New York, New York

A group of crossed stories that are just interesting when you take them one by one, but none of it catchs you emotionally, nor the global painting. Paul Auster is not one of my favorite writers (you read a book, and say, it´s good, not a masterwork, but good; but when you read 3, you think, It´s all the same story), and here they take one tale from Auster (not incredible) and try to creat a costumbrist story around it. So, you can see the film, but it´s difficult it thrills you. But if you are Auster´s fan, you´ll like it.

Betwenn 2.5 and 3 stars, but only because I have always liked Spiderman

Our votes for the stories: Woody Allen, 31 points; Scorsese, 30 points; Coppola, 24 points. However, I personally liked much more the funny story from Allen than the others (just average).

Someone told me that the original musical was much more darker and made more emphasis on social aspects... I have also been told that this movie showed how a musical could also speak about serious issues. Well, there is an excess of "glam" on it not to be considered as frivolous (at least for me), and I observe the same plain story as in Romeo and Juliet. I am not a great fan of musicals, although I like some, this is not made for me.

What Peter Jackson does is trying to overcome an apparently simple plot (monkey gets girl) adding human factor (the crew of the expedition), and an amazing environment (Skull Island has so many different animals that it would be a paradise for zoologists). What respects to the scenarios and the many factors and human interests (even the animal ones) involving the movie, he has made a good job; but, after all (and along it progresses) it becomes just an action movie, with rich additions, but an action movie after that. Naomi Watts does what she can in order to do more than the classical character of the blonde that everybody wants to trap, and although she gets much (she´s a wonderful actress with a intriguing and misterious beauty), she can not escape from the complicaticated task she had to do (although she is one the best actresses you can employ in any movie, she is underemployed in this kind of films). The other actors do their job, but are sometimes a little plain and submitted to common places. The story tries to create quite an ambiguous relationship between beauty and the beast, and although nothing really astonishing, it´s true they do that in a very good way, even with some lyrism (Naomi's interpretation is good in this respect; nice scene of King Kong on the ice). So, at the end, a movie you can see, but not a masterwork, and even a little boring in some moments with so much action, but, to be King Kong´s adaptation, is very good.

It has the same good points and defects than the remake: the human/humanoid plot is interesting, the action scenes, not so much. Although the blonde character is not bad, is not as good as the improved, more ambiguous modern version with Naomi Watts. Special effects, of course, are not so good, but somehow, the way the ship crew gets close to the island and the natives seems a little more realistic here, and some characters are more interesting in some aspects, but less in others. Also assuming that the second one comes from the script of the first, I can say there is a balance between both movies.

Haven´t seen it complete, so I should do before making my definitive appreciation of this movie.

More iconic than interesting. The main points of this movie are Audrey Hepburn (more posh than eccentric and charming, and these last characteristics are the really funny ones), the music, and the cat. It gives some interesting scenes and tries to find humor, tenderness and originality, achieving it some times, but it is too much frivolous and according to the tastes of elitist urban high class from New York (although there are some traces of depth on it). Not my style.

It's difficult to make a good story from such a dramatic event.