Talk:King Kong (1976 film): Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
m {{HorrorWikiProject}} |
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 5 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 5 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Film}}, {{WikiProject Horror}}, {{WikiProject Tokusatsu}}, {{WikiProject United States}}, {{WikiProject New York City}}. Tag: |
||
(34 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header}} |
|||
{{FilmsWikiProject}} |
|||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|1= |
|||
{{HorrorWikiProject}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Film|British-task-force=yes|American-task-force=yes}} |
|||
==Response Section== |
|||
{{WikiProject Horror|importance=Mid}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Tokusatsu}} |
|||
I've recently been deleting some negative comments regarding the film that have been inserted at the bottom of the "Response" section. The only reason I've removed them is because the comments are unsourced and, therefore, simply sound like the opinion of the editor who made the additions. It should be pretty easy to find citations for the claim that most people feel the film is "vastly inferior" to the original, or that it allegedly received "mostly hostile" reviews at the time of its initial release. I think both of these views are already addressed in the article, but from a more reality-based perspective, in the line indicating "While the film received mostly mixed responses from critics, especially from fans of the original ''King Kong'', it did receive extremely positive reviews from several prominent mainstream critics." This clearly shows that the film was judged unfavorably by some critics in comparison to the original. Also, I don't believe the film received any "hostile" reviews outside of the small fantasy film fan magazines (such as ''[[Cinefantastique]]''); most of the major reviewers had genuinely mixed reactions to the film. Note [[Vincent Canby]]'s review in the ''[[New York Times]]''[http://movies2.nytimes.com/mem/movies/review.html?_r=1&title1=&title2=King%20Kong%20%28Movie%29&reviewer=VINCENT%20CANBY&pdate=19761218&v_id=27392&oref=slogin] that found much to praise and pan in the movie. I think that particular review was very typical of most of the critical responses to the movie.[[User:Hal Raglan|Hal Raglan]] 20:40, 3 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low|USFilm=yes|USFilm-importance=mid}} |
|||
{{WikiProject New York City|importance=Low}} |
|||
}} |
Latest revision as of 05:51, 16 February 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the King Kong (1976 film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Categories:
- Start-Class film articles
- Start-Class British cinema articles
- British cinema task force articles
- Start-Class American cinema articles
- American cinema task force articles
- WikiProject Film articles
- Start-Class horror articles
- Mid-importance horror articles
- WikiProject Horror articles
- Start-Class Tokusatsu articles
- Unknown-importance Tokusatsu articles
- WikiProject Tokusatsu articles
- Start-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- Start-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- Mid-importance American cinema articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- Start-Class New York City articles
- Low-importance New York City articles
- WikiProject New York City articles