Flexo
Avenger
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2004
- Messages
- 11,606
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Zaphod said:I have to disagree. The first-hour of the movie, or the first 45 minutes as you say, was a waste of time in my opinion and felt like pure self-indulgence on the part of the director. The reason I say this is because the second-act of the movie on Skull Island was just one long, excessive action set peice, in which any development of characterisation established in the first-act was made redundant, since it was certainly seldom explored amdist the action of the movie. The character development of multiple personalities in a movie, can't be confined to either the beggining, middle, or end, they need to be spread out through the entire film, and Jackson was gleefully overlooking this in his Kong with his drawn, painfully long-winded first -act.
The original Kong didn't feature such an overblown beggining, and I'm sure many would agree that that was the superior-movie. The first-act wasn't the sole reason Peter Jackson's King Kong was poor, but it certainly didn't help matters any.
If the beginning had been cut down, you wouldn't have cared about any of the characters during the action. Ann and Jack's romance would have felt flat, and it would have been difficult to develop character during the action.
Oddly enough, King Kong has always had a long first act. In the original, the characters don't reach the island until 25 minutes in. Big deal, you say? Well, the movie is only an hour and a half, so that's about a third of the film stuck on a boat.
Even in the 1933 novelization the characters don't reach the island till page 53. (And the novel is only 150 pages long.)