King Kong

Trailer 2

Inhalte(1)

Eine Gruppe von Entdeckern und Dokumentarfilmemachern macht sich auf die Reise zum geheimnisvollen Skull Island, wo sie die Legende von einem Riesengorilla namens Kong auf ihren Wahrheitsgehalt überprüfen wollen. Tatschlich stoßen sie in dem von der Zivilisation geschützten Dschungel auf prähistorische Tiere und schließlich deren Erzfeind Kong, der sich auf den ersten Blick in die schöne Schauspielerin Ann Darrow verliebt und sie entführt. Kong kann überwältigt, betubt und zurück nach New York gebracht werden, wo er als Attraktion ausgestellt werden soll. (Universal Pictures Germany)

(mehr)

Kritiken (12)

POMO 

alle Kritiken

Deutsch In Der Herr der Ringe hatte jedes Bild seine Bedeutung und war ein untrennbarer Bestandteil eines durchdachten, gefühlvoll gestalteten und komplexen Gesamtwerkes. In King Kong ist jedes Bild eine Ausschweifung einer momentanen Laune und einer anderen Einstellung gegenüber dem Publikum. Und das Ergebnis ist ein gigantischer, ungleichartiger Gulasch. Am Anfang verspricht er einen originellen Jackson-Ausrutscher (die Romantik mit einer verrückten Kamera und einem verrückten Schnitt, die Begeisterung von der Filmarbeit und die nostalgische Stimmung von New York der 30er Jahre). Dann wird aus dem Film jedoch ein digitales Kalkül, in dem nicht einmal ein Dutzend blutdürstige Dinosaurier so beeindruckend ist, wie damals ein einziger pflanzenfressender Dinosaurier im ersten Jurassic Park. Den Film konnte auch nicht die Musik von James N. Howard retten, die geschickt die Bedürfnisse eines zeitgenössischen Soundtracks mit dem klassischen Schema von Max Steiner kombiniert. Die bezaubernde Schönheit von Naomi Watts, die rührende Sprache von Kongs Augen oder das niedliche Jonglieren mit den Steinen und der Eiskunstlauf haben dem Film auch nicht geholfen. Ich bin ein Fan von Peter Jackson, von verlorenen Welten sowie großen Filmen. Ich wische mir aber traurig eine Träne von der Wange, weil meine Erwartungen nicht erfüllt wurden, und schaue mir Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow an, der magischer und ausgewogener ist. ()

J*A*S*M 

alle Kritiken

Englisch I’ll say it clearly: King Kong is (and has always been) silly, already from the premise. The concentrated stupidity of a story about the love between a fragile girl and giant ape becomes atrocious in Jackson’s version, because when you spend 200 million dollars on something, if you want to make a profit, you need to aim at the lowest common denominator, i.e. the result has to be silly enough to attract the average masses. That’s why we have Jack Black making funny faces, Naomi Watts performing a funny dance for a gorilla that wanted to eat her a moment ago, sailors fighting dinosaurs… and nobody cares that a lot of money was wasted in a shallow megalomaniac kitsch that might be good in the technical categories, but fails in everything else, or rather, doesn’t even attempt to succeed. This is an approach that I will never celebrate. Utter crap, and I’m afraid that Jackson’s better years are a thing of the past. ()

Isherwood 

alle Kritiken

Englisch Jackson has returned to his roots, where he can extract maximum impact from minimal elements. In this case, it's a fairy tale that could be told in 20 minutes, but thanks to the final three-hour runtime, it remains engaging and avoids boredom. It is true that several scenes from the first half could be trimmed without much loss (although the reference to the original King Kong creator, Merian C. Cooper, was the only thing that made me laugh in the theater). However, the second half is a perfect celebration of filmmaking. While the flurry of visual effects often borders on being self-indulgent, the content is so fascinating that it's impossible not to be mesmerized, with one's mouth agape, silently staring. Kong truly comes to life, and it's astonishing how Jackson managed to imbue him with such a realistic presence. The viewer finds themselves rooting for him in the intense battles for survival while also feeling deep empathy for this profoundly lonely creature who remains so isolated. The acting talents, with Jack Black in a standout role, serve as mere supporting players, with only Naomi Watts slightly standing out because it is her character that drives Kong's actions. The magnificent finale is an amazing golden highlight, albeit perhaps excessively saccharine kitsch. However, it is so sweet and captivating that one cannot help but surrender to it and unabashedly shed tears along with everyone else. ()

Marigold 

alle Kritiken

Deutsch Es gibt eine Stelle im King Kong von 1933... Ann steht vor der Kamera und Carl Denham sagt ihr, was sie tun soll. Die Szene gipfelt in dem berühmten "Schrei Ann, schrei um dein Leben" und der Zeile "Was ist das, was sie wirklich sehen wird". Jacksons Neuverfilmung kam nicht annähernd an die Kraft und die Atmosphäre dieser Szene heran, aber man kann es ihm nicht verdenken. Statt eines furchterregenden Monsters, das den Zuschauern die Haare zu Berge stehen lässt, ist sein Kong ein vermenschlichtes und verspieltes Ungetüm, das Bienenstöcke in einem ganz anderen Bereich angreift. Es ist ein Monster, das so erschaffen wurde, wie jedes Kind es sehen wollte, ein Monsterbeschützer. Und damit verändern sich auch die archetypischen Formen der Hauptdarsteller - Ann ist nicht die zerbrechliche und wehrlose Schönheit, die den halben Film lang hysterisch schreit, Carl ist nicht der begeisterte Abenteurer mit der Kamera... Naomi Watts ist emanzipierter, mutiger, aktiver... und großartig. Jack Black ist egozentrisch, selbstsüchtig, korrupt... und brillant. Er ist es, der den mächtigen Kong vernichten wird, sein Gewinnstreben, sein Bestreben, ein Geheimnis für den Preis einer Eintrittskarte zu verkaufen. Ein großes und meiner Meinung nach gelungenes Update von King Kong. Ironischerweise schmälert die Tatsache, dass sich das Monster von gruselig zu sympathisch wandelt, nicht seine Kraft. Was die Stärke des Films schmälert, ist ein großer Mangel an Selbstkritik und die Bereitschaft, unnötige Polysilben und überflüssige Szenen wegzulassen, die das Tempo und die Emotionen bremsen. Die visuelle Völlerei und die Wiederholung einiger Szenen zahlt sich am Ende, das etwas verloren wirkt, nicht aus. Das ist schade, denn alles, was Jackson und Co. hätten tun müssen, war, sich ein wenig Zeit für ihre Liebe zur Geschichte zu nehmen und ihr eine straffere Form zu geben. Ebenso hätte der Regisseur unnötige und überstrapazierte Klischees vermeiden können, die nichts mit der Poetik des Originalfilms von 1933 zu tun haben. Weniger davon zu haben und gemäßigter zu sein, wäre völlig in Ordnung gewesen. Dennoch ist King Kong ein königliches Spektakel und ein Film mit dem Zauber "verlorener Welten", dem Pathos von Helden, Schönheiten und Monstern. Aber es fehlt ihm die Kohärenz und die innere Energie von Der Herr der Ringe, es fehlt ihm an wirklich starken Emotionen... Es hat nicht viel gefehlt und alles war in Ordnung, aber in seiner jetzigen Form hat King Kong lediglich meine Erwartungen erfüllt, und das ist bei Jackson relativ wenig. ()

DaViD´82 

alle Kritiken

Englisch Just like Carl Denham, Peter Jackson should have had a good producer at hand to keep a tighter rein on him while making this movie. As the saying goes: “less is more" and (even in the extended edition which, unfortunately, mainly contains new scenes with dinosaurs and only here or there something meaningful) King Kong is a prime example of that. The entire island part is over-combined and the fact that Peter was just making his childhood dreams come true here is no excuse for it. The scenes with Kong and Ann are splendid, but unfortunately rather sidelined by scene with the dinosaurs fleeing from other dinosaurs, something that you soon get fed up with. The only scene that works in this pulp dime action respect is the one with Ann, King Kong and the trio of T-Rexes. Basically, as long as Kong/Ann are on screen, then everything is perfect and when they aren’t, then it’s just mediocre. Of course, any objections go aside as far as the New York finale goes (which lasts almost as long as a feature-length movie) and I have no qualms in giving this a full set of stars. ♫ OST score: 3/5 ()

novoten 

alle Kritiken

Englisch Jackson really loves the monkey and when he enthusiastically says in interviews that he got inspiration for filmmaking from him in childhood, it's not just empty talk. But do we really have to see every detail because of it? When the main characters talk at length about the unknown threat on Skull Island and Kong as the main attraction is seen after over an hour, everything is not alright. Fortunately, what unfolds in the second half is amazing and a perfectly rich spectacle with stunning tricks. Thanks to them and also the uncluttered composition of action scenes, I hardly breathed at times. When the way back home is also a revelation, I can only regret that the slow start put me to sleep for so long. Among the actors, the atypical Jack Black pleased the most, while Adrien Brody in the role of an anonymous hero from next door barely had anything to play. I would like to congratulate Peter on another great cinematic experience and on showing, even after the trio of polished diamonds called The Lord of the Rings, how versatile and restrained artist he is. However, with a slight distance, there is not much that really remains in me, perhaps just the feeling of a pleasant adventure with a good dose of adrenaline, which, however, begins to fade sadly when placed in an attempt at a deeper story. King Kong is a fulfilled dream, but not mine. For hungry fans, dear Bilbo arrived seven years later. 70% ()

gudaulin 

alle Kritiken

Englisch I have avoided this film for a long time because I knew I wouldn't like it in advance. In the end, I couldn't escape it, and when I finished it, all the prejudices I had formed about the movie in the past were fully confirmed. There were no surprises. After the huge success of his Tolkien trilogy, Jackson had the film world at his feet, and he could have taken a risk and created any film on any topic. Instead, he chose a story that had been used many times before, was perfectly exhausted, and had a theme that could have been significant in the 1930s, but today can only evoke a sympathetic smile. Yes, Jackson wanted to pay tribute to old adventure literature and B-movies, on which he grew up, as did I. But he would have had to direct the film with a much greater dose of humorous detachment to do so. Essentially, as a subtle parody in the style of Indiana Jones. However, Jackson got carried away by the wave of romance with only a touch of adventure film. The main character is somewhat unnecessary, but above all, the chemistry between him and Naomi Watts as the film's fateful woman simply does not work. Film characters in many cases only recite their positions or appear to gloriously perish shortly after. Otherwise, it is a bombastic, high-budget film, and Jackson's direction does not disappoint. For example, the battle between King Kong with three tyrannosaurs at once, the duel in swaying vines with clapping dinosaur jaws, or attacks by giant insects that take one's breath away. There are a few such scenes in the film, but after they arrive in the city, the film loses momentum, and adventurous action is replaced by overly sweetened romance. With a budget like this, a dozen other films could have been made, and half of them would probably be better. Jackson should have been more judicious. Overall impression: 45%. ()

Kaka 

alle Kritiken

Englisch The pleasantly old-fashioned opening titles make us forget about the digital escapades that we will witness throughout the film. In every minute of this captivating film you can feel it is the work of Peter Jackson. The same mise-en-scène structure, composition of images, camera sweeps, and even the use of visual effects. Thanks to his direction, the film itself becomes more a celebration of traditional values rather than just an action blockbuster. The lengthy running time does not bore and not a single shot feels unnecessary. The production design is truly impressive, the panoramic shots of 1930s New York are breathtaking. The meticulously crafted visual effects were truly worth the money and you can feel the amazing atmosphere. Even Kong himself turned out to be outstanding. This was made with love for film, as a dream project. It should be taken into consideration. ()

D.Moore 

alle Kritiken

Deutsch Ich halte es wie Peter Jackson – ich liebe das Original mit allem Drum und Dran. Genau wie der Regisseur weiß ich, dass es unmöglich ist, etwas zu drehen, das die Atmosphäre des Originals hat, aber dieser Film hat mich mitgerissen. Nostalgie, wo immer man auch hinschaut, Zitate aus dem King-Kong-Original in jeder zweiten Einstellung, Szenen (faulenzende Brontosaurier, Kongs Duell mit einem T-Rex), die niemandem außer Jackson einfallen konnten. Dazu noch schöne Kameraführung, Musik, unterhaltsame und interessante Charaktere (die beste Nebenfigur ist Kretschmanns Draufgängerkapitän) … Einfach großartig. Aber wenn ich das Original nicht so kennte und liebte, würde ich wahrscheinlich eine schlechtere Bewertung abgeben … Um einen Stern. ()

lamps 

alle Kritiken

Englisch I appreciate the director's efforts to bring a cinematic legend to the screen in the most sophisticated style, I appreciate the great visual effects and some truly breathtaking and imaginative action scenes, but there's still a little something missing and my favourite from 1933 remains unsurpassed. That's certainly not to say that the new King Kong is bad. On the contrary, Peter Jackson incorporates a lot of new ideas and strange animals into the story, and he lets them run wild, whether on the humans during the unforgettable scene in the deep ravine or during the long battle between the tyrannosaurs and Kong. Perhaps the film could have been shortened a bit and even more suspense could have been packed into it, which Jackson tries to do especially after the arrival on the island, but the romantic scenes with Naomi Watts and her ape admirer, which should be the highlight, don't really play into his hands and instead slow down the already slow pace. An absolutely great spectacle for the eyes and ears, but it simply lacks more verve and momentum. ()

claudel 

alle Kritiken

Deutsch Peter Jackson erzählt gern lange Geschichten und legt dabei viel Wert auf die visuelle Seite. Ich bin mir dessen bewusst, dass meine Bewertung nach oben ginge, wenn ich den Film im Kino und nicht im Fernsehen gesehen hätte. Im Unterschied zur Neuheit aus diesem Jahr ist Jacksons Geschichte traditionell und klassisch, so wie ich mich noch aus meinen Kindertagen daran erinnern kann. Ich schaute in mehreren Stücken, was auch nicht besser war, andererseits wäre ich im Kino vom Visuellen berauscht gewesen, doch die erste Stunde hätte ich möglicherweise gegähnt. Summa summarum hübsche drei Sternchen. ()

Othello 

alle Kritiken

Englisch Probably the greatest movie I've ever seen. Of course, it raises the question of whether greatness should be the direction a film should generally go in. But if we measure it in the context of Jackson's work, one can't help feeling that he must have reached that zenith for the very reason that he was able to bounce back artistically in yet another direction, which is currently represented by the conversion of early war footage to full-HD color, which, in retrospect, suggests that Jackson, more than anything else, was always a technophile who was lucky enough to have his wife Fran Walsh at his back, who as co-writer managed to colonize his spectacular ideas into a coherent shape. There's an awful lot of that in King Kong, and all of it in overwhelming quantity. If my chin was already dropping at the, for some, unnecessarily long New York exposition, taking place in crowded streets crammed with period detail, by the end I had a disposable jaw not worth going back for. But why do those CGI scenes work for me in Jackson's untenable tsunami of digital gimmicks, even though I usually dislike them in other directors? Presumably it's because, unlike standard CGI work in which the actors are clearly separated from the computer-generated action, here the live characters are directly part of those trick sequences, making the viewer feel more invested in them, plus they act as a size scale. This does set the filmmakers on a harrowing journey that can never be completely won in terms of credibility (or even completely derailed in places, see the terrifying escape from the dinosaurs through the gorge), but when they do succeed, they have a far better chance of succeeding not only in terms of the action, but on an emotional level as well, working with the relationship between the eight-foot digital ape and the famed Naomi Watts. And incredibly, indeed, the film succeeds in this endeavor as well. Unintentionally amusing, then, are the scenes through which the filmmakers try to explain, with seeming patience, that they can make the audience relate to many of the supporting characters as well, so that we have enough clues during those three hours that this is not an animated film. The scenes involving the young sailor and his mentor or the chef and his Asian friend feel out of context, and when they're not naively funny they border on irritating pathos. Besides, they pretty much lead to nothing. That general naivety of the film is otherwise related to the overall concept, i.e. the creation of an actual giant blockbuster, completely devoid of postmodern thinking. In some ways, it's a miracle that this happened at all, let alone that it worked. PS: Someday I hope to live to see the lawsuit between Ondřej Soukup vs. James Newton Howard over the original ownership of the central musical motif, which is totally swiped from Accumulator 1, don't tell me I won't. ()