King Kong Review

First things first, I’d like to apologize for not coming through with a Narnia review. My life became considerably busier the week it opened and I simply didn’t have time to write one up. In any case, it is a wonderful adaptation and I would highly recommend it to any fan of the book, especially those who read it as a child. As for the subject of this review, I’m starting to wonder if the gods of cinema heard my mocking of this seemingly imaginary box-office slump in my Harry Potter review and answered with King Kong. Before Kong had even been released media outlets were proclaiming it the savior of the film industry. If the initial figures are any indication however, those proclamations were a bit premature. As I type this, film industry analysts and studio executives are waiting for the final weekend tally to see if it’s a modest disappointment or an out and out flop. The sad thing is that this wouldn’t even be such a big deal if the picture wasn’t so damn good. Don’t act so surprised. It’s true, remakes usually suck. A good general rule is the better the original movie, the worse the remake will be, and the 1933 King Kong was and is one of the greatest films of all time. Well forget all you know about remakes, because Peter (Lord of the Rings) Jackson’s Kong is a more than worthy re-imagining even if it falls short of the film-nirvana of the original Kong and the Lord of the Rings series.

Right now analysts are scrambling everywhere to figure out the reason for the shockingly low opening, and like most I’m going to throw my own two cents in. For whatever reason, Kong is drawing awful audiences. I’ve seen the film twice now and both times the theater was filled (though it was far from full) with loud, obnoxious theater-goers that would seem more at home watching 2 Fast 2 Furious or whatever terrible teen-horror movie was out that week. I had such a bad time opening night that I had to wait until I had seen it a second time to write a review, because I knew that I couldn’t honestly rate the movie based on that experience. If this has anything to do with why more and more people are skipping the theater and waiting for DVD, then I can totally understand. The thing is, the film really does demand to be seen on the big screen, so if you’re like me and get annoyed by people who can’t keep their mouths shut (no, I most certainly do not expect a silent theater), go to a mid-week matinee or see it three weeks from now when the crowds have died down, but do not blow the film off. But enough about that stuff, let’s get into some specifics. The thing most people seem to be hung up on is the length. At 187 minutes, Kong 2005 is about twice the length of Kong 1933, but in this critic’s opinion the film does not drag and keeps a brisk pace throughout. Sure there’s plenty I would cut (Mr. Hayes and Jimmy’s storyline in particular adds nothing to the movie and pretty much goes nowhere), but I never found myself getting bored, even during the long voyage to Skull Island. I’d be lying though if I didn’t say that the film really gets going once they do get to the island. While the first act is certainly entertaining, the rest of the film is just non-stop excitement straight through to the closing credits. I remember thinking that they showed a little more than I wanted to see in the promotional clips they give to talk shows, but the truth is no matter how much you see in the trailers and clips, you’ve only scratched the surface. Still not convinced? Oh, I get it. Yeah, I was a little taken aback when they cast Jack Black as film producer, Carl Denham too. This isn’t manic funny-man Jack Black though, this is the less seen dramatic actor Jack Black, and he honestly does a damn good job. However, the character didn’t quite land with me the way I wanted him to (through no fault of Jack’s). This problem lies with Jackson and his script-writers, who made Denham a little campy at times and ultimately unlikable when his true colors are revealed. Now I’ve heard both sides on this issue, but when you get down to it, the Denham in the original was just a driven showman. Jack Black’s Denham is a complete and utter bastard, which effectively robs his final line of any resonance since you loathe the source so much (the line was scripted for the original Anne Darrow, Fay Wray before her death). If Denham was a bit of a step down from the ’33 version, Adrien Brody’s Jack Driscoll is a huge upgrade. While the original Driscoll was a chauvinist pig and a cardboard cutout of a character (who even gets the girl in the end), the character we get here is much more sympathetic and heroic. If you’ve seen The Pianist, you already know how great an actor Brody is, so I won’t dwell too much, except to say he’s as good here as you’d expect. The real revelation is Naomi Watts. She’s been deservedly gaining more and more notoriety in recent years, but with this performance, we’ll be seeing her take off into the stratosphere. Like the two previously mentioned, Watts’ Darrow is a bit of a departure from the original character. In this case I wouldn’t call the tack they take better or worse, simply different. Whereas the original Anne Darrow saw Kong as a monster to the very end, Watts’ Darrow develops a symbiotic relationship with him over the course of the film. This choice changes the whole dynamic of the film’s conclusion, and though I can’t say that it tops the original, it certainly works here. And I can’t go through the major characters without hitting upon the star of the show. I am of course talking about the titular character, the 3000 pound gorilla, King Kong. Gollum may have held the trophy for “most lifelike special effect” for a few years now, but I can say without a doubt, that title now belongs to Kong. There is not a second that Kong is on screen where you don’t 100 percent believe he is there, and there are a couple scenes where if you don’t feel sorry for that monkey, you’re reading the wrong blog. Kong isn’t the only fantastic special effect in this film though (just the best one). The dinosaurs (particularly the V-Rexes) look as good or better than the ones in the Jurassic Park series, and the Kong/V-Rex battle is one of the best action sequences ever put to film. I might also let anyone who has bug-issues know that there are going to be some scenes in there that you absolutely hate. While the effects may not be perfect 100% of the time (the humans aren’t blended in so well in a few scenes), they are certainly among the best I’ve seen in a film so far. One visual I wasn’t as taken with was the slow motion “Jackson-cam” shots, which show up at least once too often. I’m all for directors bringing their own style to a film, but in this case I feel it works against the movie and takes the viewer out of the moment. There’s one scene in particular where we get a slow-mo montage of the characters accompanied by a voice-over that not-so-subtly mirrors them, where I could’ve sworn we were listening to Gandalf talking about elves and hobbits. Thankfully none of these complaints touched the finale in New York. If the film takes off when it gets to Skull Island, New York is where it finally touches the greatness I was waiting for. I really can’t describe what it was about the New York sequence that hit me just right. It’s simply a great payoff for a long ride (though the Empire State Building scene runs a tad long). So there you have it. Is it a perfect film? No, far from it, but it’s easily worth $9 and 187 minutes of your life.