| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Billy Pilgrim wrote: |
| joe_doufu wrote: |
And why didn't Kong just jump over the wall or through any of the many visible gaps? Where are Kong's family? Why does nobody mention that Kong is female?
|
Why would he bother? Where's he gonna go? As the film shows you, he's a vegetarian, so he's not going to be looking for the natives for food.
And as for the family, I think it was pretty obvious that during the movie, you see another Kong skull/skeleton. It appears that his partner is long since dead. |
Right. Besides, gorillas don't swim. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
joe_doufu

Joined: 09 May 2005 Location: Elsewhere
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hollywoodaction wrote: |
| Billy Pilgrim wrote: |
| joe_doufu wrote: |
And why didn't Kong just jump over the wall or through any of the many visible gaps? Where are Kong's family? Why does nobody mention that Kong is female?
|
Why would he bother? Where's he gonna go? As the film shows you, he's a vegetarian, so he's not going to be looking for the natives for food.
And as for the family, I think it was pretty obvious that during the movie, you see another Kong skull/skeleton. It appears that his partner is long since dead. |
Right. Besides, gorillas don't swim. |
If Kong is a strict vegetarian, why do the villagers sacrifice people to her? I did see the skeletons but there should presumably be a whole species there on the island... it must take quite a long lifespan to get to that size. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 6:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| Why does nobody mention that Kong is female? |
I was thinking about that. I think Kong is male. It's simple wasn't drawn anatomically correct. Do you think it would have passed the censors if it was? Imagine the size of those jewels on the screen. Don't forget that some Americans were upset at Janet Jackson's tiny nipple. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
joe_doufu

Joined: 09 May 2005 Location: Elsewhere
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hollywoodaction wrote: |
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| Why does nobody mention that Kong is female? |
I was thinking about that. I think Kong is male. It's simple not anatomically correct. Do you think it would have passed the censors if it was? Imagine the size of those jewels on the screen. Don't forget that some Americans were upset at Janet Jackson's tiny nipple. |
Yeah but if they weren't going to digitize the equipment, why do they film all the crotch scenes... like the writer guy driving the taxi under Kong's legs? I think Kong is female... when Jack Black names declares "he was a King in his world" it's intended to show what a fake he was, and what a weird world those rich people were living in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
Posted: Sun Dec 18, 2005 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In any case, Kong is physiologically impossible. Normally, the circumference of bones does not increase at a factor of one as size increases, as can be seen in Kong. Its skelleton would be incapable of supporting its weight. Consider this, if a cube is twice as high and twice as large as a smaller one, its 4 times as large. That's 4 times as many cells to feed if it were an animal. Consequently, larger animals also need far more oxygen and food than smaller ones. This involves the circulation of far more blood. It's safe to say that if a gorilla was that size, it's chest and abdomen would have been larger than portrayed in the movie as it would need larger organs.
Another problem would be the regulation of body temperature. Larger animals have difficulty getting rid of body heat because of their larger size, and thus they have aditionnal adaptations to counter the problem (elephant's large thin ears).
Kong would have looked quite different from a gorilla. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|