King Kong Comparison Essay

The book and movie are completely different. It 's like comparing apples and oranges. (I 'm assuming that you used the newest version with Guy Pierce). The biggest difference is probably the ommision of Haydee and Maximillien and Valentine (three of the main character) and the addition of Jacapo. Jacapo does is in the book, but he is never a large character.

Some things are different in the book and movie. Like Sunset Towers and Money in both versions. Sunset towers is luxurious in the book but a bad place to live downtown. The money the will was worth 200 million but in the movie it is worth 20 million. Another difference is that the Wexlers moved to Sunset Towers because they had no money, but in the book they moved because they had money. In the movie Jake Wexler is paying off his debt though they have money in the book. Jake Wexler is a

In reading the book Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, and watching the by the same title, I discovered several large differences. Primarily, the edited and modified parts were changed to make the movie more interesting.

Many directors choose to make many different decisions when producing their version of Hamlet. Every actor portrays the character Hamlet in several ways making each version almost a new story. Mel Gibson's 1990 version and the 2009 David Tennant films are very different in style, scene omissions and several other aspects.

One of the biggest differences between the 2005 and the 1933 versions were the characters. Ann, in the newer King Kong movie, had much more character. We were able to see the back story of her dancing career and how talented she was. Also, Carl Denham was vastly different. In the original movie he was depicted as this great movie maker, but in the newer movie he is characterized as a sleazy guy; overall, he isn't a very good person. For example, he trapped Driscoll on the boat after he refused to write the rest of the script before they left. Jack Driscoll, in the 2005 rendition is no

In fact, Bruce Willis’ films usually bring in large amounts of money are box office hits, but Hudson Hawk apparently was a flop and a big loss. Who could have predicted that?

than all the films that have came in prior to it in several ways. An

Rocky changed the film industry through its success. The movie won a Golden Globe award in 1977 for Best Motion Picture (Drama). This showed the Rocky really was the best movie in its genre at that time. It is also believed by critics to be

It can very difficult to make a good sequel to a recent blockbuster movie. How likely is it that lightning will strike twice, not very. Creating an all new epsiodic event for you already established characters can be daungting and redundant. These icons have proven themselves to be heoroes in the viewers eyes and writers have to raise the bar even further to coerce moviegoers to part with their entertainment bucks.

The studio’s executives were in shock after watch the movie that looked fantastic and it was an epic on a grand scale, but there is no way the studio could commercially release a film that was over five hours long. Frazier being forced to cut the film becomes two hours long. The movie was shortened, but now it made no sense. Characters appeared and disappeared randomly, the plot was impossible to follow, and the dialogue did not make sense at a several key points. The film was disaster. The reviews of the film were terrible, and audience stayed away in droves. On a total outlay of $90 million, the studio recouped less than $9 million. The studio releasing the five and a half hour version of the movie, but it made no difference to the overall financial results.

In my opinion, the deception and trickery in the Twelve Monkeys is the key to achieve its success. The mysterious of the story lends the audiences to think and analysis to several possible answers on what is going on, and the next plot of the story is always surprising the audiences. And also, topic of time-traveling in this film also attractive to the audiences as it is a fresh theme to the audiences in that time. Nevertheless, when a well-made and visually impressive film has separate fan bases because of its director, writer and actors, then turns out to be gripping in its own right, word of mouth will have an effect.

The performance in Die Hard would change drastically if Bruce Willis’s role was changed to another actor or actress, Die Hard would not be the same. Bruce Willis’s role in Die Hard makes it hard to recreate the same movie. The meaning would not be the same, plus it wouldn’t be the action packed movie that the audience would be used too in a Bruce Willis movie. If the role were to be reassigned to another actor or actress the meaning would completely different. The meaning would give off a distinctly different feel to the movie. From watching Die Hard, the movie is an in your face action and has the audiences’ attention from the very beginning.

A good movie can either be captivating or thrilling depending on the plot of the movie. Like the thrill of a rollercoaster, so is the thrill that comes from watching the King Kong movie. It is both captivating as well as intriguing in the sense that it provides rich thematic presence and sceneries. In this paper, the learner will take a look at the King Kong movie from a critical perspective to deduce whether the movie really should be living up to its fame.

A movie’s greatness is often measured by its monetary returns. There are numerous examples of huge commercial successes that are able to draw dollars from people with each iteration of their product even when the movies themselves are less memorable. Think of Fast & Furious or Transformers, hugely popular, even producing a great movie from time to time. Less often, is a franchise that produces a string of great films. Star Wars and James Bond have consistently brought viewers to the box office over decades. Many of those movies will be watched by generation after generation. Then there is the oddity, the financial dud that gets better ratings with time. The Shawshank Redemption didn’t impress on opening weekend. It didn’t have a surge after a limited release with great reviews. It did have a compelling story and superb acting providing the viewer an emotional experience. That experience allowed The Shawshank Redemption become one of the most well-regarded movies of recent history.

Equally, the film’s visual effects are stunning without being overwhelming or redundant. We do not see action sequences repeated from the first movie but fresh new twists that appear as visual candy. Many