No matter what the reviews are, I still want to see it!

‘King Kong’: The First Reviews
International reviewers scrambled Monday night to post reviews of Peter Jackson’s King Kong after it premiered on 38 screens at two Times Square multiplexes. All appeared to agree that the film will pack ’em in. John Hiscock wrote in the London Daily Telegraph: “Hokey and clich√àed in parts, thrilling and dramatic at other times, King Kong is reminiscent of both Jurassic Park and Titanic. And like those two record-setting epics, it is certain to be a huge hit.” Baz Bamigboye in Britain’s Daily Mail described it as “jaw-droppingly brilliant: the most entertaining blockbuster movie this year.” Kevin Maher in the London Times commented: “That Jackson’s King Kong upgrades the now hammy original with wit, heart and humor is a pleasant surprise. That it does so by reinventing the action blockbuster, in form and emotional impact, is nothing less than an act of cinematic alchemy.” But several writers also noted that the film will have to become one of the top-ten box-office earners of all time in order to be considered a success. Geoffrey Macnab of Britain’s Independent, who noted that director Peter Jackson poured $32 million of his own money into the film to cover budget overruns, commented, “Even with Jackson opening his check book, King Kong remains a monumental risk.” The New York Daily News is running reviews from each of its lead film critics, Jami Bernard and Jack Mathews. Bernard calls it, “the most thrilling, soulful monster picture ever made. At last, it can be said without irony — I laughed, I cried. … It’s brilliant.” Mathews concludes that it “will further Jackson’s reputation as the leading visionary among fantasy filmmakers and it restores the Empire State Building to the stately glory of its past.”