compare and contrast them. what do you think is more better, [and don't tell me that because 2005 is new and 1933 is old] which is better, and how would you explain your answer.
2007-02-27 13:31:03 · 5 answers · asked by Rumba 4 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
The new version took more time to develope Denham's character, but Adrian Brody and Naomi Watts were flat and uninteresting. The middle hour was squandered on poorly conceived CGI effects that made you dizzy and gave you a headache. Then, once back in New York, the final segments were rushed through...this portion should have been the main focus of the movie. Unlike the original, I felt no sympathy for the ape. I think Peter Jackson's best work is already behind him(LOTR)! In all, a big waste of $200 million that could have been used to make 4 or 5 'good' movies! The Original is a part of movie history...for good reason!
2007-02-27 19:08:00 · answer #1 · answered by david p 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like the 1933...the 2005 version did not live up to my expectations. I thought with all the CGI and stuff that it would be better, but it wasn't For the technology they had in 1933 i think the did an awesome job.
2007-02-27 13:49:17 · answer #2 · answered by Carrie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
1933, the cardboard look a like King Kong is hialrious. I love special effects in the 30's its so funny.
2007-02-27 14:05:58 · answer #3 · answered by Jeffrey C 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
in case you advise the flicks that have been titled in basic terms "King Kong" going from the 1933 unique to the Peter Jackson remake some years in the past, it is not considerable because of the fact they don't seem to be meant to be sequels of one yet another. yet there have been some sequels between the biggest video clips (which incorporate Son of Kong in 1933 and King Kong Lives in 1986). in case you desire to video exhibit each and every King Kong action picture ever made and function the journey make experience (especially lots), your superb wager is to video exhibit them interior the order wherein they have been made.
2016-10-16 22:14:40 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
2005 version is much more realistic and technically superior
the 33 Kong looked more like a Plasticine model in time lapse. Film/audio production was still in its infancy.
2007-02-27 13:36:44 · answer #5 · answered by kicking_back 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋