King Kong (2005) - Action, Adventure, Drama

Hohum Score

99

Hohummer

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.

IMDB: 7.2
Director: Peter Jackson
Stars: Naomi Watts, Jack Black
Length: 187 Minutes
PG Rating: PG-13
Reviews: 268 out of 1000 found boring (26.8%)

One-line Reviews (964)

The slow beginning was one of the original film's flaws.

Whereas Wray was a screaming, personality- devoid damsel-in-distress, Watts' Darrow is a real human being, put through some truly uncomfortable, intense and emotionally heart- wrenching situations.

I guess I can talk about the visuals now, because honestly they're good, but I think there were some parts that were pointless.

This re-imagined "King Kong" is an amazing achievement from a director who loves and honors the original too much to produce a slavish and pointless imitation.

This movie was a great disappointment ,just being able to produce astonishing visual effects do not necessarily mean you should be making movies, A very predictable, overly long movie, and pretty boring.

Overall, the acting was good and NYC was beautifully portrayed, but Peter's over-enthusiasm in the design of the actions scenes and lack of restraint in the editing room made this movie far too tedious to have lasting value.

Leading lady Naomi Watts seems to alternate between looking astonished and looking scared, leading man Adrien Brody epitomizes bland, and Jack Black is way out of his depth as the duplicitous Carl Denham.

Every single action sequence feels drawn out and extended with unneeded extra footage.

Jackson unquestionably does better than Spielberg here, although he seems to think his source material is much more serious than it is, and he occasionally seems pretentious.

Each part was way too long.

The 1930s locations are visually stunning, as accurate as any typical movie back lot or whatever can be, and a lot of antique classic cars are trashed in totaled in the end.

I actually saw this twice, and enjoyed it both times.

I had recently read some positive things about the movie from some people I trust, so my hopes of discovering a good and enjoyable movie were up.

Its stunning effects and imaginative scope hit a more visceral spot than Universal's arty, European monster movie, Frankenstein.

All-in-all I left the theater longing for Peter Jackson to return to movies like The Frightners rather than subject us to a disastrous remake like this one again.

This is quite possibly the worst movie I have seen in my entire life, and that's saying something...

The variety of encounters on the island are exciting and diverse.

I didn't see it at the cinema, but in the comfort of my own home, and a good job to, because I think I may have lost my mind spending that long that bored in a cinema.

In short, this movie does just a great job of entertaining us for 3 hours.

Peter Jackson has found a way to make a classic story longer than necessary, more complicated without proper motivation, and just plain bland.

It was very boring at the very beginning.

The pacing is nearly perfect (the beginning is a bit stretched and the later Skull Island scenes begin to drag a bit) and there's always something exciting to see.

But the worst part is the fact that its all pointless!

Overall the movie is long and slow.

The production design is very impressive as the 1930s New York City & the Skull Island are recreated in stunning detail.

Before we get to Skull Island, the filmmakers stick to an intriguing, deliberate pacing, giving each character in the ensemble their grace notes, confident that as soon as the boat is drawn into the fog-bound hellhole, we will be spellbound.

There was no story and who wants to see a giant gorilla jump & swing about in the jungle for 3 solid hours.

In my opinion, the film is way too long.

The nice thing about this section of the movie is that the special effects, spectacular and breathtaking as they are, are primarily there to serve the human interest aspect of the story, a rarity in any film in which FX play such a crucial part.

For my money, both versions are worth watching.

The visual and sound effects were absolutely amazing; unfortunately it took a long time to get there, and even as these were amazing some of them were pointless, like the sucking creatures that swallow someone's head and those giant insects.

While very heavy on the brass, and a slightly sleep-inducing theme for Kong, Howard has composed a nicely done piece with several great tracks, and considering the time crunch, it's pretty stunning to hear the final result.

The plot is weak, because all Kong plots are weak, but the character development is good, which makes this an entertaining film.

This is a touching, exciting and a perfect movie in every way.

Great film, very entertaining, but it was way too long.

I hope that after King Kong, a disastrously written, tedious, overindulgent blockbuster is a fleeting follow-up to how spoiled he has become.

One of The Worst Movies Ever .

The movie starts off slow and I mean really slow.

The story dragged at every possible spot, and some impossible spots as well.

Kong's facial expressions are breathtaking as well.

Now director Peter Jackson tries his hand and the end result is a rousing, visually astonishing, emotionally rich experience that can stand proudly alongside its predecessor.

This is a movie that will make you laugh, cry, wonder, and have you on the edge of your seat.

But there were too many long, drawn-out build ups.

Throw in its over-reliance on cartoony looking CGI F/X, tonal inconsistencies and heavy handed storytelling and you have a film that is every bit as slow, clumsy and dim-witted as its titular star.

In the original, Kong had a breathtakingly suspenseful battle with ONE Tyrannosaurus Rex after gently setting Ann down.

Fun - but ultimately as pointless as the '76 version.

Peter Jackson direction is awful, King Kong doesn't need 3 hours to tell the story, I got sleepy halfway and bored to death with the action.

So if the above conditions do not apply on you, you can watch the movie and you will find it really entertaining.

He finds a new leading lady (Naomi Watts) and manages to con Adrein Brody's bored writer into coming with them.

The CGI is sub-standard, the casting is suspect and shear lack of real-life physics makes for one long, boring misadventure topped off with one too many crappy Peter Jackson fly-over shots for my taste.

I think the connection between Naomi Watts and Adrian Brody was stunning in some films you don't always get a good connection between the two.

I saw the movie a week after the premiere and have to admit I was willing to leave the theater 30 minutes before the end.

Jackson failed because he dragged out the story.

Let's just list some of the film's many flaws: * Slow beginning -- way too much exposition on the boat and even before they ever get on the boat.

Everything is dragged out endlessly --half the film (and its length is far more horrifying than anything produced by a special effect) is devoted to Ann Darrow giving longing, supposedly meaningful glances at Kong.

This was just 3 hours of cheese and at least an hour and half too long.

One of the Most Exhilarating, Entertaining & Enjoyable Motion Pictures of Its Year.

The novel mechanical Kong may not have been as realistic as the current one, which was probably computer generated (or at least some of it) but it was different and thrilling.

It could easily have been a leaner, tighter, more compelling story had all that been eliminated.

There are so many asinine drawn-out scenes that simply should not be here.

Too long; Only a few movies remain enjoyable for over three hours and King King is unfortunately not one of them.

They are monster movie stereotypes one and all and some are quite pointless (like a black guy and a white guy who have a father/son-like relationship that never amounts to anything).

Here's where the film gets less good – Jackson is so busy having fun with all his new sparkling CGI creations, he loses the focus of the story, and Kong's match against three Tyrannosaurs quickly becomes tiresome.

A stunning achievement.

The movie also is way too long, but it's perfect if you want a film to fall asleep to.

What really sucks is how SLOW the film is.

This film is way too long, but it is entertaining where the important parts are.

and became instead the story of a bored little boy, his green screen, and way, way, WAY too much money.

I expected to be bored to tears watching this movie since I had seen all the other King Kongs(including Vs Godzilla).

Jackson proved with his Lord of the Ring Trilogy that a film CAN combine massive effects with a well-told story and be entertaining.

That was just a waste of time.

The scenes beyond the wall on Skull Island are stunning and much more disturbing.

The movie started off great, full of edge and amazing cast, but after a certain point it just got boring...

One of the worst movies to come out!!!!.

A waste of 3 hours of my life .

I think the story really unfolds nicely with some beautiful scenery and imagery, i must say when ever the camera was on kong every details really looked nice work well done, and the fight scenes were actually really action packed they make kong invincible LOL and he is in this film.

However, the rocks jutting from the crashing waves can cause groans of cliché-ridden familiarity since they seem to each resemble some kind of threatening monstrous visage.

When I wasn't put-off by the acting, story and action scenes, I was mostly bored and could not wait for it to end.

Just as much a bore is Adrien Brody.

This is a visually stunning film - the T-Rex fight will blow you away whatever you are expecting.

Get ready for breathtaking action in this thrilling epic adventure about a legendary gorilla captured on a treacherous island and brought to civilization, where he faces the ultimate fight for survival.

It was definitely three hours of lost time for me.

MOST ENTERTAINING.

The film was very enjoyable though.

1) Running time - this movie was WAY too long and had a poor pace.

The visuals in this movie are stunning, and, let's face it, are the reason you went to see it.

Even though its rating is all over the place, Jackson's version of the eighth wonder of the world is hugely entertaining in my opinion, that is if you manage to survive the first hour which really tests your patience.

Adrien Brody on the other hand, he was boring.

I love horror, fantasy & sci-fi including many cheesy B-pics, but Jackson's Kong came off as bloated and pretentious to me.

Running length aside, it was definitely one worth watching.

The film looks promising for about 10 minutes then spirals out of control with intense disregard for the viewer.

I have been told that Peter Jackson wanted an EPIC epic, but the poor editing comes off as yawn-worthy.

It's an action filled movie with exciting scenes.

It just felt stale after a while, and felt like it dragged on farther than it needed to.

The pacing is glacial and, in spite of all the crazy action taking place on screen, the movie is boring.

This film was a waste of time.

To summarize: Jackson's movie is loud, dull and over-long.

The fight with Kong holding Ann while taking on three T-Rex looking dinosaurs was really entertaining.

CGI driven films are getting really boring and King Kong proves this.

Would have made a fantastic 100 minute movie, but as it is seems as ponderous as its sophomoric literary references straining and failing to upgrade this from a B-movie.

This over the top feel of the film sort of becomes tedious at points, with Jackson setting the record for the number of attacks perpetrated by odd looking creatures in X amount of time.

The story sounds interesting, but knowing Peter Jackson's filming techniques, he'll probably turn it into a long and boring film.

The movie was forever long; 3 hours and 8 minutes, I sometimes got lost as it dragged along.

Impressive though sequences are they are overdone and just become boring.

Anyways the movie was brilliant except the island kind of dragged on.

First of all let me say this movie is a complete waste of time.

One of the bad things about King Kong is the movie was very slow to start.

to cure audience's insomnia?

anyone recommending that you watch this film has either never seen a proper film, or has some ulterior motive behind wanting you to waste 3 hours of your life.

The film's heart rests exclusively in this pairing, and when they are together, especially in the latter segments of the film, King Kong is engrossing.

Winner of 3 Oscars including best achievement in visual effects, King Kong is a memorable fantasy adventure with some brilliant direction, good visual effects and an intriguing plot.

I needn't have worried though as it was gripping from start to finish, you certainly need to be in a comfortable chair though.

this movie was mind blowing.

Speaking of intense, I was impressed by tense action that the movie sets when on the island scene.

It even tries to infuse poetry to that almost silly story, through beautiful photography and slow, reflexive moments suggesting the mystery underneath common reality.

The breathtaking action is non-stop as Kong kills dinosaurs by ripping open their mouths, crushing them with his hand, for no one can stop King Kong.

There are some knock-out visuals sequences who are absolutely stunning, especially in Scull Island.

The new york scenes at the start are boring and no one cares what is happening on the ship as all the people in the world watching just wanted to get to the island.

Yawn.

The jungle scenes became a little boring after a while.

Everything apart from Kong and the main narrative agents seem utterly pointless, only serving a tendency for unnecessary horror and violence that does not advance the narrative in any way.

The problem is that he "includes" just about every scene that would have made the original boring.

They both were bored with the first part of it and went to bed.

The Empire State Building sequence was mind blowing.

"Kong" is an emotional and action packed adventure film that is, simply put, amazing on all levels.

He was just as dull as in the original film.

Too long, boring, and the cast members were going through the motions, particularly Jack Black and Naomi Watts.

This scene is supposed to be suspenseful and horrific, instead everyone was laughing and thinking "Yeah, right.

The climax was exciting too, if a bit overdrawn.

I still think there's a pretty good 100-120 minute movie hiding somewhere in there, but both the theatrical and (especially) extended editions are far too long.

This film is a complete waste of time!

While the original film was tightly paced and constructed, Jackson's misguided attempt to recreate the magic of the original movie is a three-hour bore, bogged down by ridiculous special effects, poor character development and scenes that strain belief.

It has everything that one can ask from a mainstream motion picture - jaw-dropping special effects, breathtaking set design, good script, very solid acting and superb pacing at the running time ~ 3 hours.

While most complain the beginning was too long, I found that to be the most entertaining part, perhaps because it's more real than what follows.

I think all the people out there who love to watch a good thrilling story should give this movie a try.

Accidental or not, both made the film unbearable.

The action sequences are too long, but they are pretty darn exciting.

This new version of "Kong" is mostly entertaining and watchable, though it isn't perfect.

It helped drive the plot at a more gripping pace.

The creepy native scenes also were overly drawn out.

This movie is bad,first mistake:with all my respect to the 30's this one had to happen after the awful 09-11-01,"Epic Movies " look old fashioned, the people gets bore soon,the first hour looked like "the UNTOUCHABLES" or "TITANIC",when is impossible to transfer towards our time,that works,the first hour is to forget,the beast is just mentioned at the 36' by a scared sailor,when Grodin and fellas were already struggling with the problem and THE BIG MONKEY just appeared after 66 minutes!!

The moment we do hit this bump the film becomes nothing more then a 2D action film that drags on and on until it hits the ending that we all knew about going in, making the whole trip feel pointless.

I enjoyed it, and will probably purchase the DVD.

The film does have great effects and they are worth watching.

Firstly when they finally capture Kong, you see him fall asleep with his head on a rock then its cuts straight to him in Broadway.

If you can make it through the first hour or are willing to skip it(you wouldn't miss a whole lot), I would highly recommend it for the last 120 minutes.

One pointless subplot involves an adult African-American ship's lieutenant and a young white sailor.

After watching the Lord of the Rings, I expected it to be exciting and it was.

I even saw Kong yawn on- screen, a few times.

But that about all I can say for it because it was a colossal waste of time.

This movie was much too long and drawn out.

There is non stop action that'll keep you on the edge of your seat.

Watching this movie was waste of time.

The action and visual effects are stunning and once they start, they don't let up.

really boring, even their performances were boring, but good...

I felt really sorry for Kong and I had a tear in my eye when he was gripping on for grim death on the top of the Empire State Building - he had some sort of "cuddlyness" about him.

I like good special-effects, too, but there are 3 hours of almost zero plot here.

In Kong Black has the grin turned up to 110, and it became tiresome very early on in the piece.

This is the worst story and worst movie ever.

Boring.

Overall then a solidly enjoyable blockbuster that produces plenty of noise, action and impressive visual effects.

Self indulgent twaddle .

They are really getting cliché and being a relatively new paleontological find really don't fit in a thirties era Kong movie.

The visual effects in the film are, however, quite stunning; King Kong himself is a sight to behold.

This is a tedious 3-hour stretch of far-fetched animation, hashed into a mish-mosh of ape meets Godzilla, Jurassic Park, spiders, insects yada yada yada I sat with my mouth hanging open.

The New York set was stunning as well- nice job by Jackson's team.

What he has made is a lifeless, dull and poorly directed mess of a movie.

The jungle battles Kong fights on Ann's behalf are more exciting than the perils Carl Denham, Jack Driscoll, and the Venture's sailors encounter on Skull Island because a relationship is at stake and you care about it.

The rest is just padding consisting of eye-candy, poor lines and pointless scenes.

A special effects bore.

Still it was the most visually entertaining movie I have seen in a long time.

Peter Jackson's King Kong is way too long and way to familiar of a story to leave an impression, especially when a masterpiece of the tale has already been accomplished in 1933.

Its sets the stage of the movie perfectly and the visuals effects are Stunning.

And for this reason the story arc was flat and uninteresting to me.

Honestly it is the worst movie I have seen in years.

One hour after the start the dudes are still on the boat, where absolutely nothing happens except for some storm and some filming.

Having just seen this film, I found myself finally sitting still after 3 hours of fidgeting in my seat and shaking my head in disappointment.

Back in the day, before Peter lost a whole lot of weight on the set of "Kong", he delivered us masterpieces, intense rides of fine-tuned mayhem in the form of Braindead/Dead Alive and the Lord of the Rings movies.

dinosaur scenes were both tedious and difficult to watch.

There is also another part that if you are scared of bugs at all you would have to leave the theater.

There were a few unexpected delights apart from the CGI, such as the eerie natives and the mysterious island itself.

King Kong is an unmissable cinematic experience that will have you on the edge of your seat despite the running time.

The second hour on Skull Island was exciting--full of great effects and fights.

CGI OD = zzzzz .

However, good things never last, and Kong is seen as a threat to society, being chased with Ann Darrow to the top of the Empire State Building and a thrilling conclusion.

The film really dragged.

The main problem with "King Kong" is that a remake is completely pointless.

Zzzzz.

This is where the film starts to slow down, big time.

So, in a nutshell (not a brevity Jackson's familiar with) it's a good film that goes on for far, far too long.

Some visual effects look like they were made in 1930, the film is stronlgy desperating, teadious, boring.

Way too long and silly .

Great remake that does justice to this poignant, subdued and yet intriguing prospect....

I fell asleep towards the end, which is an exceptionally rare event.

The stampede sequence from start to finish is impressive and the three-on-one battle with Kong against three V-Rexes is so intense it will leave one breathless.

It was boredom and a lack of story and special effects.

It makes the fantastic final line from both films seem totally meaningless, and makes his attempt at remaking a childhood favorite, seem totally pointless.

This film is very entertaining, even with it's three hour runtime.

Each moment must rely on the adorned saturation of repetitive violence from both beast and man, thoroughly debasing the viewer into a cognizant netherworld where they are coerced into dormancy (the function of this mediation between the viewer and the screen).

It's 3 hours of cinematic overkill and rehashed plot lines that feel a lot like deja vu.

This is just another big, long, noisy, CGI cardboard box of a movie that ends up being empty inside.

Filled with savages, dinosaurs and huge insects, the island packs has it all with entertaining sequences involving humans vs animals in some stunning CGI sequences.

With a dead ape, torn from where he belonged and dragged, for the basest of human reasons, to a an environment that was sure to kill him.

As far as remakes of Kong go, this barely outranks the 1976 take on the famous giant ape, but is nowhere near as amazing or exciting as the original.

It actually made me fall asleep because it was long and boring, also it didn't really show action.

It reminded me of some of those Spielberg movies that just go on and on and have 3 or 4 endings and a ton of publicity that makes it feel like an event, but ultimately leaves me feeling empty and bored.

Kong is the most entertaining film of the year.

Also, it is very long.

Exciting, big, involving, moving.

The damsel in distress like the romantic scenes is because that can get boring after some point.

Breathtaking photography (in the form of Ann and Kong on top of the Empire State) and awesome emotional power make for a blast of an ending - who can honestly say they weren't moved when Kong died?

Some parts dragged, it seemed like they were on the boat for about an hour.

Other than that, Naomi Watts was stunning and amazing in her role.

Either way, there were far too many assaulting effects sequences which tend to bore rather than thrill.

During some of the action scenes, my heart was literally pounding - they were breathtaking.

The scenes on Skull Island dragged on...

Great graphics, excellent storyline, thrilling, anyone would enjoy this film.

It will be just as entertaining to them as it will be to you.

Peter Jackson manages to create an appropriate atmosphere and mood for every single scene, and even when the last part was a bit tedious in comparison with the first half of the film, the overall result was satisfying and good enough, at least for me.

King Kong is a wonderful experience that is enjoyable for all ages, since its moralities are true, and the story is very well put together.

Naomi Watts was brilliant as Ann Darrow, an excellent casting choice who turned in a stunning performance, which added new dimensions to the character.

The creature designs for that part were fantastic, and it was the best and most intense part of the entire movie.

Some may object to the length of the film(eons longer than the original it seemed)as it is rather slow going until Skull Island and its inhabitants make the scene.

The rest of the movie however is absolutely mind blowing!!!

Stunning work by cinematographer Andrew Lesnie (b.

3 hour Movie worth watching.

For those of you out there who enjoyed this waste of time, sorry.

The film is already way too long by an hour.

); I could go on, but Christ, these are just in the first few scenes of a movie that is way to long and contrived.

Also, Adrien Brody's character was a little boring.

On the contrary, I found it very entertaining, well written and well acted.

What could have been an exciting moving and engaging film is a bloated self-indulgent wallow in CGI , improbable events and irritatingly sentimental drivel with a stunning disregard for the laws of physics and the fragility of the human body.

He doesn't have any lines, but he takes a character that never really had too much of a personality before and turns him into a fully fleshed out, realized and emotionally engaging character simply through body and facial acting.

Avoid this over-ambitious, self-indulgent, B-grade mess!

Watts was dull and wooden.

)If you like effects this has great effects by the bucketful, and the actual characterization of the beast is stunning.

It is through their adventures on Skull Island that we get to enjoy a thrilling landscape untouched by modernization.

You have to be able to lose yourself in the slower, first part of the film to really enjoy the second.

The whole thing just feels dull.

I think it brings in a lot of important and entertaining things for 3 hours.

The movie is too long, it takes ages to develop, and the acting is unrealistic.

It is too long and Peter Jackson does add too much.

I could believe the storyline was taking place there and was successfully immersed for the most part.

And another thing, this poor King Kong fellow must have been desperately bored to even pay attention to a hairless little creature.

The boat scenes were suspenseful and did a fantastic job building a lot of emotional angst.

For the first slate of the movie the viewer is dragged in the depression of New York at the beginning of 1930.

It is beautiful, heart-warming, thrilling, and powerful.

Awesome and breathtaking seems to be too low keywords to explain it.

I'd enjoy the opening scenes in New York, but I'd try to fall asleep after they arrive on Skull Island.

Fundamentally it was incredibly boring, with each scene containing unnecessary filler.

This one too booooooooring and far too long.

The roles were all perfectly cast and the humour was enjoyable and not overdone.

The writing had several subplots that went nowhere, like Jimmy's relationship with the crew member who found him.

The stunning cinematography actually more than compensated, and throughout the movie Naomi Watts is a delight as Ann Darrow.

King Kong is a waste of time for all involved.

I felt confusion, she was very traumatized like she lost all her trust for the human world and she finally found her (also lonely and depressed) soul-mate.

There's still some problems that I find with it such as the lame S-K-U-L-L Island typing shot, some cliché/annoying moments *Spoilers I guess, just minor plot stuff* (such as in the animal cargo where one of the officers who's name escapes me at the moment tells Driscoll about finding Jimmy in a cage for NO REASON..It's none of Driscoll's business.. The Island becomes a much more enjoyable ride at home, while all of Act III seemed way better in theaters and much more intense it's still amazingly good.

The violence and gore caught me by surprise to the point it got rather tedious, and annoying!

From here it's creature feature mayhem, the beauty and the beast aspect kicks into gear, and it's all very comforting, thrilling even - with one exception.

I really enjoyed it.

A visually stunning but tedious remake with an odd choice for the role of Carl Denham .

Everything about it was stunning including the special effects, acting, directing, script, sound and the scenery.

Well, the rigid, cardboard script combined with the dull performance killed that.

Waste of time .

Again the film is dragged out here showing Driscoll watching his comedy play.

Its story and production is clever, imaginative, and exciting.

And the film is also ho-hum in parts.

Easily the year's most monstrously entertaining motion picture, 'King Kong' is also one of the best; and, seeing how it was undertaken by the brilliant Peter Jackson, it comes as no surprise.

A stunning remake that never runs out of it's visual surprises.

Instead of Jackson giving his payback to Kong (as stated in the HBO 'making of' documentary) he demolishes the spirit created in the 1933 version, and for three hours of runtime, you couldn't believe how slow time went in that theater, I mean, it's like 'OK, we know that Denham is going to capture him, lets get to New York already!

All in all though a waste of 3 hours of my life!

this wasn't a movie, it was a long and boring video game .

3 whole entertaining hours .

everyone knows the story of king kong so to have all of this excess film in the middle was really a good thing because it shocked the audience, for example when the crew tie up kong and he escapes, it's unexpected as you know he gets caught anyway.

this film is really brilliant even tho it took about 45mins 2 get in to it you are on the edge of your seat with these fantastic effects quality!!

The rest of the supporting cast were bland and uninteresting.

Its hard to defend a film when you somewhat enjoyed it, or at least the effort.

Don't worry, there is only two movies I can think of that beat this movie as being the worst movie of all-time.

But some are far too long, are lacking in originality and are a distraction from the main story.

Yawn.

It's small wonder that her romance with the ape is more compelling and convincing than the one with Jack.

While some exciting action sequences, the acting was sub-par.

Entertaining in quite a few parts but others dragged and it ended up not as good as it should have been.

"King Kong" 2005 was nothing more than a bloated albatross, a completely unnecessary waste of everyone's time.

Having said that, this film was WAY too long.

Boring movie, totally unrealistic (contains some scene spoilers) .

We wait way too long to finally see Kong; more than half of the 3 hour film and what precedes it is not that interesting.

And what was the point of all the slow mo shots and the boy and the first mate guy?

attacking in very long and boring slow motion.

This picture is brilliantly made, is hugely entertaining and visually, as well as sound-wise, stunning.

)What could be more entertaining???

Some humor and character development would have helped this plodding ape remake.

I had to watch is in bits and pieces because it was too thrilling for one sitting.

Peter Jackson's 'King Kong' is one of the longest, yet most enjoyable films I've seen.

And repetitive to the point of dullness.

Repetitive allusions to Conrad's Heart Of Darkness that don't quite fit or go anywhere.

long and boring .

First, Naomi Watts is stunning throughout the movie.

The movie was long and boring.

1st watched 4/10/2006 - 7 out of 10(Dir-Peter Jackson): Exciting and thrilling adventure created by Peter Jackson, famous for the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy.

The acting is terrific across the board, the effects are breath-taking, the action is entertainingly intense, and the directorial scope of the film is fantastic.

Peter Jackson knows how to build a scene into something special and as he did with Lord of the Rings he continues to do so with King Kong and tho I did find it flawed and a little dull in parts I still found myself gripped to the very end where even I was cheering on Kong to take down the planes on the Empire State Building.

King Kong is stunning for what it is.

We all know the story of King Kong, so the movie itself is, of course, completely predictable.

It's excellently paced, though some call it too long, and incredibly well played and thought out, with breathtaking performances, lovable characters brought by the amazing, superb cast and crew, and most of all a loving, humane, sensitive King Kong.

I really tried to look past his shortcomings, but every shot of him is a tight shot of his face, and it got really boring.

It's tedious beyond belief.

3/ The picturesque landscapes, are beautiful to behold, whether its a dark and creepy cave or a gloriously stunning mountain side, it doesn't matter every piece of scenery is perfect.

Uninspiring .

So basically it does it sit right in the boring middle.

The pacing was way too slow.

However, add to that considerable boredom, and the fact that this will not go down as a landmark in special effects achievement (nowhere near the level of Avatar), I consider this a minor picture, and a minor achievement.

Way too long .

A waste of TFT and DVD play life time.

Still, even if the movie is very long, I seldom became bored.

The main part of the story which was set on Skull Island I found to be too drawn out and ended up becoming quite boring, only rescued by a few action sequences.

Certainly in terms of ambition Peter Jackson really goes for it and has told a very entertaining and epic story.

Given today's special effects this Kong has some very exciting moments.

Incredibly boring dialogues and characters.

A pointless journey with great special effects .

a mind blowing, super exciting, ultra detailed gripping adventure never before seen, far beyond the usual blockbusters.

Well, from there it's just a thrilling ride through the jungles and mountains of Skull Island, packed with incredible CGI and effects.

An incredibly absorbing remake and rethink by Peter Jackson of the mysterious giant ape living on the infamous Skull Island.

It just starts off kind of slow, which doesn't fit well into the movie.

If you love entertainment King Kong is your baby, if you love long and drawn out moments then Kong is your baby, to be honest I feel Kong is everybody's baby with some minor criticisms in between.

The ride holds you for a few seconds over a sheer drop before letting you plummet towards the ground, peter Jackson uses the first hour of this film to hold you just on the edge before releasing the most amazing thrill ride ever.

Because the viewer is so effected by the characters, story and emotion, it instantly becomes an enjoyable film.

If you like the original Kong, don't waste your money on this bloated and overestimated movie.

He isn't my idea of an action hero, and he does honestly seem bored with his role and the movie in general.

Overall, this version of Kong is not bad, and at times, quite good, and you'll leave the theater with a bit of a buzz.

Think about that a moment: While watching an "action adventure" film with a giant gorilla, oodles of dinosaurs, giant insects and centipede attacks, I got bored.

The special effects were simply stunning.

To start with the first hour was completely boring.

And the computer generated effects were breathtaking!

After watching the original and then the 76 version the latest version is way too long and boring in parts.

They arrive at Skull Island, and from here the film is just and intense roller-coaster with great action, acting and visuals.

At over three hours long, this recent version of the 1933 monster movie classic is a bloated, self-indulgent mess that screws around with the script of the original, changing characters for the worse, adding unnecessary sub-plots and ridiculous action set-pieces, and making every scene last twice as long as it needs to be.

Nevertheless, dramatic, *gorgeous*, and thoroughly entertaining.

For me the film was a success because it managed to evoke perfectly a time in cinema history when geographical adventure in exotic lands was a much loved and exciting genre.

Dear Mr. Jackson, you gave me all three Lord of the Rings movies which I enjoyed, including the Hobbit movies, and I want to thank you for offering me yet another thrilling cinematic experience.

The next 40 minutes, are spend on the boring ship.

) but is still enjoyable.

Naomi Watts was at the same time entertaining and offered a multilayered performance.

I disagree; it gave the movie breathing room to not only develop a deep friendship, but also a rousing exotic adventure, a conservation-minded treatise, some natural horror, a Depression-era time capsule, and the fleshing-out of an archetype.

But the movie was still entertaining for me especially on my big screen with surround sound.

The combination of stunning visuals, stellar acting, moving music, and a story as large as any makes this movie the King of all action/adventure/love stories.

For example, Jackson has strengthened the romantic bond between Kong and his beauty, the stunning Ann Darrow (here played by Academy-award nominee Naomi Watts).

You see, this doesn't settle for being a fast, exciting thriller; it is, at several points...

On the downside however was that for me the film was too long and became very tiresome during the scenes in New York, at a time when it was supposed to be the climax of the film.

That film was not too long, it was exciting and it is an American film masterpiece.

From the calm opening to the action packed climax, King Kong keeps you entertained all the way through.

Like many people, I went into the theater to watch the remake of King Kong with great expectations, and walked out disappointed and frustrated.

it was FULL of cliché, the most offensively impossible deus ex machinas, and the most moronic love story i've seen in a movie in years.

Kong shows great strength, awesome fights with V-Rex, thrilling Stempede of the Brontos, well-designed predators, fearsome skull islanders, these are what makes the film perfect!

The first half and hour of the movie was them on the boat, the second half was even more boring!

Jackson, however, clearly loved the original deeply (his inspiration for becoming a director, as he puts it), and has fashioned a moving, exciting, somewhat overlong tribute to it.

As exciting and action packed as it is, by the end the most interesting parts of the film are the relationships and growth of the characters, and the final scene is actually an action setpiece that manages to be truly moving at the same time.

Some cool scenes and great cast but ultimately bland.

We have come a long way from the dreary Jar Jar Binks in the dreary Star Wars Episode One.

There is also a daring and exciting rescue mission to search for Darrow.

There are many character differences from the original (most notably the relationship between Kong and Ann), but even with these changes Jackson could have made a slightly brisker pacing in his version while still keeping it as exciting as this remake is.

This kept you on the edge of your seat!

When it returns to New York however, the film picks up and the conclusion is rather enjoyable.

However, I'm afraid, for example, I cringed after Kong chased Jack through goodness knows how many streets of New York, finally catches him, then the oh-so-predictable pan to a conveniently located ...

The main problem is that too many sequences go on too long, and go from exciting to ludicrous.

If there's only one movie you're going to see this year it's got to be King Kong as it contains some of the Mosting stunning visuals ever.

So I give one star to gorgeously divine Naomi Watts (her beauty was stunning), one to CG group for recreation of Kong (he was almost perfect) an finally, for Universal studio for throwing 200 million bucks to garbage pit (feel the sarcasm).

Then it comes time to chase after the human's and he goes back to being big lumbering slow coach.

OUt of a 3 hour movie there was about 15 mins worth watching.

Enjoyable movie with lots of action and gross giant bugs.

The CGI effects are as fascinating as its' dynamic plot .

I guess it's that old cliché of an actor being type-cast, although Mr. Black did portray his character to great effect and with a high level of both skill and aplomb.

the three dinosaur fight, and the Empire State building fight was exciting.

The fight between King Kong and the V-Rex's is truly stunning, you've never seen anything like this before.

The rest is unwatchable.

It's way too long, and the actors are annoying - especially Brody and Black.

Visually this was a stunning production.

This movie shouldn't last longer than an hour, because there no story to make it longer.

The scenes with Kong and the girl are very boring and overdone.

Unfortunately, this happens to be one of the worst movies of 2005.

-Movie is predictable, obviously -Inconsistent Time frame (one thing takes 1 hour, equal event takes 10 Seconds) -Small Plot Holesbut my biggest pet peeve is that Peter Jackson makes these movies so darn long that I will never watch it ever again.

The story was superb, full of action and intriguing characters.

The predictable, "sad" ending, had me laughing.

The scenes of depression era New York are absolutely stunning in it's realism.

The proceedings of the film are slow and the characters especially that of Jack Black is very weird.

It's still entertaining, if you look at it as a comedy.

Too Long, far too long, when you don't even get off the boat until an hour in, then you know you have problems, Far too many fillers for my liking, the stampede could quite so easily have been cut completely for the added worth it gave the storyline, The whole attack of the bugs bit in the valley, again too long, casting was atrocius, Jack Black was awful and couldn't make his mind up whether to try to play it straight or descend into School of Rock anarchy mode.

People who loved this film seem to have been hypnotized by the CGI and failed to notice how the film was way too long, how poorly cast it was, and how many of the graphics looked more like a video game than a modern computer generated movie.

It contains some of the most suspenseful scenes I have ever seen in my life!

The three leads are all incredibly boring especially Jack Black and his delivery of the final line almost made me lose my popcorn.

By the time many of the CG scenes in this movie are over, I'm exhausted and bored.

And the natives figure that the stunning blond Ann is the perfect sacrifice for their Beast God, Kong.

And I will agree with most people that The Venture Voyage felt too long, but every scene felt important and the action scenes as well as the special effects were visually stunning.

) Actually, I really liked how much attention to detail was paid, like period ship, weapons, costumes, etc. It's just that after you've seen one dinosaur die, the rest are kinda boring.

The action scenes were each 15 minutes long, and dragged out way too long, they made unimportant parts too long, and the last airplane scene was at least 20 minutes of airplanes flying around doing nothing.

Now, the sound effects are equally stunning.

Don't waste your time.

King Kong is a film filled with exciting action and dramatic depth.

Lengthy but still enjoyable .

As one who dislikes the remaking of classics and was bored with the rings half way through the first installment, I must confess to the only reason I decided to take in Peter Jackson's "King Kong": Naomi Watts.

The whole Naomi Watts/Kong relationship was just really irritating and stupid and the most boring aspect of the film I didn't see the point in it.

Peter Jackson has established himself as Lord of Adventure Films with "King Kong", one of the most breathtaking movies I can remember seeing for quite some time.

Naomi Watts is bland at the best of times, so she's useless here.

The entire crew on the boat were pointless.

By the film's end, I was expecting to shed a tear for the eventual outcome that everyone knows is coming, but instead I found myself incredibly bored by the long slog, and dragged out final sequence.

Jack Black in particular was entertaining.

This is a film that is so visually stunning that it blows everything else away.

Peter Jackson : Sorry but this crap was a waste of money, time and whatever you have better made a Bad Taste remake with 1/8 of the producing costs.

Well, this is actually surprisingly engrossing and emotional despite being an oft told tale of "beauty killed the beast".

The movie had little surprises and followed a formula that was predictable and bland.

Aside from a slow start, the film is entertaining, the relationship between Kong and the girl really works, Kong is great, the whole cast is great, and the film is a very quick three hours.

The scenes when they first arrive on 'Skull Island' are intriguing, especially at first with the encounters with the natives of the island, who are incredibly creepy (and oddly enough look like a human form of the Orks in Lord of the Rings).

Stunning .

" Just when you think the plot might go somewhere there is another pointless attack by special effects monsters.

In the end, their whole journey was completely pointless!

FAR TOO LONG.

This movie is far too long for its own good.

Having said that, unfortunately the film has many flaws that diminish its greatness:The scenes of the 'dinosaur stampede' and the 'T-Rex fights' are far too long (over 20 min) and grossly exaggerated, thus unbelievable as well as completely unnecessary.

The movie was overall the WORST three hours of my life.

While some reviewers out there might think the first part was slow and too long, I disagree because it was necessary to set up the story properly so that stronger emotions can be felt in the latter part of the movie.

It was a slow moving movie and a slow ending movie.

This movie's CG was stunning to say the least.

like this hilariously bad idea he tries multiple times using low frame rate shots during suspenseful moments.

It's pretty long, but it's engaging by the sum of its parts.

Kong's facials especially were quite evocative, and you got a good feel for the interaction between Kong and the object of his infatuation.

He is dull as dishwater and I honestly remember him doing nothing of interest throughout.

Overall if you like really drawn out action scenes and overplayed remakes King Kong is for you.

It's one of the most boring and stupid movies ever seen .

The movie is both family entertaining as well as theater enjoying- an absolute popcorn movie.

I enjoyed it at least.

All the people who cried over the movie should really start to use their brains because it is next to war of the worlds, the worst movie of 2005.

My only complaint with the film is that the action scenes were way too long.

It is several things all at once: An homage to the "Saturday Afternoon Adventure Serials," (ask your grandparents), an homage to the original "King Kong" (1933); and a jaw-dropping, breathtaking showcase of what can be accomplished today with visual effects.

Thrilling action sequences, and also very touching and powerful.

The storyline while unbelievably at times keeps you interested,on the edge of your seat,and has a group of fantastic characters.

Very intense scenes with great acting.

Who knows but for me, I enjoyed it much more at home then I did in theaters.

Few directors can make a blockbuster as intense and fun while simultaneously examining important things that give the visual effects and loud noises meaning.

Far Too Long.

Very enjoyable for the most part, and you will love the action.

Despite some flaws with the running time and slow pacing King Kong still delivers on the action, suspense, solid acting by the cast, a little humor and amazing special effects that make for an overlong but enjoyable film to watch.

Stunning visuals.

The heavy score was fitting, and at times, even rousing.

But, Kyle Chandler as Bruce Baxter probably gets the nod for worst acting-bland and amateurish.

If you're an intelligent, thinking person don't waste your time or money on this Roadrunner cartoon.

An absolutely stunning visual showcase - another first class effort from Jackson.

There they fight a number of weird creatures and prehistoric beasts and it's all just so contrived and redundant.

Must watch for all cinema lovers & an action packed ride with King Kong.

This lavish updating of the Cooper-Schoedsack 1933 original is, in every conceivable manner, an undeniably stunning and altogether breathtaking piece of cinematic history.

Certainly there is one intriguing aspect about the old film, which was that we felt the beast loved the woman.

Perhaps some radical editing may have saved it, but overall, it drones on and quite frankly, had me bored to tears with its ludicrous storyline and special effects.

Emotional As well As Entertaining .

KOng has always been just an exciting adventure story and nothing more.

Stupid, stupid, contrived.

After sitting through 40 minutes of absolutely pointless scenes, the film crew finally arrives at Skull Island where they are planning to shoot a film.

It is a good film, technically brilliant and hugely enjoyable as a fantasy, and that's what films are all about.

Otherwise, every one of those movies is a cure for insomnia.

They are mind bogglingly good, and the film is an incredibly exciting blockbuster.

The ending was just boring and slow!

Nothing Happens there.

By the end of the first 45 minutes I was so car sick that I left the Theater.

Totally makes up for the boring 1st part.

A very slow first half; the cast was so-so at best.

The original was bland and boring with annoying characters and a cardboard King Kong; What Peter Jackson does with this story is put in a heart and should to give it edge and pizazz.

To me this film starts off slow and it harms the overall experience.

And I also feel some scenes were drawn out too much (especially Kong & Ann staring at each other, the sunset, etc.). And even some of the action scenes seemed to go on beyond the realm of effectiveness.

The movie starts out okay but the boat ride to the island is way too long.

Some of the sequences in this Beauty And The Beast tale are breathtaking.

Some scenes are very exciting and will stick with you for a long time.

But Peter Jackson's King Kong was the first one I ever walked out of.

All situations were contrived and I found the leading characters about as exciting as oatmeal without raisins.

It must have looked stunning in a cinema.

' What this remake does is remind us just how good the thrilling, fast-paced, tautly directed original 1933 version of King Kong really is.

For the first 45 minutes the film was boring,and had pace of a sloth but as the film progressed it became action packed and an example of what creativity is.

King Kong is also action packed!

That is where it fails because we all know adventure movies should be equal parts thrilling and compelling, but this movie favors a slower pace too often.

How can stretch out a 90 minute film to 187 min without making it tedious, boring and uninteresting.

Adrien Brody, admittedly with the help of an improved script, plays a far more likable and emotionally engaging Jack Driscoll than the sexist, macho-man brute of the original.

But, like I say, 'King Kong' is overall quite enjoyable to watch.

The classic story took a modern revamp with stunning special effects, and a beautifully acted cast.

Maybe it was the fact there were unnecessary and pointless story lines and scenes.

Too slow and the characters seemed flat .

in particular, trite acting, cardboard caricatures for characters and appallingly long animation sequences that just went on and on and on and on and on and....

Would you rather hear an epic, boring, filler-ridden musical album or one masterpiece of a song?

If it wasn't for her, I would have walked out a third of the way through- and missed the great finale.

The third hour was dull until Kong escaped then it REALLY picked up.

" The reason they think this is because they are so caught up with the marvelous special effects that they forget what a dull and boring story King Kong actually is.

Hugely enjoyable though very long, its a film you'd want to see again.

A gripping directorial work from Peter Jackson, despite its over-the-top running length .

The interaction of the cast with one another was disjointed and didn't make sense in places.

In this amazing, breathtaking film, we see Carl denom, film producer extraordinaire, taking on the spooky skull island which is reality was only just a myth.

The Worst Movie of the Year .

Some say it is too long.

Too long and boring in parts .

The village scenes were even more uninteresting, for me.

Tedious and Badly CGIed .

I watched it on DVD tonight and from a certain point on I was annoyed and bored by it at the same time.

There are spectacular visuals involving extreme action scenes, beautiful exteriors, and an always stunning Naomi Watts.

So exciting and interesting with good characters.

Overall, the movie plot and subplots were good, the action kept me on the edge of my seat a number of times, and the acting was excellent.

The closing line is the highlight of a very captivating and engaging performance, and sealed the deal in my complete praise of Black's performance here.

From Ann's tumbling fortunes at the start to Kong's path of destruction through New York at the end, this is a truly stunning film.

Once the crew reached Skull Island where King Kong was located, things began to get better and more exciting and they stayed that way for the most part.

It's getting boring!

If you are someone who believes in peace and unity within this world then I appeal to you to save your money and to watch some other film that is worth seeing.

At one point it sets out to be a sincere epic, then it baffles the mind with the poorly contrived casting of (and, unfortunately, equally sub-standard performance of) Jack Black as }insert character name here}.

Through a mixture of competent directing and Watts' sensitive portrayal of Ann, we witness an intense sense of mutual affection between the Kong and Ann.

)The middle part is an odd contrast of over-the-top drugged natives-bronto-raptor-rex-Kong-giant insect-carnivorous bat action on the one hand, and Ann Darrow entertaining Kong, as well as setting limits for him, when she gets to know him as a persona.

It's just boring.

Till now I have watched the movie 10 times(last two times in DVD) & every time I enjoyed it thoroughly.

6/10 – The first 40 minutes are excellent, Jackson deconstructing all that is Kong (writer in cage, posters defamed, Watts as Jackson/Director), but eventually the project's sheer bloatedness grows tiresome.

Horrible what a waste of money.

An entertaining, albeit unwarranted trek down memory lane for a director who is certainly more than a one-hit wonder; viewers who say so who would like to eat crow should watch "Heavenly Creatures".

The relationship between the black guy and Jimmy was irrelevant, unresolved, and pointless.

As you would expect of Peter Jackson's work, the visuals, exteriors, process shots, mat scenes, etc are all breathtaking.

The action sequences are fantastic and entertaining that some run for even fifteen minutes long without a line to be said.

After seeing this movie I have decided that the depression era of the 1930's is simply American propaganda created by Hollywood for creative storytelling and possibly an excuse for women of this time to be dressed a little more sexy for the sake of the men who watch these movies.

What a waste of time!

All these scenes last far too long and are extremely unbelievable.

But if three hours worth of film still left us with this ridiculous waste of money, time, ability, and talent...

The first part of the film is tediously slow, and without much payoff.

Also the ending is weak, very predictable.

However, he has now reached new cinematic heights in directing a breathtaking remake of the gargantuan gorilla story which we know as "King Kong".

Everyone is familiar with the story by now, so I won't bother with a long, boring synopsis.

And you get exactly what you expect from Jackson: not only stunning special effects, gargantuan (and extended) action sequences, and all the spectacle and adventure you could ever want, but also a well-written script, all of which are additions to a very compelling story.

The editing and pace is lacking at times, which does make the movie a bit tiresome to watch at moments.

It doesn't particularly matter to the plot, but with the rest of the film being as elaborate and drawn-out as it is, it feels downright jarring to just jump a gaping hole like that.

They try to get Ann away from the great ape and so they drugged the ape with chloroform and dragged him to the ship to return back to New York.

When King Kong captures Ann Darrow, portrayed beautifully by Naomi Watts, there develops a dilemma and as Darrow feels sympathy for the giant gorilla, it makes very gripping, epic viewing.

It you thought Fellowship was a slow starter you will be in for a shock.

This film has amazing visual effects, fantastic production design, and a breathtaking recreation of 1930's Manhattan.

And this (Godzilla) has one of the best, most exciting and enjoyable story lines I've seen in any movie, remake or not.

Elsewhere, Thomas Kretschmann is enjoyable as no-nonsense captain Englehorn.

However this film suffers from scenes lasting way too long.

The writing, done by the same trio that penned LOrd of the Rings, is snappy at parts, and cringe-inducing at others.

Slow paced, redundant, complete sleeper .

Way too long for its own good.......

Sadly, the film went on, and on, and on, and on, and zzzzzzzz.....

When I watched it at home, I fell asleep for a few minutes because of how boring it was.

Somehow under the impression that it was the length of Return of the King that made it so successful, he adds a pointless subplot, involving a crew member of the ship, which leads no where.

So bored .

That's way too long!!!

However, at home on DVD it was very enjoyable.

Of course, that film was hardly timeless, and so when we watch it today, we feel sick, bored and dissatisfied.

It is a powerful and compelling scene which shows the audience exactly who is the lord of the island.

The opening half an hour is fairly dull and over the place but hang on for a great entertaining boat journey which sets the film on the way to an unforgettable adventure.

8/10Rated PG-13: violence and intense action

it was really unbearable.

King Kong(2005) is a thrilling film with a powerful emotional message of love portrayed as Beauty and the Beast.

An emotional and thrilling ride from start to finish, the film is far more sentimental and sensational than its original.

A powerful and thrilling Epic.

Make your own mind up, but I would recommend taking a book with you during some of the duller moments.

This is so different from the zippy little original, which is clunky by today's standards but which had the fast paced, no nonsense style of the best of the old-style action flicks.

Kong's escape from the theater is absolutely riveting.

Many of my biggest complaints are covered by other reviewers - too long; pointless characters and subplots that conveniently disappear; bad CGI scenes; lousy dialog; utterly inappropriate attempts at comedy relief; stupidly contrived situations where people absorb physical punishment that would cripple or kill a trained stuntman, but they just jump up and carry on as if nothing happened; inane inconsistencies (Watts in winter with no coat doesn't shiver on Empire State, ape that pulls down theater balcony can skate on thin ice, etc); the abominable performance by Jack (I can't act to save my life) Black; and, worst of all, the mind-bogglingly idiotic concept of having her love the ape more than she loves the guy.

Step two One Hour later my friend fall asleep and for me it wasn't better.

The plot was good, but the script was boring and acting was poor.

I will say that the beginning was kind of slow because you don't see the giant beast until over an hour into the movie.

On the island is one thrilling scene after the other, with the expedition crew trying to fend off gigantic creatures and insects.

It's hard to post a review about a movie right in the boring middle.

The film still has flaws, though: the film takes way too long to get to Skull Island; instead it uses it's first hour to introduce characters that really don't get that much screen time.

The most ridiculously contrived plot lines since Spielberg's Raiders (an entire Nazi regiment can't detect an archaeological dig under their noses?

It is an absolute Masterpiece that is worth watching more than once in order to grasp the story and the brilliant themes in it.

The entire film is moderate-to-highly entertaining.

The scenes on the island were exemplary however, Kong was fully realistic and 100% believable, he was certainly worth the rather tiresome wait.

The film is perfectly balanced, combining adrenaline-overdose action with a tragic love story.

Old tricks from a young dog: lacking the abandon and focus of little movies like "Dead Alive" and "Heavenly Creatures", Mr Jackson's late work bears a depressing resemblance to the paintings of Robert Kincaid - formulaic, manipulative, and vacuous.

This new version was painfully too long, I mean excruciatingly so, and I swung between irritation and boredom, wanting to fast-forward through all that idiotic sub-plot with the dinosaurs etc etc and get to the capture of Kong and part 2 back in New York.

All in all, this was well shot, well written, well acted and exciting movie, one that I will no doubt purchase at some time.

Adrian Brody was dull, Naomi Watts, no idea why Kong liked her except she wasn't as filthy dirty and ugly as the natives.

One stereotypical cliché after another.

And you just sit there and wonder where the last three hours of your life have gone.

The actor's movements were so convincing that it made the movie even more enjoyable to watch.

The movie is a bit scarier than thought and the loads of action scenes make this movie extremely entertaining, the sad part is it is very inconsistence some time it is fun and then it turn out extremely slow the next.

People were living on the edge in the Depression, doing almost anything to survive (Ann would rather steal an apple than sell her honor).

I did find the subplot about Hayes and Jimmy a bit pointless, and some of the characters were not particularly well fleshed-out.

:O Anyway, there are some interesting and well done parts of this film, but it is entirely lopsided and way, way, way too long.

The scenes themselves were done with simply stunning special effects; it is indeed a very nice looking movie with A LOT of computer generated stuff in it.

The tribute it pays to its previous versions, or the new age of visual amazement that it brings, Peter Jackson's King Kong gave me a feeling of intense satisfaction after I saw it.

The original 1933 classic was the grandest, purest, and most exciting action adventure film ever made at its time, and in my opinion, it remains so today.

All and all, it was an entertaining adventure film.

On an overall scale, King Kong may not have lived up to the legacy of the original & is full of noticeable flaws but there's no denying that it boasts many memorable moments, some truly jaw-dropping action sequences, a heartbreaking finale & its fair share of melodrama to succeed as one of the most entertaining, enjoyable, exhilarating & emotionally rewarding cinematic experience of its year.

It is a slow starting movie that gets really intense.

Instead, he was dispatched, cliché-like, according to Hollywood Formula #17: "Black Guy Meets A Noble Death".

The only other one we have is the relationship between Hayes and Jimmy, and what goes absolutely nowhere so it was pointless.

) However, to make things even worse, PJ thought that Tom Hanks's bland offspring, one called Colin Hanks (what a name!

Still, the Empire State ending is spectacular, intense and heartbreaking all at once.

Oscar-nominated actress Naomi Watts does an utterly dull job with all 4 of her lines.

To make it this long, basically everything had to be stretched out, and there are so many tedious sequences!

Some of the reasons I didn't like this film like the romantic scenes is because that can get boring at some point.

The current film needs all the drawn out special effects to achieve some impact.

But when i wen to see it in theater i was completely overwhelmed with the amazing CGI, the great acting and the stunning love story.

In this one, i felt bad for people who had to sit through over 3 hours of this nonsense in the theater..

Number one they are in New York too long I got really bored with the New York sequence.

I was dragged to see this film, and, although I felt it was a bit too long, I would definitely see it again.

I've heard from other people the part on the island is way too long, with a lot of different things that also weren't in the original.

Now at 25 I still think the Dinosaurs in JP are breathtaking.

Entertaining story on King Kong .

Some of the action sequences are incredibly intense and may be quite scary for very young viewers.

Grade: D-Poorly written, poorly edited, big, expensive, loud, and often tedious.

The dino fight sequence was dreadfully slow and boring.

Jackson strings out a simple, thrilling story to nearly 3 hours.

Yes, this film has some thrilling action sequences and, for the most part, is entertaining.

this film was so boring!

There's 3 hours of my life I can't get back!

the first 30 min of the movie was completely pointless and can simply be removed without affecting the movie at all, just cut em and don't change anything else.

This film swung from tedious melodrama and weak comedy to over-the-top, over-long action sequences.

The whole build-up to them getting to the island is so long and painfully dull that it is impossible to expect people to stay interested.

Way too long and boring .

First of all I must say that I'm not a big fan of Jackson's movies, I found them really boring, I think that he's more interested in showing us what he can do with a lot of money and a computer, than in showing us a story.

This film was, by any yardstick, one of the most fabulously entertaining films ever made.

(The video game, on the other hand, is fast-paced, exciting, no-nonsense and too short, and is pound for pound the superior product, which is rare in videogames)

That being said, it is a far better film than lifeless special effects yawns like Matrix 2; I, Robot; Batman Begins, and Star Wars 3; because of the outstanding performance of Naomi Watts and her poignant relationship with Kong.

The special effects are great, but the "drama" between the lead actress and the monkey is and somewhat touching at best, tiresome and comical at worst.

Virtually every second scene was drawn out and it seemed the whole picture was in slow motion.

The whole time I was on the edge of my seat and man did this movie tire me out, it had me laughing, on the edge of my seat, sad.

It is a lot better of course than the 1975 Kong with Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange but not even this film, with its breathtaking beauty and epic treatment holds a candle next to the original 1933 Kong which is still the best of the best.

The story is great, the action sequences entertaining, and the movie amazing.

It was tear jerking dramatic suspenseful and gruesome at some points.

Super-super-boring.

Overall, I've liked the movie, no seriously, some parts were exciting (Kong's fight on top of Empire State Building).

However, if you are like me and have long wearied of majestic special effects and scenery with no substance behind it, then don't waste your time and watch something else.

The pace is plodding.

Overall, this is a fun and exciting motion picture.

This is a very long film (it takes exactly 3 hours), in the beginning the pace is quite slow.

Though the start was relatively slow, the plot developed very slowly, without any adventure in usual sense (we watched the movie in search of adventure), and we were practically waiting for Mr. King Kong, it appeared to me that the maker of this movie spent much time, money and effort to make it a memorable one.

unexpected .

Even if there had never been a 1933 KING KONG, this 2005 version would have still been an exercise in yawning due to its lack of anything remotely real.

3 hours long of useless scenes, 3 hours of a girl and a gorilla gazing into each others' eyes, 3 hours of special effects which make you think of just that; special effects.

Visually intriguing and a wonderful thirties throwback if there ever was, checkout the opening and closing Universal 'thirties style décor credits and main title sequence, the atmosphere is set.

Still, an interlude in which the heroes fall into a bug pit and are set upon by various centipedes, cockroaches, and slugs is good sick fare, and there's the unforgettable sight of a man being chewed upon by a massive slug which alone makes the entire film worth watching.

Despite having a slow set up (almost an hour goes by without any sort of action), KING KONG picks a frenzied pace after that.

The banter between Hayes and Jimmy is so cliché it is comical.

Extremely intense action.

The story might be very long (at 3 hours), but it's an exciting one which is very amazing to watch.

It also has some intense scenes of violence that may disturb some audience members.

1930s New York has a really authentic vibe which was enjoyable.

The first hour is quite tedious and many on here who have written opinions are correct in that much of this could have been presented far more efficiently.

The final battle between KK and the airplanes was quite long and tedious.

All sudden a day when i felt bored with nothing to watch I decided to give it a try...

It may have been 3 hours long, but it was a 3 hours well worth watching.

All the family will absolutely love it but make sure you have stood up for a while and have an extra supply of popcorn before settling down for the full 3 hours of the film.

it's over 3 hours long but even the slow parts entertained me.

In fact, if there is one clear flaw in the film it's that it stretches things out too long, sometimes by a lot, even when it's exciting stuff.

Naomi Watts was stunning as Ann Darrows, and her performance tugs at the heartstrings of anyone watching.

The start dragged on forever, I almost thought the movie would finish before they got to the island.

You may hate this movie like hell only in the following cases :1- If you don't like long movies, or get bored quickly, or don't have enough time.

Driscoll didn't know where Ann was, as evidence by him asking Preston (Colin Hanks), another pointless character, where Ann was when he was watching Kong in the theater.

Unbelievably bad, unwatchable.

Important details like that were left out while entire scenes were devoted to showing the actors check out their hair, a piston churning, etc. Some parts really dragged like the top of the building where they share that romantic stare.

The most obvious thing is, yes, it's way too long.

The beginning was painfully slow, actually getting on the boat to the island, and when the part of the story finally got around to the romance between Watts and Brody- it was rushed!

The pacing is not very good; sometimes it is too slow, especially and I really get bored, and sometimes I can guess what happens next.

It keeps the audience in the hearts and minds of everything that happens on screen and therefore maintains an engaging atmosphere.

Peter Jackson was an excellent maker of quirky, low budget films and then enhanced his reputation with brilliant film versions of the hugely over rated, tedious Lord Of The Rings books.

" Otherwise I found LOTR to be an enjoyable movie-going experience and I blamed the occasional dumbing-down of the movie on the producers.

The pacing of Kong is dire, minute after minute plodding slowly on, the viewers mind turning to jelly as more and more clichés are blurted out lazily by the film's participants.

The visul effects are beyond incredible ,Kong is terrifying ,funny, exciting and powerful.

It was long and boring even before they arrived in the island.

If you want to see the original watch the original, otherwise this is a great and highly entertaining film to watch and enjoy.

I felt like Peter Jackson made this movie completely for himself and to hell with a coherent, entertaining, well-made, well-acted film.

The CG effects were good but it took way too long to get there.

Stunning visual effects .

So that's it: 3 hours of astonishing special effects...

Once again, a potentially suspenseful sequence is marred by another unnecessary implausibility.

A massive special effects bore that has no heart, soul or mind.

Thrilling remake of a classic film .

So in this regard the film works by kicking out the action after a comparatively slow start where we spend a lot of time with lesser characters who don't matter that much in the wider context of the narrative.

It's amazing that a movie which throws so much action in your face is capable of coming off as slow.

All the time and money put into this and the result is a steaming pile of cinematic boredom.

They are in New York & on the boat far too long.

They bore no use to the overall film.

The special effects are one of the most breathtaking ever seen once again only really rivaled by those in The Lord of the Rings Trilogy.

Still, there are moments when the film is absolutely breathtaking to look at.

I have always considered Howard the Duck to be the worst movie I have ever seen.

It is a grand film, full of exciting images.

That featurette is concise and entertaining - unfortunately King Kong (2005) has neither of those merits.

Every second of this film is stunning in some way - and it also manages to maintain a dark and menacing side as we follow our characters across the sea to Skull Island - it leaves you drooling for action.

King Kong was an excessively long, excessively violence, excessively ostentatious, excessively pretentious production that appeared to overly manipulative and short of character development that could have made this version a excellent animal drama.

The scenes are way too long and slow, King Kong himself was a bit lacking for my taste and the whole fight with T Rex was unnecessary for my opinion.

The complaints of Jackson's self-indulgent 3-hour running time are actually quite foolish considering some of the benefits that he mines from that extra screen time.

I could take all 100 hours of the LOTR trilogy and cut it down to one comprehensible and entertaining two hour movie.

Naomi Watts carries the movie with her stunning beauty and natural charisma.

This is spectacle film-making at its worst: all the wrong elements are given epic treatment - vapid characters have predictable decisions interminably analyzed for 50 minutes before the story starts - while the moments spent in action, with a couple of magnificent exceptions, feel thin and rushed.

The journey to Skull Island is too long and takes itself too seriously.

You would probably even get away with making some kind of the "The King Kong In Space" attempt, which could be at least interesting / avant-gardeishBut instead you just make a quite boring movie for simpletons, not utilizing fully the acting capabilities of Naomi Watts and Adrien Brody, with the King Kong performing an ice ballet in Central Park in New York CitySo, that is a nice one Peter Jackson: you have truly disappointed the world of cinema enthusiasts.

What he fails to realize, is that one of the most important skills in film making, if being able to cut the film down to it's best and most entertaining edit.

The movie is visually quite stunning.

It's passionate, mournful, subtle, satisfying, intense, and an impressive achievement in every field overall, end of story.

The scene at the end where Kong battles the planes on top of the Empire State Building is riveting and literally had me nearly falling off of the edge of my seat.

Everyone knows the plot of Kong, but here it's all so drawn-out that you may as well watch the fine original.

There's one contrived scene where raptors, some other dinosaurs, and humans stampede together; just embarrassing.

UnExpected Entertainment And Thrill!.

most of the action sequences were really exciting.

One of the worst movies ever made.

It's imaginative, breathtaking, massive, and awesome.

Wonderful and Exciting.

A good story, exciting scenes, a beautiful score my James Newton-Howard (Beauty Killed the Beast V, how can you deny that?

Final view on the film: A very enjoyable blockbuster film,that sadly has quite a few flaws.

And, like the creatures, the action is larger than life, leaving the head of even the most avid adrenaline jockey spinning.

Boring.. I prefer the original .

It was a waste of my time, and the time of the 3 people I watched it with.

A pointless love story; and I mean the one involving Naomi and Jack.

The movie starts out okay, and then becomes silly and long-winded, factually a huge waste of money.

A wonderful first third, an unbelievably intense middle, and a classic finale .

Although it was lengthy, kingkong 2005 was worth watching.

The second act consists of his crew reaching Skull Island after a tiresome journey, and along with encountering dinosaurs and giant insects among other things, poor Ann Darrow is taken away by a 30 foot tall gorilla who inhabits the island.

With serious editing this might have been pretty good but endless action sequences, cgi and long slow connecting sequences do not a good film make.

The ice skating scene in Central Park is vomit inducing for the sheer pretentious of it.

Even more unfortunately, in order to include this banal new material, the remake sacrificed one of the creepiest sequences from the Wallace/Cooper version - the log raft attack in darkness by an aquatic monster - yet saw fit to retain an hour of dull, unnecessary exposition.

So watch this movie, but turn it off when they get to the city (unless you have insomnia, watch the ending because you will FALL ASLEEP)

But the best part was when BLack and his team were walking on the tree stem, then Kong came and started shaking it, they all fell off except for two of them who were left hanging on the edge of the cliff.

Also, it is very bad in parts, such as the long beginning which starts with a bang showing vivid images of the Great Depression, even though most of the songs used are from the Jazz Age of the 1920's, but is dragged out until it becomes one big bore with the viewer kept waiting to see the star of the show, King Kong.

It feels like an empty shell to me.

Pieced together, though, it just dragged on and on...

so, exciting.

3) The interminable giant, prehistoric animal stampedes and attacks on the humans were incredible CGI, but after a while it got boring, and added nothing to the story line--it was just that: incredible CGI.

There are also lot's of moments in this movie without any dialog, for example dinosaur-ape fight in the jungle (logical because there is no one around besides our female animal right activist, but still BORING) or last 20 minutes in NYC, "Beautiful, Beautiful" is not enough to wake me up and make grey cells get on track again.

Another silly moment occurs later in New York City where Kong and his lady take time out from what's supposed to be the gorilla's intense and deadly rampage to do a little cutsey ice skating in Central Park.

King Kong was visually more realistic as well as his movements etc. The interaction between Ann and King Kong was more intense due to his more realistic nature.

That is a fantastic 20-minute action packed sequence.

The action scenes are hard to follow on the big screen, following the idiotic trend of shaking the camera during action sequences.

Well this is an entertaining movie.

It is too long and drawn out, and never succeeds, no matter how hard they try (and boy!

4) The painfully slow development of the film that eventually surmises to nothing.

King Kong is an odyssey of a movie, and the most genuine and compelling output seen since...

I have to say the one where Jessica Lang played the leading role was more enjoyable at least 30 years ago it was.

Don't waste your time.

2) How did any of the principals survive 3) The Brontosaurus was a slow moving herbivore that spend most of its time supported by water unlikely to be as fast moving.

First off I don't like the male love interest, he's really boring, and doesn't really do much that would make me like him, other than the fact that he wants to rescue the damsel in distress.

However after a few days i realised that this film is actually pretty dull.

I like long movies, even slow movies, as long as the characters and dialog all contribute to the main story line.

She was stunning, and given a decent role was also a good actress.

The crew's battle with the giant creepy-crawlies is equally as breathtaking, as is the finale on top of the empire state building.

The relationship between Billy Elliot's character and his mentor was cliché, cringe-worthy, long winded and ultimately completely pointless!

The movie is way too long, because it "feels" too long.

The (and I quote) Special effects, were laughable, with far too many obvious model shots, especially around New York, OK can understand it was because it was Serkis in the suit as such, but please it looked like a 60's 'B' movie, so overall, yes watch it see what all the fuss was about, and then sit around afterwards and wonder where three hours of your life went,(actually to be honest I fell asleep until the gnarly old woman screamed KONG on the island it was that boring)

This was just plain difficult for my family to sit through, the kids got bored, even with the long chase scenes, and we all got hungry and antsy.

every sequence in the film dragged on beyond comprehension from the fight with the t-rex's to the bug scene.

A boring side-story with the token black mentor sailor teaching the young, inexperienced sailor, stuff like that.

Her scenes with Kong are so evocative; she makes her character vulnerable and real.

It doesn't grab your attention until the middle of the story; then it holds your attention for about an hour, then it was getting boring.

There are already reports of people thrown into slack-jawed confusion when real things go wrong, and no Superman materialises to save the day.

Too much of the film is spent anticipating an event, and despite some cool special effects, is just plain boring.

King Kong, therefore, pulls off an astonishing trick: it manages to be both spectacular and tedious at the same time.

The memorable beginning and end can only somewhat make up for the drawn-out action sequences in the middle.

Only three characters are even remotely portrayed as characters, and they're super bland.

1930s New York is flawlessly re-created, challenging the similarly impressive scenery in movies like Gangs of New York, so it was fascinating to watch even the almost full hour that led up to the confrontation with Kong, smoothed along even more by outstanding performances from Jack Black, Naomi Watts, and Adrien Brody, among so many others.

I also think that is too long.

From Kong's movements to the incredibly creepy details of the leech monsters, everything feels authentic and intense.

But Kong's fury at Ann's refusal to let him knock her over repeatedly and his astounding juggling act as he battles three T-Rexes to defend her, are fascinating.

Though the film looks great and is gripping, it does have it's corny and dumb moments.

The animals move realistically, the textures are alive, the action overwhelmingly exciting and to top it all, someone on the film team had a real aesthetic eye, because the island is as beautiful (as we see the wonderment in Kong's eyes) as the sunrise over Manhattan and the light glinting on the top of the Empire State Building (before the antenna!

The three T-Rexs that battle Kong in an endless and boring battle are poorly designed.

The presentation of Kong was really dull.

You empathize with the beast, due to the compelling relationship that Kong has with Ann.

The horror of eternal CGI boredom.

This movie displays a long and drawn out 3 hours of nonsense.

One more horrible creature after another devouring the supernumeraries, and co-stars just gets boring...

But I guess that's what we get for a 3 hour movie, a few slow moments.

Its boring.

Some of the action on the island, too, is rather uninspiring.

Cinematography by Andrew Lesnie is absolutely stunning.

"King Kong" needs two entirely different versions instead: a fast moving one for the action/horror fans with all the monsters, and a slower one (with the comedy elements to spice it up), for families who like anthropomorphous apes.

Interesting how even the most frenetic action scenes can become boring after the tenth dinosaur makes a lunge.

If you want an action packed movie, thats well acted with even better direction then this is the movie for you!!

remove the shouting and the comic elements and you are left with a very dire actor who is a textbook definition of bland.

Overall an average movie that is dragged out too long .

Watts, Brody (The Pianist) and Black (School of Rock) give good performances in their roles and though the characters and dialogue can be dull and predictable at times, each has their own particular great characteristics and moments.

The first half of the film was very hard to follow,not to mention the fact that it was extremely monotonous.

In case of the latter, just a long-winded boredom assault with mostly bad acting and horrible dialogues and only marvellous landscapes to make up for it.

)Hey I liked Adrien Brody in "The Pianist", but he was too boring in this flick; Jack Black was miscast, Naomi Watts was weird, and Kyle Chandler I just wanted to smack!

It also takes far too long.

The ending drags on far too long.

It was a very wise decision on Jackson's part to build up a mythology of Kong in the film prior to his entrance, which is thus made all the more fascinating.

The rest of the cast including Jack Black was average at best, and the overall plot was pretty dreary and the CGI was awful.

All it did was make me bored.

One of my friends actually fell asleep and had a good nap in the theatre during this time...

great story, exciting adventure.

The scene in the spider pit was equally unnecessary and dull.

While it's still a reasonably enjoyable film, it is nowhere near as great as it had the potential to be.

A long yawn.

It was exciting and novel and didn't need all the hoopla and fancy special effects to make it great.

Unlike the title, King Kong is long, full of action fill-ups, uninspiring, very long, very uninspiring, despite good performances.

It had it's great parts for sure and the CG still looks good, there's some good action and story beats but you just get bored and want it to end, not to mention how many plot holes there are, and how many questions you're left with in the end.

the only reason I rated this one so high and enjoyed it (visually speaking) so much is because of the masterful job of special effects...

The scenes with Kong and Watts were emotionally compelling.

My biggest gripe with the movie is how it was dragged along.

This doesn't last long, as a few dull scenes later, Kong appears and takes Ann, and the men are in hot pursuit.

The very enviorment itself is simply stunning and Jackson truly takes us into another world.

Despite an engaging and elaborate first act, Peter Jackson's "King Kong" quickly degenerates into a series of unimaginative action sequences, our cast of bland characters running from equally bland CGI monsters in both a giant cartoon forest and giant animated city.

* Boring antagonist -- they might as well have eliminated the male protagonist.

Way too long and the story being set in second place to effects and loooooong action sequences.

superior to any past version of king Kong, riveting action episodes and meticulous detailed special affects....

Some people may even get bored for a while.

Kong looks absolutely stunning though and is the main star.

WOFTAM - Waste Of F****** Time And Money (may contain slight spoilers) .

Peter Jackson's Masterful Direction, The Water-Tight Script, The Stunning Cinematography & Outstanding Graphics, take 'King Kong' to a mighty level.

This love-story-come-patronisingly-dull-drivel was so poorly contrived that PJ literally couldn't be bothered to develop it.

It's empty and hollow despite the price tag.

An unimaginably entertaining film.

He looks more like a dope dealer on the lam than a documentary film maker, and his every scene is both tired and tiresome beyond all possible description.

The story is too long, and was partially miscast: Jack Black in the role of the ambitious director and Adrien Brody as romantic pair of Naomi Watts do not fit well.

The action sequences are are so intense,so brutal,and so realistic it leaves your senses shattered with awe.

He could have cut some scene, especially in the first third where it did get boring at times.

" On the positive side, the scenes involving Kong taking on THREE t-rexes are truly thrilling.

The stuff in New York City was fine for setting up the film crew's reason for coming to Skull Island, but most of the scenes on the boat just felt like empty exchanges between side characters that I didn't care about.

It was an overall entertaining movie.

) Despite all this, as I do still agree with my original takes, I do believe I was too harsh on one of my favorite actresses Naomi Watts – she did as best job as she could, the action – when it finally began somewhere after an hour and twenty minutes – never, ever lets up – shy of a slight New York slow down leading into the climax, and the cinematography/FX and score were top notch.

The entire movie moved along excruciatingly slow and it seemed to linger redundantly on the same material over and over again.

Boring.

I didn't shift in my seat, feel like it dragged or need to take a pee!

But what "King Kong" manages to do is that after starting off the film with a compelling beginning, takes us to straight, nonstop high-tension action sequences and colorful computer graphics.

It was really enjoyable to watch Ann Derrow (Naomi Watts) paying Charlie Chaplin in her little vaudeville routine.

It's a shame, because there are some truly stupendous moments in the film, most notably a thrilling fight between Kong and a bunch of dinosaurs and the final New York sequence, which is an intelligent and even touching expansion on the original's ending.

The first hour or so focuses on an utterly pointless boat cruise, which saps the very life out of you!

The movie was very long and hard to follow.

Then we go from boring to absurd CGI physical activity that no human could endure and I mean surviving the forces associated with the action as well as enduring the watching of the film.

Yeah it's a big budget film, but I was on the edge of my seat the whole time.

Could be the worst movie I've ever seen .

There are two ways to approach this movie, either with a cynical "look for all the flaws" attitude or a "just get immersed" outlook.

But when King Kong comes, it is possibly one of the most entertaining movies of the year.

When the action does come, Jackson proves his mastery at fashioning breathtaking sequences.

don't waste your money.

No matter how long it was, I really enjoyed it, even the slow moving scenes.

Though it was a pretty long movie (more than 3 hours which would give Bollywood movies a run for their money) every frame was entertaining!

Other fine actors in the movie are Thomas Kretschmann, Jamie Bell, Colin Hanks and Andy Serkis also plays an entertaining, enjoyable role as Lumpy the cook.

Do yourself a favor, watch paint dry.

The script at some points was horrible, close to unbearable.

Once there, too much time was wasted on pointless chase scenes involving CGI creatures.

Although Peter Jackson directed this almost note for note like the way he directed the LOTRs trilogy, it still is a fluidly filmed piece of entertaining cinema milked for all its worth and if something isn't broke, why fix it.

Crashing Bore .

This sequence is way too long as well.

The beginning was sort of boring to me.

The final scene is the most memorable, being in New York on the Empire State building is exciting, and horrific at the same time.

It is a remarkable exercise in film technology, but oh, so long, and oh, so tedious.

I tried watching this movie, and fell asleep after the first hour and a half.

The music was boring because this is so post to be an action movie.

" Moreover, its ability to leave one on the edge of their seat was amazing—there were so many moments in this three hour saga where my hands clenched the theater chairs.

Otherwise the film is an OTT homage to the original 1933 version: I loved the Art Deco NY during the Depression, but the Skull Island section is far too long and there are far, far too many monsters.

Boring.

Or do you expect me to describe those dull monster fights and everyone's favourite monkey climbing a building in the middle of New Yoyk?

Worst movie I almost saw - I actually walked out of the first hour.

The original is still enjoyable entertainment over 70 years later.

By the way, Peter, I thought that Lord of the Rings was way too long, too.

The camera movement was very interesting and breathtaking which put the viewer in an (inside action) State !

Stunning.

Watching such fighting-dance-crap I literally get hypnotized, quickly bored, very tired and almost fall in sleep.

Natives from the Skull Island add new scary strokes to the cliché.

At least an hour and a half of the film is solid entertainment, but the other half is just pure boredom, well-made boredom, but boredom none the less.

Black shows that he can actually act in a more or less serious role, which is a little unexpected if you're used to his comic roles.

It is totally enjoyable and i encourage anyone who haven't already seen it to harry up and do that.....

OK, of the three major versions, this one is just OK, but far, far too long.

Cap it off with Kong gliding on the ice on his ass like the worst Coca Cola commercial and you have what today's audience thinks is "awesome" and "riveting".

Huge vistas, teeming jungles, yawning abysses...

An absolutely breathtaking masterpiece.

The whole movie is very realistic and riveting throughout, and only has about 1 dull moment in 187 minutes.

The first King Kong movie was all about the jungle scene, and the rest was pretty much ho hum.

So glad we watched on an HDTV from a DVD that we could run sections at 2x or 4x with captions on and get through the parts that would otherwise have dragged out forever.

Crucify me if you want but the scene with the dinosaur stampede had me stifling a loud yawn while looking at my watch .

Sitting through three hours of a movie with this much attention to fantasy was like sitting through Lord of the Rings.

This was an adventure filled love story, all in good fun, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

"King Kong", the masterpiece of stop-motion animation, other groundbreaking visual effects, and entertaining original story lines and action sequences, had already been remade in 1976.

This movie was so amazingly boring that I almost fell asleep, and I don't have a short attention span.

The over-the-top use of CGI fantastical action was so unbelievable that I was pulled right out of the movie I was immersed in and I was placed into a video game.

Don't waste your time.

You stole 3 hours of my life and I want them back.

In this one, all I could think of was contrived, contrived, contrived.

The sound is terrific, the special f/x great and the cinematography breathtaking (here I think an Oscar was more than deserved as well as for the Art Direction which received only a Nomination).

I actually got up and walked out during the scene where Kong is being captured.

Each and every action sequence was dragged out so far that I'd lost interest in the outcome by the time they'd escaped the savages/dinosaurs/falling log/man-eating bugs.

I watched this on and off last night on TV while I was doing something more interesting and it still seemed way too long, even for a blockbuster.

PROS:Naomi Watt's Lead PerformanceAndy Serkis As King KongPeter Jackson's Ambitious DirectingSolid Supporting CastThe Relationship Between Kong And Ann Is TouchingThe CGI Is GreatGreat Visuals And CinematographyThe 1930s Period Is RealisedFun Action SequencesIt's Suprisingly FunnyThe ScoreCONS:It's Way Too LongA Pointless RomanceA Few Dumb And Over The Top MomentsJack Black Is Miscasted

It's highly entertaining & engaging.

I actually got bored while watching this movie.

The next act is an extremely brutal and relentless trek across Skull Island followed by the exciting climax back in Manhattan.

A real achievement, and while not quite at the level of the remarkable Lord of the Rings Trilogy, is an excellent and throughly enjoyable film.

I liked Naomi Watts at first, but then Peter Jackson stops directing her, and she becomes totally predictable.

Here she is a far more engrossing and sympathetic character, with humour and pathos mixed beautifully.

She looks absolutely stunning.

After more pointless scenes with the two of them where Kong falls "in love" with Ann, the crew decides to take Kong back to America.

Jackson's contrived and pointless additions to the story simply drag it down to the level of a dull video game.

The movie could have been great, and in fact there are many interesting and enjoyable elements.

The full credit of the movie goes to the animation team, for there stunning work.

It is too long,and could have benefited from some editing.

This film is terrible, because it is ridiculously long and some parts were just pointless and din't add to the story at all.

Also it doesn't look like Kong just a giant Gorilla, OK the special effects look great (yawn) blah blah blah.

Exciting and thrilling adventure created by Peter Jackson...

Jack Black is entertaining as Karl Denham, the one-step-ahead-of-the-law, Ralph-Cramden-get-rich-scheming hustler/movie producer.

Instead, it's a predictable, puerile 4-star that I give a "1" simply to offset the nonsensical "9s" and "10s" being given to this unedited amateur production.

It did, when the whole group had to make a 90 degree turn on the edge of a cliff.

this movie was absolutely stunning.

My only complaint was the inclusion of several unnecessary and uninteresting characters.

The lines were way too predictable.

Unfortunately, it went nowhere.

Unfortunately, this film should've been much better, the camera-work was lazy and it was far too long, as it progressed i felt myself getting more and more tired at watching it.

I know it's supposed to be trite and two-dimensional!

This movie is so bad, it makes me want to open the windows in my house to empty the stench , (frankly, it really puts the "retch" in "wretched") throw the clothes I was wearing when I was exposed to this abomination into the fireplace, and take a two hour shower to cleanse myself.

I don't give the movie a 10 rating because I stand by what I said about the beginning: it's a bit slow.

The reason it doesn't get a completely failing score is because I managed to stay awake and even enjoy some scenes.

It sucks, too long, boring.

while very entertaining with some really awesome scenes, this movie is extremely absurd.

A lot of the graphics looks unmistakeably like the actors are standing in front of a flat screen - this was most obvious in the 'tumbling brontosauri' scene (which went on for far too long).

Kong going martial arts and roundhouse kicking dinosaurs was stupidly cool and the scene in the insect pit was nicely intense.

Entirely engaging and a delightful and sometimes frightening adventure, it is one with definite heart.

I would tell people the movie is very slow.

There were certain subplots that went nowhere and had so little pertinence to the film as a whole that they felt like awkward tack-ons.

Complete waste of time.

All in all, I was somewhat bored throughout most of the movie.

At 3 hours running time "King Kong" is way too long and Jackson proves once again that he just doesn't know when to end his movies.

this was the best movie ever it kept me sitting on the edge of my chair.

Naomi Watts gives one of her best performances, and other characters like Jack and Jimmy are so well played and structured that you grow to care for more than just one main character, including King Kong itself in this version; I felt compassion when he fell from the Empire building, because the movie takes so much time setting up all these different aspects and creating a true to heart and sincere atmosphere to where you will be shocked, riveted and blown away by it's surprising brilliance and succumb to a beautiful, awe inspiring story that deserves two big thumbs up for the vividness and intensity it portrays.

However, no matter how long it is, doesn't mean that it's bad, or in any way unwatchable.

Also it is TOO long!

I was helpless during this period but being bored and waiting for the actors to start their journey to the Kong Island.

Keeping with the Lord of the Rings movies tradition of keeping people stationary as long as possible, he dragged it on for 3 hours.

Although there are CGI disappointments, this is one of the most visually stunning films I've ever seen!

This film was very entertaining, eventually, once it got going.

His shots are breathtaking, and he seems to know just how to follow every character to maximize their efforts, Kong most of all.

first, it was way too long.

The positive things in the movie that I thought were fascinating was I thought it was cute when King Kong and Anne acted like they were skating on the little skating rink.

Instead, we have a painfully slow opening sequence which seems almost to defy us to wait to see the ape of the title.

I highly recommend it.

It's a wonderful action filled suspenseful monster movie, adventure and peril, and it really does justice to the various other film adaptations.

Too much boring scenes...

And how come Ann Darrow escapes from Kong's clutches with hair still gleaming and untangled and her clothes unspoiled and unbesmirched with filth, having been dragged through feral humid jungle?

Car chase and FX, BORING!

to me the fillers are a good thing as it allowed all of the action to be as breathtaking as the story.

Once you see the computer graphic that was so shocking, you realize that Jack Black's agape mouth indeed was more exciting.

Apart from highly enjoyable action, there are the usual monster/action movie ingredients: blast-your-mind CGI-action, logic holes that King Kong himself could walk through without ducking his head, likable characters build up simply to kill them off in a suitably tragic way, some really icky creepy-crawly scenes, and the aggressive more-or-less African looking natives (I'm kind of waiting for the "racism!

Not only the movie contained excellently pasteurized scenes, it always kept me on the edge of the seat!

There are also forays into character development, while nicely done and frequently compelling, are a complete disappointment because nearly everyone except for the main characters are killed or dropped from the script after Kong is captured.

Just another movie reminiscent of Lord of the Rings in that it was a waste of my time for the length of time alone.

A Long, Tedious, and Boring Film.

The first hour of the film was a complete waste of time and could have easy been totally deleted.

When I saw this movie I was hoping for a really good action packed, full of destruction field, but it was just boring.

In 1933, the idea of a giant gorilla from a mysterious island was exciting.

Overall, this was an entirely enjoyable movie.

Can you imagine an action scene that goes for so long that you begin to check you watch and yawn?

Visually amazing, alas too boring...

A film that spends 3 hours without realizing it, full of action, adventure, horror, romance, drama, with stunning visuals effects and a fantastic and touching story.

The start was slow and was concentrating towards the characters of the film.

He does this beautiful, and despite the lack of action it is very engaging, and makes the film seem like an improvement on the original film, because it gives us a reason to care later on.

Tolkein understood the balance of terror and the mundane.

There are indeed plenty of scary scenes in King Kong, so the little ones probably should stay at home - or watch it with you when the movie is available on home video, so you can skip some of the more intense parts.

Long doesn't always mean better, it means boring.

It was too long, and got a bit repetitive near the end.

So go and enjoy this film, it'll make for a very enjoyable 3 hours.

Although it's meant for pure escapism, save your money or spend it on renting the original or, again, the 1976 remake.

The first third of the movie was boring back story before they got to the island.

This shamefully bloated self-indulgent work by Peter Jackson illustrates what is so bad about modern day films and what is so great about old movies.

really great movie, just stunning .

Bloated & Pretentious .

Borrow this one from a friend - and save your money.

Jack Black's Denham was bored, screwed, constantly angry and poor in every way.

Plus his use of imagery (island people) is compelling.

The exposition is too long; over an hour passes before Kong appears.

The effects are incredible, particularly the dinosaur stampede and this remake is certainly better in every aspect than the original, as this movie is just simply breathtaking.

The story was exciting, adventurous, and at the same time a true heart breaker of a love story.

It is overlong, dull, and all the emphasis is put in the wrong places.

three hours of boredom .

As they finally arrive on the island, after about 20 minutes of pointless dialogue in-between subplots, you get slightly excited thinking perhaps something will actually happen!

In no time, she's entertaining Kong with vaudeville acts and cartwheels!

Two: The narrative follows the same structure as the original though it seems painfully drawn out .