Lounge of Tomorrow

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)
-   Beatnik (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   "King Kong" - monkey talk and movie talk (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=2478)

Gemini Cricket 12-28-2005 01:51 PM

You must spread some Mojo around before giving it to innerSpaceman again.

innerSpaceman 12-30-2005 12:18 PM

And the bigger hole than the plot one of having Kong sit on the ice for six hours is the ice one that would happen if Kong sat on the ice at all.

Ponds, like lakes, do not freeze solid. They freeze at the surface, and such ice would never support the weight of a 25-foot tall, 4 ton gorilla (holding a 93-pound Nicole-Kidman look-alike woman).

Not Afraid 12-30-2005 04:41 PM

UMMMMMMMM............ Brody's nose..........

innerSpaceman 12-30-2005 06:08 PM

Yes, the ice would not support the weight of Adrien Brody's nose either.

Not Afraid 12-30-2005 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman
And the bigger hole than the plot one of having Kong sit on the ice for six hours is the ice one that would happen if Kong sat on the ice at all.

Ponds, like lakes, do not freeze solid. They freeze at the surface, and such ice would never support the weight of a 25-foot tall, 4 ton gorilla (holding a 93-pound Nicole-Kidman look-alike woman).


No, the plot hole for me was why in the frick didn't she freeze to death in the cold dressed in a nightie.

€uroMeinke 12-30-2005 08:36 PM

For me suspension of disbelief starts with Kong - if I accept him the rest follows easily

Gemini Cricket 12-31-2005 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke
For me suspension of disbelief starts with Kong - if I accept him the rest follows easily

I don't know about that. (It's funny that I'm debating Kong's weight here.) :D
In filmmaking, there is always an attempt at adding plausibility to what's presented. If his weight can crush a theatre balcony, then he should break through the ice. It's the way he's presented in the film. He's not magic.
I don't know it I'm making sense here. Just because we buy the idea of Kong, doesn't mean he doesn't have to conform to the rules just like everyone else being that he's in our world...

innerSpaceman 12-31-2005 05:49 PM

Yes, rules that the filmmaker himself shows Kong abiding by (very astute to point out that he crushed the theater balcony, GC).

Similarly, I will accept T-Rexes existing on skull island (even though they are regular size while apes and bugs are not), but I will not accept them swinging on vines.

Sometimes it's best not to push the belief-suspension envelope too far, lest it break ... and then ruin the suspension you might have otherwise achieved.



Now that I think of it, it was a mistake to have dinos be "normal size" while mammals and insects were radioactive-huge. True, the spider pit sequence was conceived for the original 1933 King Kong, but it was never included in the film. And the flying creatures played by vampire bats in the new version were portrayed by pterodactyls in the original. Thus Kong was the only giant creature on the island, and the conundrum of why some creatures were big while others were not was sidestepped through Kong being a singularity.

€uroMeinke 12-31-2005 06:55 PM

I guess the movie didn't make me think that much


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.