Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

King Kong: Don't Mess With the Monkey 192

Posted by michael from the 800,000-pound-gorilla dept.
Noodles22 writes "King Kong: Don't Mess With the Monkey began as an audition piece for Eden Phillips. After adapting some scenes from Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh's 1996 King Kong screenplay, the natural appeal of the Kong story attracted more and more enthusiastic volunteers who generously gave of their time to make Kong a rich, funny short film. We are honoured to dedicate it to Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, Wingnut films, and all those involved in the Lord of the Rings films, and upcoming King Kong remake."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

King Kong: Don't Mess With the Monkey More

King Kong: Don't Mess With the Monkey

Comments Filter:

  • and.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Digitus1337 ( 671442 ) <(moc.liamtoh) (ta) (sutigid_kl)> on Saturday February 14, 2004 @10:39PM (#8283713) Homepage
    he'll climb to the top of the building and throw the ring to it's doom.

  • In other news (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 14, 2004 @10:39PM (#8283716)
    King Kong was one of Hitler's favourite movies. The other one was Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.

  • The story (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 14, 2004 @10:46PM (#8283748)
    Posted AC for obvious reasons..

    --

    The Story
    KONG: Don't Mess with the Monkey is essentially a prequel to King Kong the feature film. They year is 1933. A party of three adventurous archaeologists make a first foray into the depths of the previously unexplored Skull Island which, rumour has it, is home to the dreaded great ape known as King Kong.

    Our film opens on a youthful and attractive Ann Darrow, an aspiring archaeologist on a Sumatran dig site. She is accompanied by her father, Lord Darrow, a world renowned archaeologist and leader of this first expedition to Skull Island. Walter Douglas, Lord Darrow's assistant, is the reluctant third member of the expedition.Douglas appears to be much more at home in the comfort and safety of the Oxford University Library than out in the field. Our expeditionary team is also supported by two jovial Sumatran natives, Motumbo and Mentawei, who are all too familiar the feared Cult of Kong.

    Kong: Don't Mess with the Monkey shows British science's first foray into the mystical and savage world of Skull Island. Our intrepid archeologists are stunned to discover the first evidence confirming rumours of the Kong cult and the ritual sacrifice employed by the natives to appease the beast; they are on the cusp of the archaeological discovery of a lifetime!

    Jack Driscoll, an unsavory American entrepreneur, is on Skull Island to fulfill a forestry contract. Driscoll recruits a workforce from the Sumtran natives of the island, and sets to work clearing one hundred thousand acres of rainforest.

    Once evidence of the re-emergence of Kong is revealed by our archeologists, the terrified natives abandon their villages and flee to the mountains to escape the return of the Wrath of Kong!

    An enraged Driscoll, blaming our archeologists for the loss of his workforce, demands they leave the island within an hour. Driscoll's expulsion threat follows immediately on Ann's unearthing of an ancient map revealing the location of the Sacrificial Site. Legend holds that at this site the great Kong ripped sacrificial victims' flesh to ribbons.

    In spite of Lord Darrow's stern protestations, Ann shows herself unable to resist the discovery of a lifetime when she compels an unwilling Douglas to join her desperate search for the Sacrificial Site. The clock is ticking on Driscoll's threat - but a mysterious roaring emanating from the jungle presents a far, far greater one...

  • Peter Jackson is officially jumping the shark (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 14, 2004 @10:49PM (#8283765)
    The guy really should have taken a break after the massive effort that was LOTR filming and cutting. There are so many great ideas for movies that haven't been made and we have to go back to King Kong? I hope this doesn't ruin the reputation he's acquired.
    • He couldn't take a break, he's been working on the Hobbit [lathamfilms.com]

      Ok, so its not real. Pretty cool trailer anyway.
    • Awww come on. You know that all us geeks are going to be emerging from our dank dungeons to go see this movie too. What's more, I am sure it will be a great movie. I honestly have no idea what is up with the stigma against remakes in today's world. If it's good, but pathetically horribly implemented by today's standards, then go ahead and remake it.
    • Not sure what you think of peter jackson, but you should see Meet the Feebles [imdb.com]. Twisted shit...
    • ....but you ruined it with the assinine comments about Kong ruining his reputation. Like one of the greatest horror flicks of all time is a bad subject to take up. Jackson is one of the few directors I trust to do justice to a great concept; a mix of beauty and the beast and monster movie.

      And BTW, the term "jumping the shark" has become one of those overused cliches, especially when some anonymous authority on Slashdot proclaims it "official".
    • Look, Jackson can do whatever he wants and he wants to do Kong. If you don't care to see another Kong movie then just say that. But don't give me some finger-steepling crocodile concern over his reputation when what you really mean is that you're not interested and would rather he do something to suit you.

      When you've earned a reputation in the industry that makes you worthy to second-guess a working director (one recently showered with accolades for his decisions and work, I might add), maybe he'll care. U

  • Mirrored download page with links... (Score:5, Informative)

    by antdude ( 79039 ) on Saturday February 14, 2004 @10:52PM (#8283778) Homepage Journal
    I am pretty sure King Kong can't handle /. traffic himself. ;) Here's the copy of the download page with links (Bittorrent too) for /. users:

    Download The King Kong Movie

    To play the DivX verisons you will need the latest Divx 5.1 bundle [divx.com] and at least an 800Mhz processor. Any earlier versions of divx might cause the player to lock up.

    We reccomend the Normal Quality version for people on slow links or who want to see the movie quickly. To save it to your Hard drive right click on the file and select "save as" or "save link target as" and select a place to save the file.

    Mirror 1

    [Kong Full Movie [flapdoodle.org]] High Quality DivX 5.1 : 13 meg

    Mirrors for NZ users.

    Mirror 1

    [Kong Full Movie [kongmovie.com]] Normal Quality DivX 5.1 : 85 meg
    [Kong Full Movie [kongmovie.com]] High Quality DivX 5.1 : 137 meg

    Filesharing links

    You can grab the movie via various filesharing networks. We recomend Bittorrent as it is fast, easy to use and saves a lot of load on our servers. You need to install the windows client from here [sourceforge.net]. It intergrates into your browser so you can click the bittorrent link below.

    [Kong Full Movie [kongmovie.com]] BITTORRENT : Normal Quality DivX 5.1 : 85 meg
    [Kong Full Movie [kongmovie.com]] BITTORRENT : High Quality DivX 5.1 : 137 meg

    Download the King Kong TrailerMirror for US and international users.

    Mirror 1

    [Kong Trailer [flapdoodle.org]] High Quality DivX 5.1 : 13 meg

    Mirrors for NZ users.

    Mirror 1

    [Kong Trailer [kongmovie.com]] High Quality DivX 5.1 : 13 meg
    [Kong Trailer [kongmovie.com]] Half Size DivX 5.1 : 5.2 meg
    [Kong Trailer [kongmovie.com]] Low Quality MPEG : 12 meg

    Filesharing links

    You can grab the movie via various filesharing networks. We recomend Bittorrent as it is fast, easy to use and saves a lot of load on our servers. You need to install the windows client from here [sourceforge.net]. It intergrates into your browser so you can click the bittorrent link below.

    [Kong Trailer] BITTORRENT : High Quality DivX 5.1 : 12 meg
    [Kong Trailer [kongmovie.com]] BITTORRENT : Half Size DivX 5.1 : 5.2 meg
    [Kong Trailer [kongmovie.com]] BITTORRENT : Low Quality MPEG : 12 meg

  • King Kong remake is going to be great (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 14, 2004 @10:56PM (#8283795)
    I was so worried about the King Kong remake like with Planet of the Apes, but Tim Burton's epic masterpiece proved me wrong. I suspect I'll be just has surprised with this remake. The scuttlebutt I hear is that they've hip-hopped up the new ape by 10% and added a new companion character called poochie or something so it will be great.
    • 'ya know...Planet of the Apes wasn't too bad of a film in itself; if were a 'new' film, however since it piggy-backed on a true epic it just didn't measure up. Too bad, it's actually a story about humanity and how delicate it is with the interaction of time and space. I think that's what Tim was trying to hit on, but failed.
      • > Planet of the Apes wasn't too bad of a film in itself;

        No, the remake sucked, all by itself.
        It built up to a climactic ending which made NO SENSE AT ALL.

        Yes, it was made EVEN WORSE by the fact that the original movie had a climactic ending which was among the best and most shocking of all time.
        • No, the remake sucked, all by itself.
          It built up to a climactic ending which made NO SENSE AT ALL.
          The ending actually makes perfect sense. It is just a little tricky, because you actually have to think quite a bit about the film's structure. :D

          Think about what we know about how the time warp behaved, in terms of what went in when, versus when it came out. First In Last Out.

          To spell it out further: so when Marky Mark goes into the time warp again at the end of the film, it stands to reason that anyone pot
          • > anyone potentially going after him is going to get out well before him...

            Ok....
            So if talking ape popped up within a lifetime of when the Lincoln Monument was built, do you suppose he would take over the world or more likely be dissected as a curiosity or burned as an abomination?

            Back then they wouldn't have elected a non-white-non-protestant-non-male and you suppose it makes sense they elected a MONKEY as president?
            • I couldn't imagine that he was elected! And though he did replace the Lincoln statue, I am not convinced that he didn't change the existing monument, rather than Lincoln never becoming president in the first place.

              However, let's say he brought some futuristic weapons, along with reinforcements, and his landing was a surprise... and there is the implication that somehow they were able to advace Earth's apes as well, perhaps through interbreeding? And when did he start doing this? Of course it is a long shot
    • Ocean's Eleven did pretty well at the box office. It was a remake. I thought the Rat Pack version was better. Some remakes do okay. The more detached the viewing public is from the original source the better. I distinctly remember watching Planet of the Apes as a kid. However, I only have fuzzy memories when it comes to King Kong or Mighty Joe Young (or any other ape movie).

      I wonder if I could mod an old version of Donkey Kong before King Kong hits the theaters.

  • BitTorrent Links (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:04PM (#8283812)
    In case the site gets slashdotted, here are all the bittorrent links to the kong movie and trailers:

    Kong Full Movie:
    High Quality DivX 5.1 : 137 meg [kongmovie.com]
    Normal Quality DivX 5.1 : 85 meg [kongmovie.com]

    Kong Movie Trailer:
    High Quality DivX 5.1 : 12 meg [kongmovie.com]
    Half Size DivX 5.1 : 5.2 meg [kongmovie.com]
    Low Quality MPEG : 12 meg [kongmovie.com]

    (posted anonymously to avoid karma whoring accusations.)

  • What is this? (Score:5, Funny)

    by CelticWhisper ( 601755 ) <celticwhisper@Nospam.gmail.com> on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:06PM (#8283820)
    Hey, now, this is Slashdot! Where are all the computer-related stories? NO MORE MONKEY BUSINESS!

  • Don't Mess With the Monkey - It's about a film... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Richard_L_James ( 714854 ) on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:07PM (#8283822)
    Thank goodness as for a second I thought this was yet another single geek advice article on valentines... !

  • apparently we differ on some definitions: (Score:5, Insightful)

    by chimericalburst ( 726539 ) on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:08PM (#8283825)
    not only was that not "rich" or "funny" but those were the LONGEST TEN MINUTES OF MY LIFE

  • I'm such a nerd... (Score:5, Funny)

    by IchBinDasWalross ( 720916 ) on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:11PM (#8283835)
    I keep thinking "Donkey Kong" and not "King Kong" while reading these comments. Maybe I spent too many happy hours as a young child with a SNES controller in hand.

  • don't mess with the monkey? (Score:3, Funny)

    by FrancisR ( 640455 ) on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:19PM (#8283861)
    more like don't mess with the waterskiing squirrel [pinku.biz]

  • The Wrath of Kong? (Score:3, Funny)

    by TravelSizedMonkey ( 585629 ) on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:20PM (#8283863)
    KONNNNNNNNNGGGGGG!!!!!

    Seriously, they mentioned "the wrath of kong" twice, but they never did the yelling. I had to get it out of my system.

  • Anti-climax for fans of PJ (Score:3, Interesting)

    by adept256 ( 732470 ) on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:21PM (#8283864)
    This is going to be a big dissappointment for fans of LOTR expecting more of the same from Peter Jackson.

    The LOTR trilogy contains a beautifully realised fantasy world and an epic story with way more material than you need for a movie. King Kong is a just a fifty year old screenplay.

    Why not come up with a new idea instead of remaking a fifty-year old idea? They want the name recognition and the fanbase. I wonder, if you asked five years ago, who's name would be more recognizable, Gandalf or King-Kong?

    I think the big difference is that LOTR is a 900 page epic and King-Kong is a 70 minute screenplay, and it's going to show in the characters and dialog. Not to deride Peter's directing talent, but without the genius of Tolkein's story-telling I don't think his genius with directing is going to make the 100-foot monkey movie fly.

    I read somewhere (sorry no link) that as animated characters become more realistic, they reach a stage where they are so realistic that it's disturbing and (paradoxically) seems more unrealistic. The gollum character got around this because he was supposed to be disturbing... or something... anyone find the link for that? Anyhow, how would they achieve the same effect with king-kong?

    Don't forget what a flop the remake of Godzilla was.
    • to http://www.suntimes.com/output/answ-man/sho-sunday -ebert11.html
    • The thing is, Peter Jackson is only really a genious in filming battle scenes... the rest of the movie was fine, but nothing a huge budget couldn't do for any competent director.

      The battle scenes though... they're breathtaking, simply put.

      Now, the question is how this style of filmmaking is going to translate to King Kong... obviously it's not going to be a many vs. many situation, so it will be interesting to see if he can make magic out of that too.

    • Re:Anti-climax for fans of PJ (Score:4, Informative)

      by ahaning ( 108463 ) on Sunday February 15, 2004 @12:04AM (#8283992) Homepage Journal
      The DVD for Finding Nemo has some interesting extras. One of them is with one of the directors (or someone in charge). He talks about how they went scuba diving and took video. They then gave the video to their CG people who recreated a scene from underwater looking to the water's surface. When played side-by-side, it was hard to tell the two apart, and so they had to work on making it believable that it could exist, while also making it obviously not real.

      I also recall something along the same lines with the princess in Shrek, they made her too realistic, and then had to make her more "fake".

      But, it really depends on what you're animating, though. I saw the Final Fantasy movie that was supposed to look all real, and it was good animation, but just "not right."
    • King Kong is a just a fifty year old screenplay

      Lord of the Rings is a fifty year old book.
    • This is going to be a big dissappointment for fans of LOTR expecting more of the same from Peter Jackson.

      It seems to me that there is an inherent contradiction between the title of your post and the first sentence. Jackson made his career with edgy genre-busting films. In fact, LotR is in many ways his worst work in the last 10 years. That does not mean that it's not a fine pice of work, but compared to Dangerous Creatures and even The Frighteners the story is lacking. Really not any fault of the writers, it was just the naure of that wondrous hydra of a narrative that Tolkien created, that you really can't condense or summarize it successfully.

      The nice thing about Kong (70 years old, not 50 years old), is that since it was written as a story to be told from start to finish in 100 minutes, it is the perfect size for a film adaptation. There is enough there to fill the attention of the audience for an afternoon, with enough wiggle room for Jackson to put his own stamp on it.

      LotR fans are not necessarily Peter Jackson fans and Peter Jackson fans are not necessarily fans of LotR. I'd much rather see him do another Dangerous Creatures or Forgotten Silver (that managed to bamboozle fair number of New Zealaders into thinking that he really did discover that all of the major inovations we take for granted with film were invented in New Zealand and lost.) In fact, Jackson quipped that he promised Fran Walsh, his partner (professionally and personally) a low-budget, low-stress art film.

      Don't forget what a flop the remake of Godzilla was.

      The big problem with Godzilla is that the original Godzilla was a product of a specific time (post-WWII reconstruction) and place (Japan). Godzilla just does not translate well.

      But on the other hand, we see a remake of The Wolfman about every 10 years, a remake of Dracula every 10 years. A remake of Hamlet ever generation. Why not do the Gilglamesh of monster movies, King Kong?

    • Re:Anti-climax for fans of PJ (Score:4, Insightful)

      by BiOFH ( 267622 ) on Sunday February 15, 2004 @04:22AM (#8284573)
      This is going to be a big dissappointment for fans of LOTR expecting more of the same from Peter Jackson.

      Well aren't you a cheery ray of sunshine and opinion.

      1) If a LOTR fan goes into King Kong expecting some relation to LOTR just because Jackson is involved, he or she deserves to be let down. He or she is an idiot.

      2) So, Peter Jackson must now only choose projects which relate to or will appeal to LOTR fans lest he let them down when they wander aimlessly into a theatre expecting hobbits.

      3) People still love LOTR, people still love King Kong. Your personal preferences notwithstanding, people seem interested in both.

      4) "not to deride Peter's directing talent" What? Saying his new movie, which hasn't been completed yet, is going to be a flop, that he's making a poor choice, that isn't deriding his abilities?

      5) I'm sorry... what the hell did Peter Jackson have to do with the Godzilla remake or its being a flop? Nothing. Absolutely freaking nothing.

      So you love LOTR. Yay for you. But this pontificating is about as weighty as a Star Trek vs Star Wars argument.

      I also read something 'somewhere': hot air rises. Judging from the +5 Interesting mod on this puffery, I'd say that theory is proving true.
    • This is going to be a big dissappointment for fans of LOTR expecting more of the same from Peter Jackson.
      Indeed. Like the TTT and ROTK were a huge disappointment for fans of FOTR (although the majority ate all three).

      The LOTR trilogy contains a beautifully realised fantasy world and an epic story with way more material than you need for a movie.
      Nothing of which happened because of PJ.

      Why not come up with a new idea instead of remaking a fifty-year old idea?
      Because he doesn't have [m]any original idea

  • of FANIMATRIX fame (Score:4, Informative)

    by bahamutirc ( 648840 ) on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:40PM (#8283926) Homepage
    It should be noted that these are the same people who did Fanimatrix.

  • Apparently they didn't consult with a lawyer... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by telstar ( 236404 ) on Saturday February 14, 2004 @11:43PM (#8283932)
    "Music used within this film was utilized as a gesture of respect and admiration for the artists and labels involved.
    No financial gain whatsoever can be attained from this film and/or any copyrighted materials that appear within it.

    We hope this film will help further promote the works of the artists and labels featured here. Any objection to the usage
    of copyrighted materials within this film will be met with immediate compliance and complete removal of the offending material without question."
    • So they've basically admitted that they never asked for permission to use any of the music in the film ... and they explain that it's okay ... because it was used out of respect, and they won't make any money on the project anyway. (I could've told them that after watching it) But they promise to remove the music if anyone complains. Nice to know they'll close the barn doors after the horses have already left...

    • Listen cat, they're relying on the intelligence of the copyright owners to notice that this is (well I would say good but having seen the film...) not bad marketing, and will not ask the parties involved to remove the offending material when or _if_ they decide it is not in the copyright owners best interest.

      Not that you would know anything about intelligence or best interest. I'm thinking mod redundant would be best for the parent.

      And don't tell me you didn't love the little red hat.

  • Why King Kong, Peter? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by HarveyBirdman ( 627248 ) on Sunday February 15, 2004 @12:01AM (#8283986) Journal
    I say give Jackson the money to do Zelazny's Amber series.
    • ...dude. I can't tell if thats a good idea or not.. So much of the Amber books is Corwin thinking to himself and scheeming, not sure how that would play on the bigscreen... And the plot is pretty convoluted..

      And besides, how many people would sit through five years of Corwin locked in the dungeon, anyways?

      • Please, PLEASE don't let anyone make Zelazny's excellent books into movies. It'd destroy them.

        I can imagine that with some real talent behind it Hellriding could be quite a CGI experience. But there is no way at all that any justice could ever be done to the stories themselves, not in the movies, certainly (given the number of novels) and a miniseries would be pathetically short on the time needed to decently explain what's going on. It'd be like the horrid distortion that's the modern "Highlander" seri
        • blah blah, itsd to good for a movie, blah, blah, Can't be done, blah, blah,blah.

          Free clue: If they do get made, don't go see them.
          I know what your thinking,"It's Amber, I must go see the movie. It will give me a chance to complain that corwin is wearing the wrong shoes."

          I heard the same thing about LOTR and Harry potter.

          Sinally, if you know Zelazny, you should have used his 'Damnation Alley' as an example. Great story, sucky movie. After it, he said he would never allow one of his books to be turned into
          • Actually I thought LOTR was very well made, and I've been reading/rereading Tolkien's books for decades.

            That wasn't my point, tho. "Wrong shoes"? What does that have to do with my post? My feeling is it'd be damned hard to try to explain the storyline (which runs thru, what, 20+ books?) to the average movie audience; and in the process they'd have to destroy it.

            I guess what I'm really trying to express is this: Why the hell can't Hollywood come up with some original stuff that doesn't involve plots b
  • King Kong Slashdotted! Geeks Spank The Monkey!

    I know, I know... he's an ape not a monkey, but let's pretend it's a FOX headline :P
    • Geeks go Ape after hearing 'Geeks Spank The Monkey'

      And now, here's Mojo Jojo with the weather, MoJo.

      Thanks Diane, in todays forcast there is Doom! and Daspair! at the hands of I, MOJO JOJO, and it will be partly cloudy, the sky will have some sun, and some clouds, but more sun then clouds, which is why I MOJO JOJO said partly cloudy, and not Partly sunny.
      Now I am off to cause Doom and despair, and then RULE THE WORLD! Diane.

      This just in Mojo Jojo has been captured by the Power Puff Girls.

  • Sweet (Score:3, Funny)

    by Jade E. 2 ( 313290 ) <slashdot@perlstorm. n e t> on Sunday February 15, 2004 @12:32AM (#8284066) Homepage
    That was really useful. Not often do I get to add 5 more actors to my "Don't see anything these people are in" list at once.

  • I wrote a short article [allenvarney.com] for the January 1997 issue of Collect! magazine that recounted some of the interesting history of the original King Kong filmmakers, Merian Cooper and Ernest Schoedsack. Collect! (now defunct) covered non-sports trading cards, so don't be puzzled that there's a paragraph of commentary near the end about several Kong-related card sets.

  • Another one done to death (Score:4, Insightful)

    by simetra ( 155655 ) on Sunday February 15, 2004 @12:40AM (#8284101) Homepage Journal
    == insert any and all Shakespeare here ==

    Frankenstein

    Dracula

    Jekyl & Hyde

    King Kong.

    PLEASE, enough of this recycled crap already. Someone please come up with something new... Or I will, damn it!

    • I think there is a lot of room for a good frankenstein movie. I don't mean the tall slow moving platfor show wearing grunt abomination.
      I mean an abomination like the one in the book. That has potential.

      Dracula- always room to see vamps get vaped. Some of the retelling of the vampire myths hav been pretty good. Lost boys, Blade, Love at first bite, just to name a few.

      Jekyl & Hyde - A lot of great opportunity there as well. Unfortunatly they are very often done like crap. Something closer to the book co
      • I think there is a lot of room for a good frankenstein movie. I don't mean the tall slow moving platfor show wearing grunt abomination.
        I mean an abomination like the one in the book. That has potential.

        DeNiro wasn't bad if he could have gone opposite anyone else but Branagh. I find it interesting that the only things he's done lately that have not irritated the heck out of me are things like Harry Potter where he is supposed to irritate the heck out of me.

        King Kong - OK, as modern weaponry gets to the
    • Yeah, after 400 years, it really begins to grate.

      Seriously, though, do you think you've seen every Shakespeare play? For those that you have seen - have you seen them done well?
    • PLEASE, enough of this recycled crap already. Someone please come up with something new... Or I will, damn it!

      Alrighty, then. *settling back on the couch*
      When can I expect it?

    • Sorry, anything new is copyrighted for another 70 years.

  • can we (Score:4, Funny)

    by geekoid ( 135745 ) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {dnaltropnidad}> on Sunday February 15, 2004 @01:10AM (#8284188) Homepage Journal
    punch the monkey?

  • oh no (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ziggles ( 246540 ) on Sunday February 15, 2004 @03:14AM (#8284410) Homepage
    Please don't tell me we're going to hear about every thing related to Peter Jackson now. Ok, I gave you breathing room on Lord of the Rings since that's obviously nerd territory. But King Kong? What's the relevance?
    • King Kong? What's the relevance?

      Sci-Fi. Fantasy. The geek genres.

      70 foot tall monkey rampaging around New York.

      You're right, I can't see anything relevant.

  • Bah! (Score:4, Funny)

    by jackal! ( 88105 ) on Sunday February 15, 2004 @05:14AM (#8284684) Homepage
    There are only three real monsters:

    Dracula, Blackula, and Son of Kong

  • Some comments.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 15, 2004 @06:15AM (#8284786)
    Our expeditionary team is also supported by two jovial Sumatran natives, Motumbo and Mentawei, who are all too familiar the feared Cult of Kong.

    Hmmmm. Sumatra is in Indonesia. They choose the wrong name: Motumbo doesnt sound like Sumatran name, more like African. Mentawei sound like Borneo (another part of Indonesia) name. Also native Sumatran people doesnt look like India at all.

    And if they really on Sumatra during 1933. Hopefully they prepared to meet the Sumatran Tiger. They still exist until now, and they are *a lot* in 1933. Not to mention the bears. And the guns, Indonesia was on war at that time, guerillas everywhere.

    (note: I havent watch the movie, so my comments can be wrong).

  • Obi Wan (Score:3, Funny)

    by cyberb0b ( 586966 ) on Sunday February 15, 2004 @10:17AM (#8285592) Journal
    The sound supervisor did an excellent job. I'm a big fan of Obi Wan Kenobi's work. :)

    Did anyone else notice the humorous credits?
  • The short is uninspiring. A waste of good production and acting effort.
  • I misread the title at first and thought to myself, "Don't Mess With the Money; how appropriate coming from Peter Jackson and co." =)

Slashdot Top Deals

"The great question... which I have not been able to answer... is, `What does woman want?'" -- Sigmund Freud

Close