I have about 20-25 DVD's that are still shrink wrapped that I have bought at one time or another over the years and one of them is King Kong which I bought on the day it was released. I think maybe the reason why I just never felt compelled to watch this again was because of how loooooooong the movie felt in the theater. Well, having just watched it again, I can say that King Kong played much better this time around. There were a lot of things that I didn't pick up on the first time around. Some good and some bad.

The middle of the movie is just so kick ass. Once they get onto Skull Island it's nothing but set pieces after set pieces with the crown jewel being Kong Vs. T-Rex. Even the "lesser" set pieces were nothing short of a thrill ride. The problem I had before that still plagues it now is the run time and that it takes an hour before we finally get to Kong. That's just too long of a set up, especially with characters that are just not all that interesting to begin with. I love pretty much everything that Jack Black is in, but he was woefully miscast here. It's really hard to separate his Tenacious D personae and accept him as Carl Denham.

The other person miscast here is Adrian Brody as Jack Driscoll, the "love" interest. He and Naomi Watts had absolutely zero chemistry at all on screen. So, to spend an hour with these 2 just made it more of a chore. I do think they got it absolutely right in casting Watts as Ann Darrow. But what I didn't realize the first time I saw this was just how very little she really says in the movie. It kind of got lost because of all the FX up on the screen. But watching it at home it was glaringly obvious. Also gotta give a shout out for Kyle Chandler as Bruce Baxter. He was awesome and the role was made for him and him alone.

The movie is all about one thing and one thing alone...King Kong. Whenever he is on screen you are just absolutely invested in the character. So much so that you begin to see him as a "person" rather than a oversize Gorilla. You can thank Andy Serkis for that since he was behind the motion capture element of Kong. You can't help but feel for him when he falls at the end. I did.

Even with the run time and a few shoddy Special FX shots, this was still an enjoyable movie, one that I will definitely watch again. This is definitely a Rent if you haven't seen it before. But since I already own it and can see myself coming back to this again and again, I will go with a Buy.I will probably hit the bonus stuff later tonight and see what it has to offer. Will post more later.

Not sure about a longer run time, but Peter Jackson said he has every intention of going back and making it a true 3D film since it was shot using 3D Cameras. So it's not going to be a gimmick 3D release like that other movie....Clash Of The Titans.

Had not heard that. I wonder if he or the studio's will tackle that. 3D is fading fast.

It's definitely on Peter's end to get it done and done the right way. I wouldn't EVER trust a suit from a studio. They are nothing but bean counters and will look to cut corners wherever they can, at the expense of the end result of the film.

...but not sure Jackson has that kind of backing.

Actually, I think he is a huge Power Player in Hollywood. Do you think any Studio would risk p issing him off when he's got Lord Of The Rings Trilogy, The Hobbit 1 & 2 and King Kong on his resume? They will do WHATEVER he ask for at the off chance he will continue working for their Studio. They don't want to burn any bridges with him, especially after he nearly walked away from The Hobbit. My 2 cents.

I thought I had already posted the Screencaps for King Kong. Oh well, enjoy the pretty pictures.