Will Collier of VodkaPundit, who presumably, should be one of King Kong's biggest fans, just buries the film:

Quick review of Peter Jackson's new King Kong movie: for God's sake, somebody introduce this guy to a competent film editor and screenwriter.

Longer version (although not nearly as long as the movie): It's not very good. Jackson is an incredibly gifted production designer and producer; he has to be to get movies of this scope made at all, but the sad truth is, he's not a great director.

Will also notes, "The images are beautiful, but the story, which was stretched thin in the original's 100 minutes, just can't hold up to the three-hour torture test". I'm not surprised. As much as I loved the original, it's awfully thin, pulpy gristle to grind three hours out of.

Yesterday, the folks in The Corner had some interesting thoughts on whether or not the film's initial box office was hurt by the combination of gushing reviews that emphasized how emotive Kong was, coupled with the fact that you know he's going to eat the asphalt on 33rd Street at the end of movie.