Stuff by Steve

Synopsis: Peter Jackson (Lord of the Rings Trilogy) remakes the 1933 story of a giant ape discovered on a mysterious island who falls in love with the leading lady of a movie that is filming on location there.

Peter Jackson has earned a solid - er, nigh infallible - reputation for himself of late, given the phenomenal success of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. For this reason, as well as my opinion of monster movies, I was looking forward to the film. Overall, I was not disappointed; I got a good monster movie, a good adventure movie, and an okay love story in the process. First, the good. The production values in this film were outstanding. From the set design to the special effects, everything blew me away. Kong and, in fact, most of the computer generated characters were animated in a very lifelike and believable manner. Skull Island, Kong’s home, was appropriately remote and creepy, with a “Lost World” feel that was quite enthralling. Also, I admit to having been a bit unsure of how Jack Black would come across in a serious role, but he and the others (yes, even Adrien Brody) pulled it off with style. Now, the bad. This movie was way too long. In fact, it could easily have been three movies. The first would have been called “Prelude to a Romance.” The second, “Adventure on Skull Island.” And the third, “King Kong goes to New York.” Except for the main characters and some loose motivation between the three “acts,” all three bits were distinct from each other. The romance that was built in the first act was never fully realized (maybe so as not to step on Kong’s toes when he himself fell in love with the girl). The middle part of the movie had so little to do with Kong and so much to do with the perils that befell the cast while visiting Skull Island that you almost forgot what the title of the movie was. And by the time we finally met Kong (about halfway through), we were narrowly guided through a series of events that all led to Kong ending up at the top of the Empire State building, like you always see on a poster with Fay Wray. With each of these acts being about an hour (the movie was just over three), they all felt a little rushed, since that wasn’t enough time to flesh out their individual stories. This seems odd since by the end I was squirming in my seat wondering what was taking so long for the end credits to roll. Just to clarify, this was an exciting film. I’d like to watch it again (maybe in three sittings) just to take in all of the wonderment that was so lavishly spread on the screen. But despite the length, the movie seemed to leave out some very important elements, and that made me wonder what the screen time was wasted on instead.

Synopsis: The main characters from the original Ice Age attempt to escape an impending flood - the result of the warming of the ice age they just survived - and make some new friends in the process.

I liked the first Ice Age (the movie, that is, not the geological condition). I thought it was well done for a non-Disney movie which, I admit, is how I evaluate all animated features (Pocahontas notwithstanding). While not really inventive or clever, it combined solid story elements, fairly likeable characters, and a really catchy gimmick in the form of Scrat, a squirrel-like creature on a highly comical quest for acorns. I went into this movie expecting much of the same, and yet receiving little. “Meltdown’s” story was not particularly solid; the flood-escape story had promise, but it was ultimately wasted as it took a back seat to the lame let’s-make-new-friends-and-maybe-some-romance shlock. The characters, while exactly the same as before, were not particularly likeable. Finally, the gimmick just seemed to remind us of how funny the original was and this new movie wasn’t. It was as if they had already thought of all the funny ways Scrat could be flattened, stretched, squished, dropped, and struck by lightning, and they were now scraping the bottom of the barrel for new gags. This pretty much describes the whole movie. It was a collection of second-rate elements that made for an unsatisfying whole. I wouldn’t say the movie was completely terrible - there were a few moments that made me laugh - but Danielle nodded off a few times in the theater, which isn’t a good sign under any circumstance.