All my life I've been passionate about movies. I find them to be such an all-involving art form, showing not only sights otherwise foreign to me but worlds, and encompassing so many different skills working together in cohesion - writing, music, lyricism, art form, acting, and performance. The best movies are capable of teaching and enlightening; of making us better people. It is a sublime human creation, which for me is so much more than mere entertainment or hobby.
About Ferguson On Films
Sunday, December 18, 2005
King Kong (2005)
Directed by Peter JacksonWritten by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson (screenplay); Merian C. Cooper, Edgar Wallace (story)
Starring Naomi Watts, Jack Black, Adrian Brody, Colin Hanks, Jamie Bell, Andy Serkis
Genre: Action / Adventure / Drama / Fantasy / Sci-Fi / Thriller
Country: New Zealand / USA
Runtime: 187 minutes
MPAA Rating: Rated PG-13
Evaluation: 9.5/10
by Greg Ferguson
For all my years as a lover of films, I've never fully appreciated the lasting appeal of the King Kong legacy. I've long felt that had the original not been the trailblazing special effects showcase it was back in 1933, it would have been just another of the countless b-grade monster movies to have spilled onto screens throughout the early and middle parts of the last century. Maybe, if not for one enduring attribute - perhaps the singlemost crucial aspect of the King Kong mythos - which at once stands apart from its otherwise typical monster movie fare yet remains obscured by it. Kong was always meant to be a sympathetic character and not simply a straw man villain designed for defeat; his relationship to the waifish Ann Darrow afforded him shades of personality and humanity as, indeed, 'twas her beauty which tamed the beast. As such, his persecution left room for the filmmakers to hold a mirror up to our own specious attitudes and heroism. This much I've understood and admired, but instead of capitalizing on this sentiment or even striking a balance, it seemed as though any emotional connection and behavioural observations were traded off for the blockbuster adventure and eye-popping special effects - a spurious trend which has pervaded so many Hollywood productions since then, even when accomplished particularly well.
Now comes director Peter Jackson's interpretation, which is less of a "remake" than a revision, this time actualizing its full potential. Having stated that the 1933 original was the film that inspired him to make movies himself, his is now the definitive version, after which I daresay it need never be retold again. Immediately, we notice that Jackson's King Kong giddily amplifies the action and thrills of the original and its 1976 remake. Each sequence is fraught with awe and tension even though we know the general outcome of the story and the characters. Consider how tricky and taxing this must have been to make a familiar story exciting all over again and you begin to appreciate Jackson's gifts as a filmmaker (and realize that his Lord Of The Rings trilogy was no accident).
Where Jackson's film is markedly different from the previous two incarnations is in its emotional heft and moral exposition, which is reflected in its inflated running time (just over three hours long). Jackson generously spends about an hour more than the other films exploring not only the relationship between Kong and Darrow, as well as between each of the characters, but the hosility of civilized society versus the hostility of Skull Island and how beauty comes with a price. Of course, it is the relationship between Kong and Darrow upon which the topic of hostility and beauty relies, and where this was muddled in the first two versions (I had always been left with the impression that their relationship was little more than a perverse example of the Stockholm Syndrome whereby the captive begins to identify with the captor), it is given room to grow here. Kong, whose untold history implies cruel solitude behind the imposed walls of his island, has likely never experienced the sort of attention which Darrow at last feels appreciated for giving, and the two develop an affinity and affection for one another that's direct and pure. This is the heart of the story that was somehow always missing.
On its own as a strict action picture, King Kong could have functioned as a decent feature film and still sold millions of dollars worth of tickets. That Jackson aimed for more, and succeeded, is evidence that epic marriages of this sort are viable, if not profitable, and still have a place today. In the hands of another director the tendency might have been to excise that extra hour's worth of emotion and observation in order to serve the basic story (which, ironically, was my singular beef with his Lord Of The Rings trilogy), but thankfully its integrity was preserved. It takes someone who loves the job thoroughly to get it right, and one can only wonder what great films lovers of this one may be inspired to make one day.
(King Kong is currently playing at the Empire 8, Trinity Drive cinema, located at 125 Trinity Drive in Moncton.)
Now comes director Peter Jackson's interpretation, which is less of a "remake" than a revision, this time actualizing its full potential. Having stated that the 1933 original was the film that inspired him to make movies himself, his is now the definitive version, after which I daresay it need never be retold again. Immediately, we notice that Jackson's King Kong giddily amplifies the action and thrills of the original and its 1976 remake. Each sequence is fraught with awe and tension even though we know the general outcome of the story and the characters. Consider how tricky and taxing this must have been to make a familiar story exciting all over again and you begin to appreciate Jackson's gifts as a filmmaker (and realize that his Lord Of The Rings trilogy was no accident).Where Jackson's film is markedly different from the previous two incarnations is in its emotional heft and moral exposition, which is reflected in its inflated running time (just over three hours long). Jackson generously spends about an hour more than the other films exploring not only the relationship between Kong and Darrow, as well as between each of the characters, but the hosility of civilized society versus the hostility of Skull Island and how beauty comes with a price. Of course, it is the relationship between Kong and Darrow upon which the topic of hostility and beauty relies, and where this was muddled in the first two versions (I had always been left with the impression that their relationship was little more than a perverse example of the Stockholm Syndrome whereby the captive begins to identify with the captor), it is given room to grow here. Kong, whose untold history implies cruel solitude behind the imposed walls of his island, has likely never experienced the sort of attention which Darrow at last feels appreciated for giving, and the two develop an affinity and affection for one another that's direct and pure. This is the heart of the story that was somehow always missing.
On its own as a strict action picture, King Kong could have functioned as a decent feature film and still sold millions of dollars worth of tickets. That Jackson aimed for more, and succeeded, is evidence that epic marriages of this sort are viable, if not profitable, and still have a place today. In the hands of another director the tendency might have been to excise that extra hour's worth of emotion and observation in order to serve the basic story (which, ironically, was my singular beef with his Lord Of The Rings trilogy), but thankfully its integrity was preserved. It takes someone who loves the job thoroughly to get it right, and one can only wonder what great films lovers of this one may be inspired to make one day.
(King Kong is currently playing at the Empire 8, Trinity Drive cinema, located at 125 Trinity Drive in Moncton.)
Advertisement |
||
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home