King Kong (2005)

Regisseur:

Peter Jackson

Drehbuchautoren (WGA):

Fran Walsh (screenplay) &
Philippa Boyens (screenplay) ...

Premierendatum:

14. Dezember 2005 (USA)

Genre:

Abenteuer | Drama | Romanze

Werbezeile:

The eighth wonder of the world.

Plot:

In 1933 New York, an overly ambitious movie producer coerces his cast and hired ship crew to travel to mysterious Skull Island, where they encounter Kong, a giant ape who is immediately smitten with leading lady Ann Darrow.

Plot Keywords:

Film In Film | Check | Cavern | Frozen Lake | King Kong

Filmpreise:

Won 3 Oscars. Another 20 wins & 41 nominations

Nutzerkommentare:

A 10-star 2-hour movie screaming to get out of a 7-star 3-hour movie

US TV Schedule:

Sat. Aug. 2

2:30 PM

TNT

Besetzung

Naomi Watts	...	Ann Darrow
Jack Black	...	Carl Denham
Adrien Brody	...	Jack Driscoll
Thomas Kretschmann	...	Captain Englehorn
Colin Hanks	...	Preston
Andy Serkis	...	Kong / Lumpy
Evan Parke	...	Hayes
Jamie Bell	...	Jimmy
Lobo Chan	...	Choy
John Sumner	...	Herb
Craig Hall	...	Mike
Kyle Chandler	...	Bruce Baxter
Bill Johnson	...	Manny (as William Johnson)
Mark Hadlow	...	Harry
Geraldine Brophy	...	Maude

Alternativ:

King Kong (Deutschland)
Kong: The Eighth Wonder of the World (International: English title) (teaser title)
Peter Jackson's King Kong (USA) (promotional title)

MPAA:

Rated PG-13 for frightening adventure violence and some disturbing images.

Länge:

187 Min | 201 Min (extended edition)

Produktionsland:

New Zealand | USA | Deutschland

Sprache:

Englisch

Farbe:

Farbe

Seitenverhältnis:

2.35 : 1

Tonverfahren:

DTS-ES | Dolby Digital EX | SDDS

Altersfreigabe:

Finland:K-11 (2006) (extended edition) | Brazil:12 | Ireland:12A | Peru:PT | Iceland:12 | Hong Kong:IIA | Finland:K-15 (2005) (original rating) | Australia:M | Brazil:14 (DVD rating) | New Zealand:M | South Korea:15 | Argentina:13 | Germany:12 | Switzerland:12 (canton of Geneva) | UK:12 (video rating) | South Africa:PG (13V - DVD Rating) | Malaysia:U | Singapore:PG | Canada:14A | Mexico:B | Portugal:M/12 | South Africa:PG (13V) | Czech Republic:12 | France:U | Denmark:11 | Netherlands:12 | USA:PG-13 (certificate #42322) | Canada:14A (British Columbia) | Sweden:11 | Spain:13 | UK:12A (original rating) | Canada:13+ (Quebec) | Switzerland:14 (canton of Zurich) | Taiwan:PG-12 | Norway:11 | Finland:K-11 (2005) (re-rating on appeal) | Canada:PG (Alberta/Manitoba/Nova Scotia/Ontario) | Japan:PG-12 | Philippines:PG-13 | Switzerland:12 (canton of Vaud)

Drehorte:

Beach Road, Parnell, Auckland, New Zealand

Firma:

Big Primate Pictures

Dies und das:

Peter Jackson was paid $20 million to direct this film, the highest salary ever paid to a film director in advance of production.

Pannen:

Abfolgefehler: Just before Kong falls from the Empire State Building, Ann Darrow is seen lying next to him with her shoes off. As he plunges to his death, she stands up and is wearing her heels again.

Dialogzitate:

[first lines]
Manny: [practicing sneezes] That's a funny one. Isn't that funnier?

Bezüge zu anderen Titeln:

Wird parodiert in Turma da Mônica em Uma Aventura No Tempo (2007)

Soundtrack:

I'm Sitting on Top of the World

A 10-star 2-hour movie screaming to get out of a 7-star 3-hour movie

Let me be the first to admit that there's nothing wrong with a long movie, nothing at all. "Titanic" was a long movie that was as exactly as long as it needed to be. "Gone with the Wind" was a really long movie that was exactly as long as it needed to be. "Dances with Wolves" was a long movie that I wish had been even longer when I saw it in the theater. But "King Kong"? Phhewww...this sucker clocks in at least 30-60 minutes longer than it needs to be. While it played, I kept inadvertently thinking to myself, "Boy, we really should be out to sea by now...they haven't reached the island yet?...man, are they EVER gonna find Ann?...jeez, when are we gonna go back to Manhattan already?..." and so on. Hand to God--I actually yawned twice during the last third of this movie. I even closed my eyes for a second before I realized, 'hey...you can't just rewind this when you wake up!'

Sure, many scenes in "King Kong" were thrilling (e.g., LOVED the T-Rex sequence) and, yes, I even teared up a little a couple of times. And I must say, Kong himself was beautifully realized--he looked and acted like a REAL gorilla (albeit a tiny bit anthropomorphized)! But I gotta tell you...I was more relieved than exhilarated when this movie ended. (If I saw one more flyover of the native village, I was gonna scream!) Peter...baby...why spend so much time developing all these extraneous secondary characters if you don't really have much closure with them by the end. For example, the ship's captain and Jimmy...once we leave Skull Island...pfffftttt...we never them again. Why all the backstory scenes about them? As with the original version, Jackson should have concentrated simply on the four main characters throughout: Kong, Ann, Driscoll and Denham. Period.

The problem is Jackson tried to make an epic out of a thriller, when these two approaches are generally exclusive to each other. The original "Kong" MOVED because it was simply a thriller and content to be so, but Jackson's remake starts and stops, and starts and stops, and starts and stops, merely frustrating the thrillseeker in us that wants to keep going every time Jackson establishes some momentum. But instead Jackson pauses to "delve" or "explore" or "elaborate" a la David Lean or something like that. One can excuse Jackson for shooting so much material for the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy--consider the rich source material . But how anyone could have taken the 100-minute original and nearly doubled it for a remake has far too much memory on his Mac. He should have saved all the extra footage (and I'm betting there's a LOT more we didn't see in the theatrical cut) for the DVD release as he did for LOTR. Mr. Jackson's first priority as a filmmaker (well, all filmmakers) is to present the most appropriate cut for THEATRICAL audiences during the film's initial exhibition in theaters. In this case, more WAS less. Much shorter movies in the past have had intermissions!

Honestly, though I certainly enjoyed "King Kong", I really have no desire to see this movie again--I just couldn't bring myself to sit through all the filler just to get to the good parts. How I wish Jackson and/or Universal would consider releasing a 2-hour DVD version. Hey, it's happened before, so what's the harm? Inside of a year there'll be 17 versions out on DVD anyway...what's one more? But having to sit through a 3-4 hour DVD version someday? I'll take a pass.

Do I recommend seeing "King Kong"? Of course. You'll probably enjoy it immensely, despite it's overlength. But if you do go, by all means lay off the Jumbo Coke until at least 90 minutes in! You'll thank me later.