by the larger public, and even Universal executives saw a finished version of King Kong's face - with its expressive eyes, broadly fierce nose and mane of computer-generated hair - only in recent days.

Universal lost an opportunity to capitalize on a "Kong" revenue stream when an anticipated deal to release the film on Imax screens in December, at the same time the movie would appear in regular theaters, failed to materialize, and Imax chose to show Warner Brothers' new "Harry Potter" film, "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire." (http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/movie.html?v_id=289461&inline=nyt_ttl)

"We think 'King Kong' will be a big movie," Richard L. Gelfond, co-chairman of Imax, said, "but unfortunately we could not agree on deal terms, including the box-office split."

Ms. Snider said Imax could not guarantee space in its theaters at the time of Kong's release, and acknowledged that both the studio and Mr. Jackson were disappointed.

A spokeswoman for NBC Universal said Bob Wright, the chairman, has been told of the rising cost and length of "King Kong." "Bob is more than aware of what is going on with this production and other major productions, and he has enormous confidence in the leadership team at Universal Studios," said the spokeswoman, Anna Perez.

Ms. Snider said she did not think the three-hour length would be an obstacle for moviegoers. Three-hour epics, she said, are Mr. Jackson's "brand."

Exhibitors have long complained that very long films make it harder to draw audiences, though in this difficult year at the box office, they have complained louder about not having enough good films to show. Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations, which tracks the box office for theater owners, agreed that long movies posed problems. "But if it's a really fine film, it won't be a detriment to its success," he said.

"Three-hour epics...are Mr. Jackson's 'brand'"?

Wasn't it just a few years ago that Peter Jackson was the guy who made low-budget gonzo horror movies?

It'll get done, even if they have to open with wet prints.

They'll get it done with open wet pants?! :eek:

They're right about 3 hour films. I ain't sittin in a theater that long. I will certainly wait for the DVD, so I can pause for potty breaks.

Yeah, but it'll only seem like 2 1/12 hours.

With regard to the bit about missing the chance to send the new film to IMAX theaters ... I was under the impression that IMAX theaters are limited to showing movies no longer than two hours in duration due mainly to the physical size of the film itself. Some older IMAX theaters can't even handle that, so I hear. Maybe the newest ones can handle something longer ...

Qapla'

SSB

They're right about 3 hour films. I ain't sittin in a theater that long. I will certainly wait for the DVD, so I can pause for potty breaks.

Depends.

Theonering.net posted an article by Liz Smith saying that WETA expanded from 300 to over 500 employees, working 12 hour days...
Great galloping horneytoads! Not too much pressure, hey?

Depends.

Depends on what?

:D

Guess Who :)

Depends on whom. :D

... I was under the impression that IMAX theaters are limited to showing movies no longer than two hours in duration due mainly to the physical size of the film itself. Some older IMAX theaters can't even handle that, so I hear ...I suppose that would depend on the projection method used. If IMAX movies are on multiple reels with changeovers from projector #1 to projector #2, a film could be any length -- just make it as many reels as necessary. If IMAX uses something like the platter system in most modern projection booths, that would be a whole 'nother thing. Any IMAX mavens out there?

If IMAX uses something like the platter system in most modern projection booths, that would be a whole 'nother thing. Any IMAX mavens out there?I believe they use the platter-type system. At least one IMAX theater I know of (at MOSI in Tampa) has a window to afford the curious a glimpse at the film and projection machinery.

This was the reason that Attack of the Clones was edited for IMAX theaters. As a practical matter, if a significant number of IMAX theaters are limited to two hours and under per movie, I wonder if it would be worth it to have different versions for different theaters. But I remember seeing Spider-Man 2 at the newer theater here in Tallahassee, and the run-time for that one is 127 minutes -- and nothing was cut, as far as I can recall. Maybe the limit (if there is one) is approximately two hours?

Qapla'

SSB

Of course, the Tampa IMAX theater at MOSI is different from most in that it is an IMAX Dome. Really cool, but not the best for movies not made with the format in mind. The stadium seating there seems more sharply angled than in others, which lead to a completely miserable experience there once. I was there to see Beauty and the Beast during its IMAX run. Just before the movie started (why they couldn't have said something earlier or posted notices, I cannot say), we were informed that for insurance-related reasons, if we had to leave the theater during the movie we would not be allowed to re-enter. About 15 minutes in, I was really starting to squirm ... I had to GO! But I toughed it out ... Later I discovered that more conventional IMAX theaters are apparently not subject to that rule.

Qapla'

SSB

When I hear the words "Tampa IMAX", I don't think of a theater, I think of a feminine hygiene product. :lol:

the new Kong looks too much like a gorilla.

should'nt King Kong look a little different than a gorilla?

anybody know what i'm trying to say??

yeah its not good like the kong in Godzilla vs King Kong, that kong kicked ass.Cgi sucks, in my opinion.

Buzz

thats right! i hate CGI, still looks fake.

"Three-hour epics...are Mr. Jackson's 'brand'"?

Wasn't it just a few years ago that Peter Jackson was the guy who made low-budget gonzo horror movies? "GONZO"! I'll have you know that "Bad Tate" is an artistic masterpiece!:p

hey at least in the movie doom there was very little cgi, stan winston did the monsters, great popcorn movie, it was a gas.I will not watch a cgi kong , bad enough to have a cgi hulk.....yuck!!!!!

thats right! i hate CGI, still looks fake.
Unlike stop-motion animation which is indistinguishable from reality.

Unlike stop-motion animation which is indistinguishable from reality.


Good point. :) Our generation's less than convincing SPFX are superior to this generation's less than convincing SPFX.