Change Your Image
sun-mines
Reviews
King Kong (2005)
A Disgusting Perversion of the heroic nature of the 1933 version
Jack Black plays a looser version of the strong and heroic Carl Denham of the 1933 version.
He plays a liar and a cheat and a fraud.
The impact to me is that I don't care if his character gets killed or eaten or injured.
It so detracted from the storyline that I was sorry I watched it.
In the original 1933 movie, Carl Denham is a heroic figure, a wildlife movie maker that has covered the world, and is respected in the public eye and the film and stage industry.
People flocked to see Denham's "Kong. The Eighth Wonder of the World."
The public knew they would get their money's worth and a thrill.
In this 2005 version nobody would want to see the movie this Carl Denham made.
And I feel that way about this 2005 version.
Key Witness (1960)
Song "Ruby Duby Du" on YouTube.com
I put a copy of "Ruby Duby Du" on YouTube.com. I don't know how long it will last because I don't have the copyright. Tags: Wolcott.
Now, I don't appreciate this minimum length for comment being 10 lines of text. It's a waste of my time and your time.
I thought by now IMDb would have wised up.
So, I'm really sorry to have to do this to you all, but just to make IMDb happy, here's a little part of a little poem by my Dad:
"We do not know why the tear drop fell, and he would not like it so, But from his eyes I'll theorize he was looking into Hell.
A Hell of his own making, he knew where the trail had turned, Without his help the die was cast, and so the bridges burned.
High in the Hills of Tranquility sits a hawk on a lonely byrne. Broods he not in senility, but for a love who will never return.
Bear Island (1979)
Needs to be on DVD
Too bad it's not on DVD. There are many cut versions, 102 minutes instead of 118 minutes. I don't know why. It has an excellent cast, outstanding plot, scenery is superb, and what do you get for all that? A whole truckload of so-called movie reviewers and experts saying it is awful, a waste of time, not up to the standards of the book, and on-and-on. I say it is excellent, and the reviewers are all wrong, and that makes me wonder how good their judgments are on other movies.
It makes sense, that if you find a great number of them are full of beans on a movie you know, like this one, and "Popeye" with Robin Williams, then they are probably political, corrupt, and outright prima donna jerks. I think now, I'm going to reorder my priorities on giving credence to movie critics.