And they dare to preach anything.
I have NO intention of ever seeing this movie, in any format.
Take THAT Hollywierdos!
I've always liked Naomi Watts so I will wish this movie well.
Sheesh. How many times are they going to remake that monkey-fest?
If Peter Jackson is as faithful to the original book (yes, it was a book before it was a movie) as he was to Tolkien, it will make back the cost and a tidy profit.
The studio is taking a gamble by paying him up front. If the movie bombs, he takes his 20 mil and walks away. But if it's a mega-hit, they don't have to pay him residuals.
Investment
Adored his Ring. Spent most of the last weekend watching the extended version of all three with the fam.
Have never been that excited by any of the versions of KK that I've seen. Just don't understand the fuss or why PJ was so anxious to make this one. I can think of a LOT of movies I'd rather see him make.
How many college scholarships for impoverished inner city school kids would $207 million buy?
The remake can only impress us with its digital ingenuity (which includes even the look and time period of the original), but these days, digital technology can pretty much recreate anything, so it's hard to be impressed with special effects we now pretty much take for granted. I'd rather Jackson had done something original with the budget and the technology.
Geesh, I wish him luck -- but I have no plans on seeing any movies in theaters anymore. With the DVD release cycles I can happily wait the 8-9 months this thing will take to get into my DVD rental queue. And then if it's really good I will purchase it.
I am not spending $9 a ticket to see it in theater. If my wife and I go out to see it it would cost as much as the DVD! If we had two kids who wanted to see it (we have a 11 month old and one on the way) it would cost us about $30! Then add popcorn, drinks, etc.. and you are on the way to $45. No wonder movies don't make $$$ anymore (besides their craptacular content).
Just about sums it up, doesn't it.
Apologies to Peter Jackson for LoTR, though.
Full Disclosure: And Wallace and Gromit, The Incredibles, and one or two others.
Cheers!
I think with DVD sales they could break a little better than even, but I can see it doing great business in this market.
I think people are not going to the movies as much and the TV scripts have been better on the new shows.
What on earth are you talking about?
Movies cost what they cost, and they either make money or they don't, representing a risk only for those who have freely invested their money in the film. How is that decadent?
Particularly when we're talking about the director of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, which are three of the most conservative films ever made.
Now that they have done the re-make of King Kong, does it mean that they will do a remake of Gone With the Wind?
"Oh gee!"
"This is a three-hour feast of an event," said Marc Shmuger, vice chairman of Universal Pictures, who described the film as a tragic love story between the ape and Naomi Watts, who plays Ann Darrow, an actress. "I've never come close to seeing an artist working at this level."
Spin for: "We made another completely unoriginal pile of crap that is dumbed down for the lowest common denominator audience, and we are hoping for the same dumbass movie goers that went to Titantic and Pearl Harbor.
Of course, we can't say this because the hype machine is going to try to sell this crapfest like the second coming of Christ" $207 million could make 10 great studio films and 30 great Indie films. But, no, we gotta make big screen brainless crap , advertise the hell out of it, tie it into McDonalds and any tacky ad campaign we can, because we made a $207 Million Dollar Steaming Pile.
does king kong bring down indictments on Libby and Rove in this one?
Ping to the big monkey movie.
Has anyone noticed that the top movies at the box office over the weekends are getting $12-$15 million?
It use to be that weekend box office recepits for the top grosser where in the $40 million range on an average weekend.