Julio Biason
4 years ago
1 changed files with 35 additions and 0 deletions
@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
|
||||
+++ |
||||
title = "King Kong (2005)" |
||||
date = 2020-12-13 |
||||
|
||||
[taxonomies] |
||||
tags = ["movies", "reviews", "fantasy", "2 stars"] |
||||
+++ |
||||
|
||||
[IMDB Summary](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0360717/): A greedy film |
||||
producer assembles a team of moviemakers and sets out for the infamous |
||||
Skull Island, where they find more than just cannibalistic natives. |
||||
|
||||
<!-- more --> |
||||
|
||||
{{ stars(stars=2) }} |
||||
|
||||
If I could summarize it, I'd simply put "weird". |
||||
|
||||
Sure, the special effects are a lot better than the original version, |
||||
done in claymation. But the whole of the story is simple... nothing |
||||
new. I mean, there are movies that took the original story and update |
||||
it to the current times, like "The Day the Earth Stood Still"; others, |
||||
are timeless, like "Twelve Angry Men" (which shouldn't make sense at |
||||
this time), but the only update from the original is that they put |
||||
Jack Black saying catchphrases from time to time -- not that his |
||||
acting is bad, the character just seems out of place, like someone |
||||
acting the way they acted in the 20s with the rest of the cast in the |
||||
90s. |
||||
|
||||
Again, the special effects are pretty damn good, with Andy Serkis |
||||
leading the titular monkey. But, again, it's hard to put an excuse for |
||||
a remake only for that. |
||||
|
||||
In the end, if they just coloured the original version and updated the |
||||
visuals, the result may be actually better. |
Loading…
Reference in new issue