Discuss King Kong
Discuss → Movies → King Kong → General
The best way to remove insects from your body
posted by aholejonesSTAFFMOD on June 8, 2017 at 11:05 PM
Is to apparently have some guy, who looks like he is in thirties of forties, and is playing a kid, blindly fire his machinegun at you. Sure enough he will miss the biggest target that is your body, and will manage to hit the insects even though he seems to have no control over the weapon.
Sheesh......and that's not even the dumbest scene in this stinker of a movie.
Reply by tmdb13060682
on June 9, 2017 at 7:40 AM
That always took me out of the movie for a minute. Hollywood makes so many mistakes when it comes to guns. That was a Thompson, which was notoriously inaccurate, largely due to the fact that it kicked like a mule. They had to put compensators on them for the troops in WWII to keep sights on target.
Reply by DRDMovieMusings
on January 28, 2022 at 7:10 AM
So, you were expecting a movie about a giant ape to be...(let me see if I get this straight)...realistic?!
Wow. You must have hated Superman. Star Wars. Die Hard. Lord of the Rings. The Matrix. The entire Bond Franchise. All Marvel movies. Movies.
All facetiousness aside, I do agree that, sometimes, a particularly "dumb" scene can take viewers out of the movie. I'm pretty sure I've made a similar comment somewhere on this site.
But, generally speaking, movies are fantastic, an escape from reality, rather than an immersion in reality. Sure, the Casino and Goodfellas of the world do attempt to be realistic (especially as they are depictions of things that did happen in real life).
Either way, going in, you had to know that a movie about a gigantic ape wasn't trying to be a Scorcese movie, right?
Reply by Adam
on February 1, 2022 at 7:16 AM
He should've used household pesticides on insects the size of cars.
Reply by aholejones
on February 2, 2022 at 2:48 AM
If they want the movie to be completely ridiculous and totally devoid of realism I'm all for it. However, if they are going to go for that route, well, they should really go for it. For starters the movie would've been ten times better if that scene ended with them noticing the "kid's" friend is now filled with some unintentional new .45 caliber breathing holes and he had completely missed the insects. At least it would've been funny. Also since no sort of "realism" or logic is needed because this is a movie about a giant ape they could've saved us at least two hours from this dreadful 3+ hour movie and have Naomi Watts walk over to Kong and stun him with a kick in the groin and follow that up with Adrien Brody uppercutting the now stunned Kong all the way to New York. Heck, while we're at it could've saved us at least another 30 minutes if they flew to the Island on Aladdin's magic carpet - no need for that boring boat trip in a movie about giant apes. You think Peter Jackson is open to my suggestions for a new improved version? I've even got the promotional part all figured out: Adrian Brody and Naomi Watts stand toward the photographer with their fists raised in a menacing manner and on the poster in bold letters shall it read: THEY PUT THE K.O. in KONG.
Reply by DRDMovieMusings
on February 2, 2022 at 3:03 AM
I hear you. It's a fine line. I mean, I haven't watched any of the Fast and Furious franchise, because I think it's beyond ridiculous. Yet, I loved (most of) the Terminator franchise which is, well, to be honest, also beyond ridiculous. As is the Die Hard franchise. The Rambo franchise. etc. etc.
I guess it comes down to, simply, did we like the movie or not? If we don't like it, we'll find reasons to justify why. If we liked it, we'll find reasons to justify why.
Having said that, taking a shot at Peter Jackson is ambitious. His special effects and ability to create a fantasy world that can immerse an audience is widely recognized, and he nailed that here in King Kong - at least, for me, anyway.