reviews: King Kong & Watchmen

[abigailbrady]

King Kong was good. It manages to also, almost as an afterthought, be a better Jurassic Park than Jursassic Park was. Although I'm not sure it really deserves to be 187 minutes. Only bit about it that felt wrong was the very ending - where was the massive crater?

Also, Superman trailer woo!

---

Also located Watchmen and read it quite quickly. I'd been aware of this before obviously, but somehow the "as if superheroes were real but [bar Manhattan] didn't have superpowers" bit had somehow passed me by. This was good as it makes Rising Stars much less an unnecessary duplication of Watchmen. Caused me to think a lot about right and wrong and suchforth. I'll have to do some writing about this sometime, try to figure out what I really think.

Comments

[abigailb.livejournal.com]

Yeah. There were a bunch of things that were just glossed over (like, to take another example, how the hell they got Kong on the boat). I've no idea whether the original glossed over these too - I guess so.

[landvaettir.livejournal.com]

It was a long enough film I could see why they glossed, you know? And while I am not all about the physics, I suspect it would be one part crater, two parts ape-splash.

I just re-read Watchmen. It always leaves me not quite sure what I think, too.

[abigailb.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that too. I wonder what the terminal velocity of a giant gorilla is.

Think I'm going to read some Miller stuff next.