King Kong
28 Mar 2007 
4 Comments
Before Peter Jackson made his remake of this beloved classic, I only knew what most people know about King Kong: he’s a great big ape who captures a beautiful woman on a remote island, gets captured himself and subsequently taken back to New York, where he eventually dies falling from the Empire State Building.
So let’s set the record straight. When I saw Jackson’s remake a couple years ago, I was mostly impressed with the production values, but felt the story was a little flat and uninteresting. Jackson was clearly passionate about the project, but I never really bought into the relationship between Ann Darrow (played by Fay Wray in 1933, and by Naomi Watts in 2005) and Kong. On top of that, I thought the movie was overly long and too laden with special effects to be anything other than a big-budget spectacle.
This is basically a re-telling of the Beauty and the Beast story, and while the major themes of the film — the struggle for survival, unrequited love, the repressed sexual desires, island life versus urban bustle — are all interesting, I just can’t help but see this as a special effects action movie, and — perhaps because I can’t believe (or maybe understand) the relationship between Darrow and Kong — the aforementioned themes seem insignificant. But let’s move on to the things I did like.
The film was shot entirely in a studio, which is a very impressive feat. The sets are large and beautiful, and the large scope of the movie is evident. There are two distinct locales (the jungle and New York City), both portrayed wonderfully with intricate detail. The models used, and the stop-motion animation of Kong, are perhaps the most impressive things of all. Remember, this movie was made almost 75 years ago. The effects look ridiculous by today’s standards, but back then, they were groundbreaking.
What I found most exciting were all the action scenes where Kong battles various creatures — a pterodactyl, a giant snake, and some kind of dinosaur — they were genuinely thrilling. Not because I cared about Ann Darrow being saved (because I really didn’t), but because this is the earliest movie I’ve seen with scenes like that. Once they leave the island though, the movie lost me (just like Jackson’s remake did).
When the movie came out, it broke all kinds of box-office record, and single-handedly saved RKO Studios from bankruptcy. It also essentially launched the “big creature” movies (like numerous Kong sequels, and the Godzilla films), making its impact on cinema history evident.
Maybe I just don’t get it, but I find this movie much more interesting from a technical standpoint, and as a sequence of impressive action setpieces, than I ever will regarding its central love story. The final line — “Oh, no. It wasn’t the airplanes. It was Beauty killed the Beast” — is beautiful and perfectly chosen, but ultimately, I didn’t think the movie deserved it.
Film Info
[shameless plug] When I reviewed King Kong for my blog, it became my favorite review.
http://sldawgs.blogspot.com/2006/03/top-250-challenge-118.html
I really had fun with it. [/shameless plug]
That’s a pretty funny review, Will. Well done. How would you rate the movie?
I would probably give it 3.5 stars. It is pretty entertaining.
“perhaps because I can’t believe (or maybe understand) the relationship between Darrow and Kong”
Coming from the girl who has a crush on Geoffrey Rush and Jack Black