King Kong and KotCS
- Thread starter JP Jones
- Start date
Dr Bones
New member
kongisking said:Oh, go nuke a fridge...
kongisking said:
Your passionate responses and user name give a small clue that you're a fan of this film. Fair enough.
My opinion I that this scene was laughably bad. Bad CG, bad action choreography in some parts.
The part where Billy Elliot was skipping over the crumbling cliff edge....ha ha ha...might as well have been watching Spy Kids 3. "Momentum" was certainly lacking in that shot...in the literal sense.
Was Eberts review of that scene only? I doubt it. Overall most of the CG in the movie was great...I wasn't panning the whole movie, which I thought was good but overhyped. I was pointing out that this secne (as with the one in KOTCS) was a small flaw in the overall picture.
"special effects do not need to be convincing if they are effective"
For me, they weren't effective or convincing in those instances.
Cole
New member
Some people are just MUCH less accepting of digital effects.
Where 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' certainly did not have 100% convincing special effects..........people have no problem with it.
Yet if digital effects are anything less than overwhelmingly realistic, it is AWFUL.
Is the stampede sequence 100% realistic? No.......but it's far from AWFUL. Particularly, because the scene is so ambitious and complicated - putting you in the middle of this huge stampede - it's a pretty cool scene.
I don't think special effects have to be 100% realistic to be effective (as the original Indy movies prove). It's about fantasy, imagination.
Where 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' certainly did not have 100% convincing special effects..........people have no problem with it.
Yet if digital effects are anything less than overwhelmingly realistic, it is AWFUL.
Is the stampede sequence 100% realistic? No.......but it's far from AWFUL. Particularly, because the scene is so ambitious and complicated - putting you in the middle of this huge stampede - it's a pretty cool scene.
I don't think special effects have to be 100% realistic to be effective (as the original Indy movies prove). It's about fantasy, imagination.
Perhilion said:
Darth Vile said:
Ironically, the cliffside race is not only one of my favorite shots in the film, but one that reminds me heavily of the original trilogy. I've always loved those little moments when Indy suddenly appears to be part of an old pulp illustration- as opposed to a mundane reality.
Indiana Jones should always look closer to Old Hollywood than the latest Jason Bourne effort- even if that means obvious sets and special effects.
Last edited:
DocWhiskey
Well-known member
Great post, James. The shots you chose sold your post. Puts a lot in perspective and gives me even more respect for KOTCS.
Dr Bones
New member
To me, in those shots the CG is dominating or actually delivering the scene, rather than just an incidental or brief back drop that could even go unoticed due to charatcer interaction.
However, I honestly don't remmber most of the matte backdrops etc from the originals but I do remember the CGI from the new movie...could be my age on first viewing I suppose.
But then I have wathced them all recently and still they went virtually unoticed as the film and character kept me in as oppsed to the latter effects which seem to be more about the effects.
To me the difference is not just the quality of CG but in what way and how much it was used that made it stand out too much.
However, I honestly don't remmber most of the matte backdrops etc from the originals but I do remember the CGI from the new movie...could be my age on first viewing I suppose.
But then I have wathced them all recently and still they went virtually unoticed as the film and character kept me in as oppsed to the latter effects which seem to be more about the effects.
To me the difference is not just the quality of CG but in what way and how much it was used that made it stand out too much.
I just don't believe such moments are intended to be invisible or something that passes without notice. The "fortune and glory" scene is a personal favorite, but I have always felt it had a storybook quality to it. It certainly doesn't look like a realistic or natural setting.
Or consider the excavation of the Well of Souls. It could almost be a scene straight out of The Ten Commandments. Even as a kid, what I responded to wasn't the fact that it looked realistic- which, obviously, it doesn't- but the fact that it appeared quite magical.
Does the cliffside race look fake? Absolutely. I immediately thought so when I saw the trailer. However, I also thought it looked exactly like "Indiana Jones". As Darth Vile suggested, I guess it simply depends on what type of illusion one is hoping to find in the series.
Or consider the excavation of the Well of Souls. It could almost be a scene straight out of The Ten Commandments. Even as a kid, what I responded to wasn't the fact that it looked realistic- which, obviously, it doesn't- but the fact that it appeared quite magical.
Does the cliffside race look fake? Absolutely. I immediately thought so when I saw the trailer. However, I also thought it looked exactly like "Indiana Jones". As Darth Vile suggested, I guess it simply depends on what type of illusion one is hoping to find in the series.
Dr Bones
New member
I do see your point, but although it's not literally the case, I felt like KOTCS was more of a CGI movie, and not a movie with some FX...does that make sense?
In the originals there were some very poor FX but also more what felt like realistic locations and stunts that I believed in. Now, when you think "well it's moslty CG" , for me it sucks a little of the genuine feeling of peril, magic and excitement out of it.
In the originals there were some very poor FX but also more what felt like realistic locations and stunts that I believed in. Now, when you think "well it's moslty CG" , for me it sucks a little of the genuine feeling of peril, magic and excitement out of it.
Dayne
New member
CGI allows the movie to have much more dynamic shots than the previous films and therefore you notice those shots more. If you get rid of the CGI, then you get rid of many of great shots in the film...such as:
Shot introducing the Jungle Cutter.
Great continuous shot of the blade tearing through the cargo truck.
...Among better known shots like of the mushroom cloud, cliff chase and interdimensional craft. The filmmakers (in this case I believe) arn't using CG for nothing.
Shot introducing the Jungle Cutter.
Great continuous shot of the blade tearing through the cargo truck.
...Among better known shots like of the mushroom cloud, cliff chase and interdimensional craft. The filmmakers (in this case I believe) arn't using CG for nothing.
Agent Crab
New member
I need to rewatch both now.
I havn't watched Peter Jackson's King Kong for a long time now. Same with KOTOS. I own 'em both.
I havn't watched Peter Jackson's King Kong for a long time now. Same with KOTOS. I own 'em both.
StoneTriple
New member
Perhilion said:
Bingo.
....
kongisking
Active member
StoneTriple said:
...was his name-o. I totally agree.
Dayne
New member
arkfinder said:
Jackson's King Kong is a very very very entertaining film. Jurassic Park III is a bad film. I would not liken the two however. And the Extended Edition is even better! Who could forget the reimagined spider pit sequence? This is coming from someone who loves the original as well.
Montana Smith
Active member
I thought Jackson's King Kong was an incredible film - both in terms of effects and in faithfulness to the spirit and story of the original novel. The story itself is the classic beauty and the beast, and the ending is sympathetically sad, as the life fades from Kong's eyes and he slips off the Empire State. It was as much an allegory about capitalism (written during the Depression) as it was about a great ape.
Of course it's set in a 1930s world that Indiana could very well co-exist in. A world of tramp freighters, stylish cars and fashions, and a world that still held a lot of mystery.
KOTSC necessarily loses the 1930s, but unless it was all CGI, it couldn't really do otherwise.
As for special effects, there are some dodgy moments in the original three IJ movies, but I tend to overlook them, as it is the stories and characters that remain prominent. If George Lucas was to revisit the movies in the way he did Star Wars, we might get to see some cleaned up special editions, and some more merchandise, such as action figures
Matt
Of course it's set in a 1930s world that Indiana could very well co-exist in. A world of tramp freighters, stylish cars and fashions, and a world that still held a lot of mystery.
KOTSC necessarily loses the 1930s, but unless it was all CGI, it couldn't really do otherwise.
As for special effects, there are some dodgy moments in the original three IJ movies, but I tend to overlook them, as it is the stories and characters that remain prominent. If George Lucas was to revisit the movies in the way he did Star Wars, we might get to see some cleaned up special editions, and some more merchandise, such as action figures
Matt
kongisking
Active member
arkfinder said:
Well, ya can't please everybody...Seriously, man, you have no idea what you're missing out on!
Dayne said:
Exactly! Every frame of this fabulous motion picture oozes love from every orfice! Jackson's reverence of the original is so infectious, and for hardcore Kong buffs like me, little moments like Denham's Broadway Act (recreating the sacrifice ceremony from the classic film, and even has Max Steiner's unforgettable music!) and the brief references to Fay Wray and Merian C. Cooper ("Fay's a size four!" "Yes, but she's doing a picture for RKO." "Cooper, huh? I might've known...") are more pleasurable than a night of the greatest sex imaginable. Thank you, PJ! Go kick our asses with you and Guillermo del Toro's Hobbit films! And Godspeed on you and Spielberg's TinTin movies!
Montana Smith said:
One of the most heartbreaking scenes I have ever, and ever will have, watched in a motion picture is Kong slowly succumbing to the effects of Englehorn's chloroform as he desperately tries to reach Ann. He has a harpoon in his leg making it even more difficult. And just before he finally gives out, Kong pleadingly opens his hand outstretched. Peter Jackson perfectly described Kong's thoughts in his DVD commentary as "all I want is to hold you again. That would make me happy. That's all I want anymore."
And what's most devastating is how you can see the sympathy and guilt on the faces of Englehorn, Jack and Preston. It's because they've realized that this animal actually has a soul, and wants nothing more than to never again be alone. If this isn't masterful storytelling, then I don't know what is.
Montana Smith said:
Now THERE'S an idea! Indy gets shipwrecked on Skull Island! Or perhaps the long-gone civilization that once lived there had some sort of powerful magical relic that the Nazis are after! Sorta like the plot of Son of Kong, but with Indy instead of Denham! What a crossover! Instant win! I'm there!
Last edited: