British Guy Says New "King Kong" Is Brilliant
It takes a lot for me to call something "jaw-droppingly brilliant" - aside from Jaime Pressly's performance in "Poison Ivy 3: The New Seduction" I am, frankly, at a loss for what else could earn such lofty praise from me.
But that's exactly what this British guy says about Peter Jackson's new "King Kong" three-hour opus. Now, I don't think this was the best choice for a follow-up to "Lord of the Rings" and I will go on record and say that most of the awards he got for the later ones in that trilogy were only because the first one was good and it got cheated plenty at award time. He made the Elves somehow seem not gay in the second movie and he probably deserved an Academy Award just for that. But even he couldn't extract a decent performance from Viggo Mortensen whose combat and acting skills were, shall we say, one-dimensional? I am assuming Jackson had better luck with a big, fake gorilla instead of the big, live gorilla he had in Mortensen.
At least for "King Kong" he didn't have to hire and fire Stuart Townsend in a matter of weeks. You know when you get fired and they hire Viggo Mortensen because he is a "better" actor you have some serious problems.
He also didn't have to fire Naomi Watts. I assume she is good in this movie. I will just be happy to shake that image of the creepy kid crawling out of the TV set to try and kill her and scare the bejeesus out of me. I also assume this movie has something less creepy, like a big, fake gorilla who isn't Viggo Mortensen falling in love with her.