King Kong 4K UHD (2005) (Ultimate Edition)

[levcore]

I agree about bad vfx work but unfortunately every big movie suffers from this, it's not unique to King Kong. Whilst a lot of the vfx in Kong Skull Island were great, I actually thought there were quite a few creatures that looked far inferior to Jackson's movie 12 years earlier.

I also love the 1998 Godzilla movie!

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by levcore

I agree about bad vfx work but unfortunately every big movie suffers from this, it's not unique to King Kong. Whilst a lot of the vfx in Kong Skull Island were great, I actually thought there were quite a few creatures that looked far inferior to Jackson's movie 12 years earlier.

I also love the 1998 Godzilla movie!

You and me both!

I really liked Jackson’s King Kong. It feels a bit long, but man the spectacle of it worked for me when I saw it in theaters! I wasn’t a fan of Kong: Skull Island.

[fred25_Ca]

Originally Posted by levcore

I agree about bad vfx work but unfortunately every big movie suffers from this, it's not unique to King Kong. Whilst a lot of the vfx in Kong Skull Island were great, I actually thought there were quite a few creatures that looked far inferior to Jackson's movie 12 years earlier.

I also love the 1998 Godzilla movie!

Oh I think every FX in Skull Island look better than in the 2005 version. Cgi has come a long way since.
I also think the creature designs in Skull Island is phenomenal, much more interesting than the ones in the Jackson version. But I still love the Jackson version haha, so I feel bad bad mouthing it.
And yeah, The Godzilla 98 is a terrible movie by an awful director but I still like it, especially now that we've gotten more faithful Hollywood versions of the big G anyhow. It's hard for me to dislike any Godzilla or Kong movies, even the worst ones. :P

[levcore]

Yeah there is a lot of great creature design in Skull Island, there is some awesome stuff in the art book that they didnt use, but that's also true of King Kong 2005.

I actually think 1998 Godzilla is a damn good 90's blockbuster, it ticks all the right boxes and still holds up pretty good today, a few fx shots notwithstanding lol.

[scarface007]

I thought PJs King Kong is a way better film than the one from 2017. It's not even close for me.

The 2005 film has better characters, story, and just looks way better from the island to the appearance of Kong himself

[levcore]

I feel like King Kong 2005 is an event whereas Kong Skull Island is just a solid monster movie.

[LexInHD]

I like Jackson's Kong for what it is, a faithful telling of the original story, unburdened by the limitations of the VFX at the time the original film was made. The 2017 Kong, I have only watched twice, in the cinemas. I own it, but haven't bothered to watch it because it just isn't that interesting to me. The 1976 Kong has a special place in my heart, as does King Kong Lives!, because both were my introductions to King Kong. I simply accept them for what they are, though I know the 1976 film could have been better, had the VFX and deleted content from the production worked out, which never could have happened due to the limitations of technology at the time.

[I-C-Blue]

With Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings being remastered recently, I wonder if he would have the interest to remaster King Kong in PROPER 4K HDR. Obviously, Lord of the Rings is the most dear to him hence the remaster treatment that's far more genuine than King Kong had. But still, I wouldn't mind repurchasing the movie in the future if such opportunity arises.

[LexInHD]

Originally Posted by I-C-Blue

With Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings being remastered recently, I wonder if he would have the interest to remaster King Kong in PROPER 4K HDR. Obviously, Lord of the Rings is the most dear to him hence the remaster treatment that's far more genuine than King Kong had. But still, I wouldn't mind repurchasing the movie in the future if such opportunity arises.

There is no way that he could make it look any better without redoing all the video post-production and VFX shots, by going back to the 35mm sources and re-creating the film at 4K. The film is basically a green screen stage composite production, with some interior set pieces that have no VFX, so Universal isn't going to pay for that comprehensive a remastering and they didn't even involve Jackson in the making of the UHD-BD for the film, so I doubt we'll ever see it better than it already is.

[Schwartzy]

Originally Posted by I-C-Blue

With Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings being remastered recently, I wonder if he would have the interest to remaster King Kong in PROPER 4K HDR. Obviously, Lord of the Rings is the most dear to him hence the remaster treatment that's far more genuine than King Kong had. But still, I wouldn't mind repurchasing the movie in the future if such opportunity arises.

His favourite film is king kong 33' ,thats why he became director and wanted to do the remake, so it should be very important to him.. weird that he wasnt involve remasterin kong :/ or hasnt even said anythin about it.

[Zimmy]

Originally Posted by lgans316

Extended version on streaming is HD 1080p.

4K is TC and it sucks every bit like the disc.

I wish that was the case but it is not.

King Kong Extended is 4k on iTunes (at least in the US).

https://www.blu-ray.com/itunes/King-Kong-iTunes/2378/

[Schwartzy]

Happy birthday King Kong!

Peter jacksons king kong turns 15 years old today!

[bradnoyes]

Originally Posted by I-C-Blue

With Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings being remastered recently, I wonder if he would have the interest to remaster King Kong in PROPER 4K HDR. Obviously, Lord of the Rings is the most dear to him hence the remaster treatment that's far more genuine than King Kong had. But still, I wouldn't mind repurchasing the movie in the future if such opportunity arises.

If LotR are any indication, I really don't think there would be anything genuine about a King Kong remaster.

[hoejunter]

Originally Posted by levcore

I feel like King Kong 2005 is an event whereas Kong Skull Island is just a solid monster movie.

Absolutely. I love King Kong 2005, it truly feels like an adventure.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by I-C-Blue

With Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings being remastered recently, I wonder if he would have the interest to remaster King Kong in PROPER 4K HDR. Obviously, Lord of the Rings is the most dear to him hence the remaster treatment that's far more genuine than King Kong had. But still, I wouldn't mind repurchasing the movie in the future if such opportunity arises.

LOTR's 4K is far closer to Kong's 4K than not, it's a strange coincidence how so many of the problems on Kong are verr similar to the problems with LOTR. A "PROPER" remaster of either we have yet to see.

[kong73]

Originally Posted by levcore

I feel like King Kong 2005 is an event whereas Kong Skull Island is just a solid monster movie.

KONG 05 is an EPIC in every way, especially that 3 1/2 hour cut!! So much Kong! So Good! I always felt KONG was a 3hr + story waiting for the right Dir., PJ was a perfect fit. I just wish it had a different composer, I wanted something a little more ambitious.

[Schwartzy]

^^ actually its one of my favourite soundtrack ever

[Rizor]

After rewatching the LOTR and Hobbit trilogies, I thought I'd revisit Kong. I sampled some of the 4K disc about 3.5 years back and posted my impressions then (though I don't even think I had a true 4K HDR display at that time!). I finally sat down to watch the 4K disc....then I switched to the Blu-ray.

I think the 4K disc is a huge eye sore, and not just the eye searing HDR. It looks to me like it got some "image enhancement" on the upscale. Noise reduction, sharpening and then a layer of homogenous grain over the top (though it's sometimes left off and looks too smooth). I think the image processing often gives faces a sort of Photoshopped/CGI look, especially with the HDR.

The colors are awful. The Blu-ray has nice, vivid colors. Particularly blues and greens during the Skull Island scenes. I don't know what's going on with the 4K edition. It reminds me of that that strange William Friedkin/French Connection experiment. Almost as though the film was desaturated and they added the color back on top. They've made everything golden. Sometimes faces just look kind of gray with an orangey tint on top. Whereas Naomi Watts has a more natural skin tone on the Blu-ray, she has a flat orange/golden complexion here and her eyes are no longer blue, they're more of a silver/gray. The green foliage and grass of the jungle are more brownish.

Unfortunately, the Blu-ray has a low bitrate VC-1 encode so the grain can kind of fall apart in the compression but overall I think it has a nice filmic look with rich colors. And it's my preferred way to watch it.

[Leonidas King]

Yeah, the 4K feels like a rushed job because Kong: Skull Island was releasing at the time.

We need a director’s approved edition with DV in the near future.

[Mierzwiak]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

LOTR's 4K is far closer to Kong's 4K than not, it's a strange coincidence how so many of the problems on Kong are verr similar to the problems with LOTR. A "PROPER" remaster of either we have yet to see.

Very true and fortunately LOTR doesn't have that weird, awful photoshoppy look (maybe in some VFX shots, but it's not that noticeable in motion), exaggerated by aggressive!!! contrast and HDR. If they did the same with the Trilogy, it would look disastrous.

I also love Blu-ray's color palette, that's how I remember it looking on the big screen. It's a shame compression is so bad, though. I'm sure the original 2K DI would would look amazing with high bitrate and subtle HDR grade, although I still like the UHD, at least some parts of it.