"With the 2006 remake, it becomes the most expensive f*cked-up beastiality subtext flick I've ever seen. PJ tries and fails to make Kong a victim of...something. With such a crazy love story, why bother having Adrien Brody then? I mean, besides the most f*cked-up love triangle in this decade so far?"

I find that very funny. Yea, one hell of a love triangle isn't it? It goes to show that some women really do like a little "animal" in their man.

I think as far as remakes go, perhaps another good reason they usually aren't as successful nor as good as the original is simply because we know the story. It was told once, and that same "magic" doesn't occur the second time.

I know it's discussed here how Hollywood has to make remakes because it can't come up with anything original. Sometimes, maybe that's the case. If KK was a new story it most likely would have been better received. Imagine what a spectale it must have been when the 1933 version came out.

I saw the recent remake of "The Omen". The storyline/script was faithful to the original, the acting was good, but it still wasn't the same as the original.

TIS