CriticSociety- film reviews

Review

King Kong

Director

Peter Jackson

Year

2005

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

As much as I’m something of an anti-fan of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, lately I started getting excited about the new remake of King Kong (1933). I didn’t much like the idea, me being a huge fan of the original, but I do admit that as excessive as he is, Peter Jackson is a quality filmmaker and if he’s as big a fan of the classic movie as I am, which I hear he is, he should respect it enough and make a good film now. So let’s see what he has to offer.

The result is quite a new experience, a re-imagining of the original film, an all-new treatment based on the “beauty and the beast” story that takes itself very seriously. Business isn’t looking good for director Carl Denham (Jack Black), who’s letting his investors down with his “safari movies” and doesn’t have a very viable project in store. It’s 1933 New York, and times aren’t easy for artists, so Denham decides to cling to his one possibility to make his dream picture. He finds a struggling actress, Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts), in the streets, and off he goes on a ship to an undiscovered island where he plans to film his picture. Most people on board, from ship crew to film staff, don’t know the truth, but Denham is smart enough to take them all there, ready to work for him. Darrow herself and the film’s screenwriter, Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody), are among the fooled ones. The destination: Skull Island, where prehistoric life presumably prevails. Once they get there, they find hostility in the natives, and a gigantic wall that divides them from the prehistoric creatures, and the king of the land: Kong, a giant ape.

The story is well-known by film buffs and a blast of imagination. Back in 1933, however, it worked much better, probably on account of people’s capacity to be awed, or probably because it was sold much more like a fantasy than it is now. It was easier to believe that an island is inhabited by dinosaurs and a giant ape when the whole mood was fantastic, as opposed to the sort of realism that’s attempted in this remake. Sadly, when presented like this, the matters that defy logic are much easier to question, like why that visionary that’s Denham would prefer to take the giant ape back home instead of one of the dinosaurs, undoubtedly much more interesting creatures. Is it so it can climb to the top of the Empire State? But how would he know that’s the ape’s fate if he didn’t see the original film?

Most people complain about the overlong first chapter, before they get to Skull Island, and I want to declare happily that I’m not amongst them. While I do think so much time is not necessary, I quite enjoyed the trip, fell in love with Ann, admired Denham, and felt expectant of the end of the trip. What I didn’t like as much was the stay at Skull Island. There, it was all about exaggerating the action, over-exposing the characters (especially those played by Evan Parke and Jamie Bell, in an annoying mentor/protégée subplot) and just taking too long at each step. Plus, and that’s just a matter of personal appreciation, I felt a “Lord of the Rings” undertone that I just didn’t like. It’s not a secret that I’m not a fan of Jackson’s filmmaking style when it comes to action and exoticism, and both the natives and the monsters seemed exaggerated to me like everything has to be EXTRA-peculiar to be interesting. Later in the film, the theater sequence uses the original choreography and Max Steiner score from the natives sequence of the 1933 film, and I wasn’t sure I admired the homage or felt a little homesick.

There’s a lot of richness in the main motivator of the film, the “Beauty and the beast” element, which adds an interest from Darrow towards Kong and gives them depth. When Kong is not beating the shit out of a dinosaur, he’s a pretty interesting character, because he’s so intrigued by Darrow, who changes his life. Her own reactions are also quite interesting and Watts is easily the best performer of the film. This element adds a new layer to the King Kong story, makes it all the more affecting, and changes the whole sense of the final New York sequence, including the closing Denham quote (“It wasn’t the airplanes, it was beauty killed the beast”).

The Denham character was also changed a bit. This guy is much more of an explorer, an entrepreneur, a ruthless artist. Driscoll becomes a much more important player too, involved in the whole process, and also quite an outcast during the trip. Both Black and Brody do a good job at portraying these guys. Also, good work by Andy Serkis playing out Kong (to be digitalized later) as well as that Lumpy character, one that gave me genuine laughs.

When I first saw the film, I was pleased with the scenes that pay tribute to the original, but after thinking and reading a bit more, I was pissed off at the one that mocks the original romantic dialogue at the ship. That’s a self-indulgent Jackson bit that almost dares say that this film (or at least, its dialogue) is superior to the original. That comparison is unnecessary and somewhat offensive. Trying not to be a jerk, I could say it’s also a statement of how movies have changed, how a more realistic dialogue is necessary now to make things better. But if that be the case, what’s with the Parke/Bell subplot, the ludicrous dialogue there, and the tiresome “Heart of darkness” references? And what about the silly transformation of the lead actor Bruce Baxter (Kyle Chandler), and how Captain Englehorn (Thomas Kretschmann) reacts to it? I could go on and on about this. The film has quite a few flaws, and I refuse to dismiss them just because the whole of it, the final result, is a good film. I wouldn’t dare rate this movie with less than three starts, because that’s how good it is, but I also want to make sure to point out what’s bad about it. And this is some of it.

To wrap up, I’ll say that the visual effects are outstanding. Great work reproducing the depression era New York, too! Dream stuff. And that final sequence atop the Empire State is one of the coolest ever seen, no doubt about it. Wonderful costume design, too, and all in all, it’s just a work of art, the whole of it. The music score by James Newton Howard is serviceable but unmemorable. And the script by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens and Peter Jackson (based on the original by Merican C. Cooper and Edgar Wallace) could be way better.

Still a must-see in the big screen, just for the awe-inspiring experience.

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Other reviews of King Kong (2005): Morris

Review

King Kong

Director

Peter Jackson

Year

2005

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Thursday, December 29, 2005

Some people regard the original King Kong as one of the best movies of all time. Or at least a whole lot of them consider it among their personal favorites. I’m just not one of them. Oh, but don’t get me wrong. I love it and consider it a true classic and everything. I just don’t have that special connection with it that so many people seem to have. Because of that, it was easier for me to watch this modern reincarnation as a movie in its own terms. I don’t really remember much from the original except the basic storyline, so there you have it. But I can tell you this: comparisons are somewhat pointless anyway. It’s as if Peter Jackson took Cooper and Schoedsack’s movie as a starting point and exploded it into a huge movie of his own. And the result is nothing short of breathtaking...

Struggling film director Carl Denham (Jack Black) is looking to make a movie in a scale that no one has ever seen before. He’s got a script by renowned Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody) and a whole crew ready to embark on an adventurous trip to Skull Island, even though Denham has not been precisely honest with everyone on board. The new addition is actress Ann Darrow (Naomi Watts), a replacement Denham just found on the streets and convinced to go along for the ride. What they ultimately find in this mysterious island is something beyond their wildest dreams…

I’m going to start commenting on the movie by stating that it is not perfect and by getting the bad out of the way first so that I can continue praising its impressive achievements in the next paragraphs. Much has been said about the first act being too long for its own good. And I’m just about to join the chorus: the first act really is longer than it needs to be. Jackson takes a little over an hour just to establish the characters and situations they’re going through. That is a lot of exposition if you ask me, and the movie tends to drag here and there. Now, I’m no filmmaker so I can’t really claim to know what a good solution might’ve been, but I can say that, for example, the entire parent-son subplot regarding two members of the crew, Hayes (Evan Parke) and Jimmy (Jamie Bell), could’ve been trimmed. We only need to really care for the three main characters (four if you count Kong) so why waste so much time on others?

That said, King Kong is one of the most exciting, adventurous, drool-inducing, heart-pounding blockbusters of all-time!

The movie starts with a nicely-put-together montage that essentially shows us what life was like in 1933 New York in the middle of the Great Depression. Then we are introduced to Ann, Carl, Jack, Capt. Englehorn, the boat crew, and the film staff. Soon they are all off to the adventure, getting to Skull Island and being captured by creepy natives, who then kidnap Ann and offer her to Kong. If all of this sounds too much like spoiler material, don’t worry, this is where the meat of the movie really starts… and doesn’t literally let you go until the movie is over.

Without delving into specifics, I just need to say that the second act of the movie, which takes place in the island, is one non-stop action scene after the other, with all of them delivering as much excitement and entertainment as a movie can do. There is a jaw-dropping brontosaurs rampage that is like nothing I had ever seen. There is an unbearable insect attack that is not for the squeamish (me included). And then there is a 10-minute bloody fight between Kong and three tyrannosauruses that is an instant classic. Once the movie gets to the third act, back in New York, we’re exhausted, but hungry for more. And boy do we get it in the form of the impressive Empire State attack. Now, I’m running out of adjectives here, but this scene is glorious beyond words. I could feel the adrenaline, the vertigo, the danger. I was there and it was exhilarating. Filmmaking at this scale, and done with such expertise, comes only once in a while. But Peter Jackson did it.

For all the exciting and huge scenes in the movie, I still count a couple of quieter ones as my favorite. The first happens just as Kong is fighting the last T-Rex, with Ann in the middle of both. She suddenly turns to Kong and steps behind him, acknowledging him as her protector. There isn’t a more magical moment in the movie. What happens after this is also delightful, but I’ll let you discover it for yourself. My second favorite scene happens almost at the end of the movie, so I won’t go into details except to say that it takes place in Central Park and it’s between Kong and Ann as well. If I recall correctly, what Jackson brings to this movie that is new to the proceedings is a more intimate relationship between these two characters, a relationship that never ceases to be between a savage beast and a fragile damsel, yet it feels true because of what they have both been through and because of the realistic way it develops. Their attachment is so honest that at the end tears inevitably come. This movie has one big heart, and therein lies its overall success.

Now, for all the genius of Peter Jackson, he certainly surrounded himself with a dream team that made what we see on screen possible. The special effects are brilliant. We still feel like some characters are being superimposed to a fake background, yet the work they did with the “living” creatures is mesmerizing. Never for one second do we not believe that Kong is real. And the same goes for every other specimen in store. Even Kong’s eyes have life in them. I was floored. The photography, costumes and production design are also impeccable. And James Newton Howard delivers a fantastic score that is not intrusive in the least, but fits perfectly.

The movie belongs to Kong, and special notice should be given to actor Andy Serkis. He actually played the giant ape before getting transformed with digital effects into what we see on screen. His is the work of a true artist. And he’s quite good in the human role he takes as well. Naomi Watts is the second standout, for her role is perhaps the most difficult of all. We have to believe in the relationship between these two for the movie to work, and having shot most of her scenes with nothing in front speaks volumes about her talent. Jack Black is surprisingly fine as Carl Denham, and Adrien Brody elevates a role that is there mainly to be Ann’s love interest. The rest of the cast is uniformly good.

A little bit of extra fun: spotting all the references to the original movie that screenwriters Jackson, Fran Walsh and Philipa Boyens specifically placed for die-hard fans. Their movie is an exemplary homage that takes a life of its own. And I can’t think of a better compliment...

“It was beauty killed the beast.”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Other reviews of King Kong (2005): Groucho