King Kong vs. Narnia

Have seen both of these films recently. Both have of course been hyped up to the extreme.

For a start, I'm not one for mainstream film and my prime objective when heading off to the cinema is not to be entertained (although there are occasions to the contrary when I'm feeling a bit jaded), so I guess I am not the target audience for films of this type. However, I have to say that I think King Kong misses the boat. Too long. I can sit through long films - the length itself is not a problem, but the film needed tighter editing. The action scenes (obviously set up as action sequences for where the real money is - Playstation and PC gaming) should have been half the length and I quickly lost my interest. Too much time was spent on Skull Island. There was a slow-mo action technique interpersed through the film that seemed unneccessary and poorly executed. And too many calculated close-up of expression-filled eyes. Yawn. Wide-open scared eyes looking into the distance - cue scary monsters coming to get someone. Maybe this is a nod to melodramatic films of the 30s, but I found the devices overused and shallow. Naomi Watts and Adrien Brody did shine though and Kong himself was a surprising success. I was glad when it was over though.

Narnia however, I did enjoy. I loved these books as a child and the resulting film fitted with my imagined world of Narnia amazingly well. Although Mr Tumnus looked more youthful than my version. There were many schmaltzy moments, but that was to be expected. With a book full of valour and virtue and personal sacrifice what else can you expect? I had the occasional lump in my throat, but I didn't feel manipulated into my emotional reactions. Tilda Swinton as the white witch was an inspired casting.