At once maddening and gloriously free and honorous of a mythical Hollywood past which may or may not have roots in reality, Peter Jackson's virtuoso remake of the 1933 classic "King Kong" offers everything for a movie lover to love (and everything for a curmudgeon to hate). Call me amiss, but I must cop to having never seen any of Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" films. Cast-of-Thousands spectaculars have always been distasteful to me. With "King Kong," it seems, Jackson has found a way to keep his megalithic special effects machine working full time whilst paying close attention to a simple plot line (albeit one written for him almost 80 years ago). The resultant film is everything one would expect from a $207 million budget.
The good news is that the story remains intact. The bad news is that the FX, as skillfully as they are employed, remain obtrusive, overwhelming and ultimately distracting. Then again, in a movie about star entertainment attraction --an oversized ape, -- unobtrusive FX would probably be deemed a failure as well. In this case Jackson, remaking a movie he says shaped his childhood and his desire to become a filmmaker, has found a balance as likely to be perfect as any a modern director could reach. The hard thing to get around is that Jackson's glittering Manhattan of the 1930's is envisioned (and then filmed) through eyes of the 21st century. The result is a curious blend of nostalgia and high-technology which, while never less than satisfying, remains always a bit unnatural and disorienting.
The plot should be well known to most readers. Maverick impressario/filmmaker Carl Denham manages to wrangle together a cast and crew to finish filming a movie on uncharted Skull Island and comes away with much more than expected. In addition to dinosaurs and massive insect populations there is an enormous simian worshipped by the locals. The 25-foot tall ape is captured and dragged back to Manhattan eventually falling in love with Denham's leading lady Ann Darrow and his infatuation leads to his downfall. As Denham, Jack Black is masterfully cast, his essential obnoxiousness and egomania working here in his favor. Adrien Brody as writer Jack Driscoll seems to be slumming, while Naomi Watts in the Fay Wray role gives her all and turns in a performance that goes a long way toward humanizing the CGI-animated gorilla and imbueing him with a sympathetic aspect. It becomes obvious that Kong is not trying to abduct Ann, he is trying to protect her from the barbarous humans they are beset with on all sides. What Jackson has over the makers of the original "King Kong" (we won't talk about the Jeff Bridges/ Jessica Lange version here), Merion Cooper and animator Willis O'Brien, comes via two powerfurl weapons: a cast that is superior in every way to the original cast; and a most sophisticated sense of how to integrate high-tech visuals into an ostensibly old-fashioned story. And by the time he is finished pulling off this amazing feat Jackson has made it look like the endeavor was effortless, like it was easy. The director demonstrates an ease and a mastery that is rare, associated most recently with Spielberg and Sinatra. Three hours plus may be a bit long for a meditation on the exploitative nature of show biz, but this version of "Kong" does it with considerable style.
The original is one of my all time favorite movies. I approached this with a fair amount of worry that it was going to, well, suck. I had seen the previews and the look was wonderful, but, it could still, well, suck.
There is a depth to this film that didn't exist in the original. I'm not sure which I prefer (I want to watch this again when it comes out on DVD) but I thought it was darn wonderful. My only (mild) disagreement with your comments ...
Naomi Watts was wonderful, but she's no Fay Wray (of course you have to realize that I am completely unreasonable when it comes to Fay Wray, so mileage may vary)
I'm really enjoying your writing here. Glad that Dave sent the link to the email list.
Eric