Thursday, June 30, 2005

King Kong trailer and doomsaying

I’ve read a lot of different blogs lately about the new trailer for Peter Jackson’s upcoming King Kong remake. Many of them show the expected enthusiasm, but a good number of them complain about substandard CGI, bad acting from Jack Black, and a “lack of originality."

To which I say: what the heck are you talking about?

Complaints about the Star Wars prequel trilogy I can understand. Those pictures sucked despite promising trailers and top-notch effects. (Though I will still defend The Phantom Menace as the sort of hyperactive kid’s flick that Lucas was born to make.) But to dismiss Jackson's cinematic career as a whole and to decry Lord of the Rings as "a fluke" based on 30 seconds of a trailer that doesn't happen to fit your preconceived notions of an updated classic? Some folks could do with a trip to the dictionary, where they might find themselves listed under the word "hubris."

I'm not saying Jackson can do no wrong (personally I couldn't watch more than about the first thirty minutes of Meet the Feebles), but sometimes the internet buzz machine really gets me down.

3 Comments:

Blogger David Lee said...

Unfortunately Sturgeon's Law applies to people's opinions as well as it does to everything else. Loved every second of the preview. Can't wait for the movie. Will it be better than the original? Stupid question. There's seventy years of societal, technological and cinematic evolution between the original and Jackson's film. They may be telling the same story but the tools and the thought process behind their creations come from different worlds.

2:06 PM  
Blogger Ken Begg said...

Even putting aside LoTR, which I agree with Chris should have bought Jackson a certain amount of fan credit, I was particularly impressed by a statement of his I read back when Kong was given the green light a year or two ago.

Basically, there was an earlier time when Jackson nearly had the chance to remake Kong, following the success of Jurassic Park. Then Jackson's The Frighteners (a fun, if not great, movie) bombed, and the project fell through.

Anyway, the older Jackson commented on how much of a bullet he'd felt he'd missed. The script written by his younger self, he explained, was a lot jokier, and wasn't adequately concerned with the grandeur of Kong.

The fact that he didn't say the movie would be better because "the special effects are so much better now," but instead, "I'm myself a little older and wiser," strikes me as the mentality of a steady individual.

For the record, I think Black is an inspired choice for Denham. The proof's in the pudding, and I have to admit that I seldom amp myself up for movies anymore, but I'm not overly concerned about this one.

2:47 PM  
Blogger AmyMo said...

I think the trailer rocks. And honestly, I had very little interest in the remake until I watched it. Now? I cannot freaking wait to see this film.

6:08 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home