who thinks the latest king Kong is absolutely heartbreaking?

Question

im begining to like the older version better. The new one makes u so attached to the animal then kills him in the end! i actually think its one of the saddest films i have ever seen . have you seen this film ?? what do u think ??

Answer 1

I think it would have been better if Kong stepped on Jack Black. That would have made it worth watching. Why can't they just leave old movies alone? Hollywood really really sucks.

Answer 2

Jim A, have you seen any other versions? That line from the end that you complained about was from the original. If it had not been used you can bet people would have complained, and complained loudly. It's too bad that Black botched the delivery of the line, but the line itself is essential to the film.

For the original asker, which version did you see where he didn't die at the end? As far as I know, the original and the remakes all have him getting killed at the top of a tall building at the end of the film. It's supposed to be sad and make you think. It sounds like for you at least it succeeded. :)

Answer 3

I think king Kong is a very diffifult move to make becuase it leashes on sci fi epic that is both unrealistic and hypothetical..

a giant gorrilla falling in love with a human being..and more important would give his life to save her...how could that be possible in reality,..
so for the audience to complain about the remake of the film is unjustified..just like if you are going to complain about the plot in STAR WARS....it is pure science fiction...how can you complain about that is made up and unreal...on what grounds can you compare and argue the merits....it is pointless...
if you find the story non interesting..then perhaps avoid the movie altogether,..since it is purely for the enjoyment of entertaining the audiences imagination...

Answer 4

Funny you should ask. After I watched it I felt compelled to write to director Peter Jackson:

====================

Peter Jackson
WingNut Films
PO Box 15208
Miramar
Wellington 6003
New Zealand

Dear Mr Jackson,

I recently went to see your new film King Kong, on now at a cinema near me, and sadly I wasn’t thrilled. I am told that it is fairly true to the original but I cannot imagine how you managed to extend the entire film by about 80 minutes. In spite of the lengthy memory blanks I experienced while in the cinema, I estimate you must have spent about 2 hours of the film on high-speed dinosaur chases that were entirely irrelevant to the plot and served only to pad out the remaining torturous hour of completely non-progressive quasi-romance. Unsurprisingly, in the time allotted to the actual plot, the relationship between Kong and Anne seemed thoroughly stagnant except for the occasional disturbing moments when she seemed to consider swinging towards bestiality.

Another thing that mildly enraged me was the closing line: "Oh, no, it wasn't the airplanes. It was beauty that killed the beast." How pretentious and contrived can a closing line be? The viewers had just been dragged through Kong's lengthy New York temper tantrum and then the man who was responsible for it all spontaneously concluded that it was the GIRL who led to Kong's death?! That is an interesting approach, but how about this: the grotesque money-grabbing nature of a New York producer characterised in his capturing a giant gorilla and taking it into the centre of a densely populated city for profit could maybe have had something to do with it. I am aware that this line also featured in the original but I cannot imagine what compelled you to replicate such a blatantly pretentious and flawed line in your horrific production.

It made my extremely unhappy that I spent 3 hours of my life in a cinema in the misguided belief that perhaps there would be a brief enjoyable period that made it all worthwhile, however no such period arrived. Asking for 3 hours of my life back would probably be a little much to ask so I have worked out an alternative arrangement. Enclosed with this letter is a reasonable quantity of glitter. I will sleep comfortably tonight in the belief that you will probably have it stuck to your hands and clothes for at least three hours which will hopefully be as frustrating and upsetting for you as your film was for me.

Given this shameless act of maliciousness, I expect it would be too much to ask for a refund of the £3.25 entry fee I paid to see that cinematic travesty which you are responsible for. However if I am being overly pessimistic in this expectation it equates to about NZ$8.20. A cheque payable to “James Arnold” will be acceptable.

I sincerely reiterate my hope that the glitter will be stuck to you for a while and perhaps even transfer into any food and drink you have.

Yours faithfully,

====================

Strangely enough, he never replied.

Answer 5

HE[ KING KONG] IS NOT AN ANIMAL.he is the leading Male actor. it is a true love story. like most love stories do not have a happy ending. he should win an OSCAR for the part.

Answer 6

i want king kong as my pet!! i did like the film yes! did you know apparently skull island is real! my sis said she watched a documentary on it the other day!! merry xmas xx

Answer 7

I knew that king kong was going to die the whole time while I was watching, but it still broke my heart when he died.

Answer 8

it was a one time deal. it waz really long 2.i like jamie bell in it tho.he had a small part.i like the knew one but i think wont watch it again... it had really good special effects in it. it waz sorta heartbreaking in a way...

Answer 9

I know what you mean! I nearly cried....this coming from a guy who tortures Goldfish and torments Dogs often...hehehe.....I like apes though....save the apes!

Answer 10

I saw that film and thought the same thing.
i never want to see it again.
I was devastated.