|
Post by WeMissGamecentral on Dec 19, 2005 14:24:52 GMT
Because it was'nt necessary, LOTR: Return of the King was longer than Kong yet i still saw it at the cinema.
|
|
|
Post by MeesChees on Dec 19, 2005 21:18:22 GMT
I still haven't seen that. Harold said a Georges Clemenceau quote. I think Donkey Kong would be a good leader of lions.
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Dec 20, 2005 0:24:41 GMT
Donkey Kong for Prime Minister.
VOTE NOW!!!
|
|
|
Post by WeMissGamecentral on Dec 20, 2005 14:40:05 GMT
He'd do a batter job than Mr Blair.
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Dec 20, 2005 15:07:44 GMT
King Kong is on four at the minute(the remake with Jeff Bridges), Kong got the birds tits out, does this happen in the new one?
|
|
|
Post by offbeat69 on Dec 20, 2005 15:54:14 GMT
Certainly not! Naomi Watts would NEVER play a role that involved her taking her top off!
|
|
|
Post by Saracen on Dec 25, 2005 23:11:10 GMT
Anyone else seen it yet? i went and watched Kong this morning and it can only be described in two words: F**king awesome!!! i totally agree with you ive seen it twice in cinema already!
|
|
|
Post by Saracen on Dec 25, 2005 23:22:43 GMT
It's odd, Kong is a blockbuster I'm actually defending from the criticism of my friends. Coming over all high and mighty about sticking with the original, as if it wasn't the film that single-handedly invented the action movie genre that my friends all despise. Since when did that kind of film become the sacred cow of bumbling artists? f**k Peter Jackson, f**k remakes of old films, but let's not do the holier than thou act on something that throroughly doesn't demand or deserve it. If it wasn't a whole three hours long I'd go just to spite my friends. no offence but what are you talking about? none of it makes any sense to me.
|
|