Home > Adventure >

King Kong

King Kong (2005)

December. 14,2005
| Adventure Drama Action

In 1933 New York, an overly ambitious movie producer coerces his cast and hired ship crew to travel to mysterious Skull Island, where they encounter Kong, a giant ape who is immediately smitten with the leading lady.


Watch Trailer


Similar titles


Kenyae Kofi

First of all this movie was longer than both Harry Potter first movies. Some of the acting was great in this movie, but I did not like the whole savages on Skull Island were people of black/African culture that really brought the movie down for me. There were scenes in this movie where slow motion was not at all necessary. When I saw this movie I was hoping for a really good action packed, full of destruction field, but it was just boring. I did like the fight scene of the T-Rex and King Kong so I won't bash that too much, but seriously so much more could have been done with this movie.

Griffin Dumeer

That's start off with the bad - the first hour. Dear JESUS CHRIST the first hour is a SLOG! It took WAY longer than it should've for the characters to get to the damn island. This movie should've had AT LEAST 30 minutes taken off. We get a tediously long introduction to Jack Black, TWO introductions to Naomi Watts, and a love story without much chemistry with Naomi Watts and Adrien Brody (and it's very rushed, too). They spend too long on the ship, and WAY too long in the damn city.Now lets get to the good stuff - Everything after they get to the island. Once they find Skull Island, EVERYTHING gets better! The pacing picks up significantly, and it's a total blast. Andy Serkis as Kong is amazing, of course, Naomi Watts is astounding, espiacally during the climax, and the T-Rex fights are a true wonder to behold. The editing and Cinematography is very shaky and a little hard to make out at times, but I think it works here because it only gets that way when Kong is wrecking havoc with Watts in his hand or in the city, and feels disorientating because it WOULD feel disorientating in real life.All-in-all, it's definately worth watching. However, I would recommend skipping to roughly the 55 minute-1 Hour mark to avoid any time wasting.


I saw this remake in 2006 in England & it pays homage by tipping it's hat to the 1933 original even recreating some of the scenes of the original. Such as the natives ritual dance & it's entertaining but the film is overloaded with too much modern embellishments & overdone & overblown special effects which are unnecessary & stupid . I wish modern hollywood would just leave the golden age alone & stop remaking the classics. Once it's been done it's been done so turn the page. How can you top the 1933 original ? The original was a huge enormous box office smash in 1933 & talkies were still new & the horror monster movies were a new experience for audiences. They had never seen anything like it before. The great depression really triggered & inspired hollywood filmmakers. At a time when movies were at their most creative & innovative & groundbreaking. The original is still the enduring classic that I can always watch & comeback to. But this remake is good to see one time & then you forget it & it'll never be a classic & stand up to the 1933 original. When I saw this remake it only made me want to see the original again so it helps & keeps the original a memorable classic. The original is the only one you need to see it'll never be surpassed.

Ian Rupert

Seeing that this movie has the equivalent of a "C" grade on here is pretty sad. This movie is awesome. Peter Jackson took an amazing, original idea from the 30's and he did a tribute worthy of the source material. Not only that, he added to it in mostly positive ways. The movie isn't perfect, but a "C" it is not. I believe it deserves every bit of a 9/10. Naomi Watts' underrated performance in this movie is brilliant to watch. Not only is she incredibly beautiful, she shows amazing skills and creativity by convincingly giving us a range of complex emotions in a relationship with something she had to imagine completely in her mind through the entire movie. Kong wasn't there, but she showed absolute fear. She showed amazement, respect, wonder and love to this imaginary presence that was only added digitally later on. Jack Black did a great job as well. I remember when I heard that he was cast for this, I didn't know how it was going to work. He really did well. The humor was mild, he really got the "scumbag" point across as someone who would tell any lie and take any risk to make his money in the end. There were a few goofy scenes and lines that didn't quite fit for me. A few times when the CGI looked sloppy even for 2005, but that only takes it from a 10 to a 9 for me. The things they got right outshine any flaws to me. They really made me care for Kong, and his relationship with Ann was touching. I really love that addition to this remake. In the original, that relationship was completely one sided. But, it worked well here and that was not an easy task to pull off. Besides a few flawed areas, the CGI was incredible even by 2018 standards. The fight with Kong holding Ann while taking on three T-Rex looking dinosaurs was really entertaining. The bugs were done quite well. The sauropods and that chase scene is one spot where the special effects just weren't right.The historical firearms were really neat. I do not think the Thompson submachinegun shooting .45 caliber handgun rounds would stop a massive dinosaur, though. It takes perfect accuracy and an entire magazine full of ammo to POSSIBLY stop a Grizzly with .45 ACP (it has happened...not ideal, but it has)Great movie. As someone who has loved the original since I was a kid, this was an excellent remake in a sea of crummy cash-grab remakes.The ultimate edition is 3 hours and 20 minutes long, but it never felt long winded to me. I will always be thankful that Peter Jackson lended his talent to the amazing character of King Kong. His movie deserves to stand next to the original.