Check

King Kong (1933)'s comments - page 2

Order by:

Add your comment

Do you want to let us know what you think? Just login, after which you will be redirected back here and you can leave your comments.

Comments 16 - 22 of 22

mittens

jackson butchered this movie in his remake. like most people my age, i saw the remake first. now, watching the original, i can see how it went downhill. the kong in the remake doesnt have the character of the original, and the entire remake is based around action scenes and the people fighting against the monsters. one thing the remake did get right is all the scenes with the natives. think about it, if you were black, and some white guys came to your island uninvited and started filming you and insulting your god, you wouldnt want to talk, you would want to fight. in the original, why dont we see the sailors fighting the natives. it would have been much more interesting than the longwinded part where the natives try to negotiate swapping women.

11 years 11 months ago

Scratch47

Amazing effects, short and sharp, great fun. But I actually prefer Jacksons' more melodramatic, bloated, glorious remake. :D

12 years 2 months ago

tylerdurden

I agree. Great speciall effects for its time. But also subpar acting and screenplay

12 years 10 months ago

EnggarB

It was 80 years ago. Of course, no CGI, they used stop-motion. But,the plot is pretty good..the story is same with King Kong (2005). So according the movie, King Kong is from Nias , Indonesia. But native Nias in this film dressed like Asmat of Papua. Because it was made in 1933, so this cultural incorrectness is forgivable. No Google.com or Wikipedia at that time.

9 years 12 months ago

Previous
Pages
- 1
- 2

Showing items 16 – 22 of 22