The Classic Corner: King Kong (1933)
Imagine a boy. Eight, maybe nine years old, not quite old enough to really understand the world but old enough to know that there’s something beyond the front door. He has his toybox overturned and is holding an action figure in both of his hands. One of them is a plastic monkey his dad bought in a garage sale, the other a dinosaur which he got at some fast food restaurant. He makes them exchange grunted threats. Maybe he stole his sisters barbie to give them a reason to fight over. When he’s done having them talk trash to each other, they run at each other and their mighty bodies collide. He smacks their unmoving plastic bodies against each other. The arm of the dinosaur break off. What this boy is experiencing it nothing less then the greatest showdown in all of history. And that is what King Kong is the cinematic equivalent of.
The movie starts off with film director Carl Denham who decides to go to an island and shoot a movie. He can’t find an actress, so he goes out and just picks one off of the streets. And away they go. The scenes on the ship, which make up the first half hour of the movie, are clearly shot on a soundstage and feature some of the most transparently expositional dialogue ever. But instead of it becoming annoying, it gives the movies a certain charming naivety, which is great to watch.
The actors are so clearly reciting their (godawful) lines it’s like watching the most awesome high school play ever. So they arrive on the island, are attacked by the natives, and then a giant monkey messes up everybody’s shit. Alright, this is what we came here for! Kong is made by a combination of different special effects and still looks great today. The effects don’t look anywhere near realistic, but they’re great fun and very cleverly done. The movie really doesn’t mess around after Kong is introduced: almost the entire time he is onscreen he is either killing something or celebrating his latest kill by pounding his chest. He reminded me a little of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Kong, shown here casually tearing up a goddamn pterodactyl
This movie was released way back in 1933, and has since become one of the most iconic movies of all time. Kong and Fay Wray on the Empire State Building is one of those images that everybody recognizes, whether they like movies or not. So when I sat down to watch it I really didn’t expect it to be this much goofy fun. Why this is still listed as a horror movie on IMDb is beyond me: there is absolutely nothing scary about the film. I can imagine this being a shocker to a 1930′s audience, but as time went on it has transformed into a completely different movie. Which is probably the best thing that could have happened to it: many films of the era tend to feel melodramatic and slow, but Kong still moves at a brisk and light-hearted pace. Not many movies of almost 80 years old can pull that off. Hell, not many people of 80 can pull that off.
You might have seen the 2005 remake of this movie, and it’s interesting how completely different they are when they follow the same story so closely. Much of this has to do with the characters: Naomi Watts plays a down-on-her-luck Vaudeville actress who gets a strong emotional connection with Kong in the remake, Fay Wray plays Fay Wray minus anything resembling a personality in the original. Jack Black played a slithery, manipulative filmmaker who was obsessed with power, Robert Armstrong plays a filmmaker who just sort of decides that faraway islands are neat. But it’s mostly an issue of tone. The remake was an impressive action film, which I actually found rather touching. The original is, in essence, a movie about a giant monkey who punches a dinosaur in the face. And that is something I can wholeheartedly get behind.
Max
A-
(8.5/10)
Have you seen this movie? What were your thoughts on it? Let it be known in the comments!
22 Comments
Fact! Fay Wray is from Ontario, Canada. I think Peterborough, or maybe Pickering. It took me a lot to change my allegiances from her to Naomi Watts’ interpretation of Ann Darrow.
Gasp! And she looked so all-American! What foul betrayal has befallen us?
We’ve been pulling that prank on you guys for a long time. Actresses like Mary Pickford and Norma Shearer are from our lands!
Yer sneaky bastards
I have a giant King Kong poster in my living room. I love this movie for starting special effects. Without out it George Lucas would have never dreamed he could create Star Wars. Sure it’s cheesy, but it’s awful fun and I love thinking how this must have blown people away back in the day!
If you like special effects, keep a lookout for this film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX6DBP0nXIs
I was surprised by how good this film was when I finally got around to watching it. Like you said, the fast pace makes it very watchable and it does have the kind of grand storytelling we’ve all acted out as kids.
It may not have the polish of its later iterations, but the original Kong has more heart and soul than the two remakes combined.
While I really liked this one, I’d have to go with Jacksons version as the better film in a strict sense. Everything he added made the movie so much deeper and more engaging.
I thought the one i saw was the classic…I didn’t know it began from black and white. It will be difficult to find it here
The latest remake is soooo boring, I like the remake before that (the one that i thought was the original)…I really want to see this black and white version
I really liked the Peter Jackson remake, actually. I can remember being very moved by the ending, even though I knew what was happening. They really gave Kong and the other characters a personality, which was rather lacking in the original.
I thought Peter Jackson’s remake was way too long for its own sake. There was certainly a good movie in there but making it over 3 hours is just pushing the limits of the human bladder ahah
Well, some stories take a while to tell. I actually thought it took a really good balance between story and action. Plus, it had a Whilhelm Scream, and they don’t put that in enough movies anymore.
Really nice review. I enjoyed this. You summed it up perfectly. Because the original is regarded as such a classic – which, of course, it should be – it is very easy to forget it’s “a movie about a giant monkey who punches a dinosaur in the face.”
I did enjoy Jackson’s remake, though that was primarily, selfishly, because they made the writer the hero. I mean, that’s something all of us here can appreciate, right?
Yeah, I was really surprised how much fun this movie was. And indeed, Adrian Brody’s character was a welcome addition to the cast. The swipes the remake took at the vanity of the “original” hero are also a lot funnier in retrospect.
Screw the remake. Go with the real deal.
Part of my problem with the remake is that Jackson goes way, way overboard expanding on what’s really a simple picture and in doing so takes all of the fun out of it by virtue of sheer volume of bloat. Maybe you can blame Jamie Selkirk– the editor does seem to have a proclivity for overindulging PJ– but someone needed to make a really judicious edit of King Kong ’05 and trim out the fat. Adding depth to movies is fine– to a degree. When you get to the level Jackson’s film did, you’re not adding depth as much as you’re diluting the elements that make the story so timeless.
The ’33 version– the original, the big daddy of them all, that indisputable classic– is pretty much perfect. It has no aspirations of being deep and meaningful on any substantive level, aiming instead for being thrilling and visceral, which is where it excels and succeeds.
The love (and hate) for the remake seems to be all over the place. I liked both versions a lot, but people seem to be agreeing that this one kicks arse.
Don’t get me wrong, I like the remake on its own merits, but I really wish that it had been leaner. The designs and action are pretty spectacular, and the cast seem to be having a good time too.
Hey Max, nice review. Dare I say the stuff you’ve been doing here is better than your previous work. Keep up the good work, and I bet you’ll be doing this for a living pretty soon!
Oh you.
Ah, your enthusiasm on my attendance is heartening.
The Jackson Remake is a HEADACHE. The Parts where the camera spins around and around and around – OUCH! Adrian Brody is the ugliest wimp in show business. Jack Black is the all time worst actor of his generation. Naomi Watts, like Jessica Lange, never acts as if she could be CRUSHED TO DEATH at any moment. In truth all three ladies would be vomiting like hydrants. Fay Wray, like it or not, could scream better than any chick in Hollywood, before or since. She was tough as nails too, they practically KILLED her making the first movie. No “stunt doubles” for her. You think the 1933 version is a joke? Buy a video projector, then get a screen 10 feet by 15 feet. Then get a big surround sound system with a 12 inch powered bass subwoofer, and crank it LOUD. Play the movie (Ted turner’s colorized version if you can find it)and try to laugh at it. You won’t.
Trackbacks