OK we all know the story, have seen one or both previous movies, and have seen numerous satires or takes on it’s basic beauty and the beast storyline. So with that in mind was it worth it for Peter Jackson to do it all over again with different actors?
Well as long as he got something from i I guess it was. I personally enjoyed aspects of the movie, but have no intention, nor need to ever see this or any other take on the King Kong story ever again. I enjoyed the first act set in 30′s N.Y. City. The sets and graphics looked great, the actors (Naomi Watts, Adrien Brody, and Jack Black), were on point, and there was buildup to something. I enjoyed it so much I was disapointed to see things shift to the boat headed for Skull Island. But I knew it had to happen. What I wasn’t quite ready for was how endlessly the time on that island would go on and on and on. It’s not so much for the suspension of belief required to posit an island full of prehistoric dinosaurs, people sucking pods, giant crawlies, and a mammoth gorilla, though this is not the kind of unscientifically correct mies en scene I would normally elect to donate funds to or watch without the thespian endowments of Ringo Starr and alot of hot cave babes. Rather it is for the time to think about things other than some of the superficial stuff on screen that this island hell should have been avoided.
The bulk of this 3 hour film is spent on the island with Naomi Watts somehow not being affected by being shaken and pounded while in the grip of a giant gorilla battling 3 T Rex’s simultaneously and running and climbing at breakneck speed with her in his hand. Ostensibly this is about establishing the Kong-Watts-Brody triangle. Mostly it seems an excuse to fulfill alot of Peter Jackson’s fantasies. The problem with having all this time doing nothing but falling and dodging stuff that makes you go ewww, is that it gave me too much chance to reflect on the nature of the Kong/Watts relationship. And it’s kind of messed up.
Now one angle that makes me ok with the movie in both past and when I can manage in the present, is that of King (as his friends call him), representing the ugly, unlovable guy in myself that the sweet pretty actress sees something beautiful in and falls in love with. One problem with this is that he’s a gorilla. He’s not David Merrick, a deformed but functioning and introspective human being. He’s a big hairy gorilla who pounds his chest to connote superiority and eats trees. He also presumably shits in the woods though we don’t get to see the humongus steaming pile I had hoped would put things in perspective at some point in jackson’s epic. But jesus you got to figure there’s alot of it around and that he and his environment have some odor issues despite the occasional lovely view of the setting Sun.
Now one of the dark and jaundiced places I was allowed by Jackson to go due to the ridiculously unedited nature of his movie (besides wondering if Jackson indeed employs editors for his films), was in finding the similarities between Kong’s macho posturing, intimidating nature, possessiveness, mood swings, and tendency to kill most women, and that of many abusive men and the women who love them in my own past experience as well as those of many friends and coworkers.
Kong abuses her, frightens her, and pushes her around, but he’s also kind of tough and dangerous and protects her from dinosaurs. This is apparently enough for Watts, Fay Wray, and Jessica Lange for that matter, to overlook all the abuse and think about settling down with their monkey-men. And she wants to stay with him. You can see it in her face as she’s reluctantly pulled back to civilization and the now boring writer guy who had seemed very appealing until getting a ride on the wild side. This is a real option to her. Staying in the jungle as the bride of a gorilla who puts her in danger and then shows his sensitive side just enough to make it all worthwhile.
But he’s a gorilla. Think about that. Let the implications roll around your noggin a little bit. And a part of her wants to stay with him.
Immediately those patterns very possibly forged into the DNA over millenia come to the forefront and like many women who date and marry smaller monkey’s, the allure of taming these brutes is very appealing. It’s a turn on. And it’s Peter Jackson’s fault. I blame him for every failed relationship I’ve had. You go to hell Peter Jackson. You go to hell and die!
No not really. I like Jackson and know it’s not his fault but undoubtedly some will accuse me of letting personal experiences and feelings taint my review of his crafty movie.
Well duh.
Personal or not, it’s hard to make a case for this being any more than a gorilla movie with very little to say. It’s a popcorn flick with long boring stretches and a sad ending. I was sad when I saw Kong die as a kid and it was Jeff Lebowski’s girlfriends fault. A 9 year old I saw this one with was similarly saddened and horrified, presumably at mans inhumanity and carelessness. And it it’s still sad watching him slip off the top of the Empire State Building with hurt and betrayed final breaths. This poor misunderstood creature shot at and hunted because of his size and inability to communicate, plummeting hundreds of stories to a city he didn’t ask to come to, does hit a soft spot.
But he’s still a girl eating gorilla.
Which brings me to another point the lifetime on the island gave me too much time to think about: Kong, and the Hollywood complex that made the original, just might be a tad racist. It is suggested that Kong consumed all the past sacrifices offered to him by the islands indigenous folk. But not Fay, Jessica, or Naomi. The islands inhabitants are all dark skinned black people. The 3 Americans are white blondes. Suddenly after years, decades probably, of Kong seeing women as mere floss to clear bark with, he’s smitten by the first white girl he’s ever seen. Jackson offers an element that redeems both himself and the latest incarnation of Kong slightly by having her do Vaudeville schtick for him, and thus showing some moxy and personality that were presumably absent from native girls who have grown up with dessicated parental figures who believe in virgin sacrifices and seem to have a serious vitamin C deficiency.
So that’s cool, and thanks Bob for pointing that out, but it doesn’t clear the original concept, or the still lingering subtext, which manages to have just a bit of the white mans burden mentality behind it.
But this is what unedited escapades on islands full of alot of silly creatures and guys posing with guns gets me in the search for thematic material and meaning. This shouldn’t take away from the probable intent of the movie which is to entertain and pay homage. In that Jackson succeeds except for the interminable periods where nothing is really happening. The movie looks good and everyone is good. Watts especially is terrific. Her early scenes where she plays a down and out actress with varying senses of wonder, confusion, and suppressed fear and naivete work really well in that early Hollywood way we’ve come to expect people (or is it actresses) in that era to talk and emote. I’ve liked her in everything I’ve seen her in and I’m not even attracted to her. Brody rocks if no other reason than he’s from Queens and a Mets fan. Black was born amusing and gets Dio, and that’s all I have to say about that.
As indicated the movie takes place during the era of the original. The De Laurentis version took place in the then present as Kong scaled the WTC instead of the Empire St Building. Perhaps this is one of the reasons Jackson chose to set the piece safely in the past. More than likely it was because that eras lack of satelite equipment and global transport, made it more likely an island with Dinosaurs could exist unkown to society or that said society would take such flimsy precautions in restraining such a beast in a crowded theater in the middle of Manhattan. Ultimately that choice works for those trying to retain some sense of plausability in the implausible.
Though i didn’t think all the CGI in the city worked as well as a guy in a monkey suit and miniatures, most of it looked good and the city had a nice combanation of period realism and of super surrealism. There were some great shots full of emotional storytelling like the one in the city when Watts is seen in the reflection of the doors leading into a seedy club she was about to descend into by Jack Black, who doesn’t turn to look at her just yet. This was an example of storytelling through images that mark great filmaking. It is weighty and profound in its own right and context. Problem is this and other isolated moments of heft and grandeur still take place in a gorilla movie that really has minimal depth and nothing important to say.
See now, I loved this movie. I loved it with that unconditional love that I have for people (and now, I guess, films) that accepts their flaws.
I’ll address a couple of your points before I make a couple of my own that will probably echo yours.
The whole white girl thing: I don’t think Kong ate any of his sacrifices. We’re shown a ‘graveyard’ of skeletons wearing similar decorative necklaces. I think Kong just killed them by tossing them off a cliff after he was done tossing them about. The skeletons and their deco were too whole and untarnished to have been through a 25′ ape’s digestive system. I think Jackson may have realized the whole white thing was just too… ‘white’. Ann does not charm him with her beauty, she charms him with humor. She’s not boring like the native girls who expect to be eaten or tossed off a cliff or played with until broken. She fucking juggles. She makes Kong laugh. I want that too. I want a girl who can make me laugh. And when you’re forced to live your whole life dealing with creepy natives, velociraptors and tyranasaurs, a little humor is a really, really good thing. And then she tells him ‘No!’, which pisses him off, yet intrigues him. Ann is not simply different because of the color of her skin and hair. She is different because she is a mystery and a change of pace to the ho-hum existance that is Kong. This is why he is drawn to her initially. His love for her grows out of the acceptance she has given him.
But maybe I’m a romantic.
Now, I also see Ann’s desire to stay with Kong a little differently than you. The chick is on an iisland with creepy natives, lizards that want to eat her and lizards that eat the lizards that want to eat her before they want to eat her themselves. This place sucks. Who is going to come and rescue her? As much as she hopes she will be rescued by sane men, the odds of them surving long enough to reach her are slim to fucking none. So she can wander off and be eaten, or she can stick with the one guy who has proved that he can protect her from the real dangers of the island. Her decision makes sense to me.
More on this later. I just worked an overnight shift that beat the shit out of me. Lost my focus.
AB
The skeletal remains of the natives appeared to be in pieces. My assumption is that they did not go through Kong’s digestive track but were thrown to the side after he cleaned the meat off them. And whether he eats them or not, he kills the black girls and lets the white girl live. While I agree that Jackson’s Kong is somewhat redeemed by falling for her after she distinguishes herself, there is still a latent presence of the original in which an inborn assumption exists that it takes an American white girl to distinguish herself, to be truly beautiful, to exhibit talent, and to rise above the mundane and the savage.
It’s a small point that a shorter movie might have kept me from even thinking about, but the white mans burden of calming the savage beasts of the worlds jungles lingers in the genes of the movies parentage.
As for Watts wanting to stay. Bob is for the most part right in his supposition of her motivations. I alluded to that desire for the protector being a factor just as it is for the women who enter and stay in abusive and domineering relationships. THey have that similar reason and motivation among others. I just find it a bit primal and unfortunate.
And survival instincts can’t be her only reason since even when Brody got to her she was hesitant, and even after they defeated Kong she at best torn. While part of this is due to sympathy for Kong who didn’t ask for any of this trouble and was just doing what gorillas do, there was a hint of her preferring what gorillas do to all that men do. Some of this is appropriate when you see the mens motivations and greed, not to mention their savagery with weapons, but the part that also rejects the sensitive male stuff that Brody represented saddens me.
Again this is admittedly from a personal point of view and apart from anything Jackson himself probably intended, though I do think the originators may have knowingly or unkonwingly exhibited some of the relationship and racial mores of the day.
And he’s still a gorilla.
I HAPPEN TO THINK THAT YOU ARE RIGHT WITH THE WHOLE BLACK THING WICH IS UNFORTUNATE.I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE WHOLE LIKEING AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP THING IM SURE THERE ARE MANY WOMAN WHO DO NOT LIKE AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP.
I WILL AGREE THOUGH THAT MOST WOMAN LIKE A DOMIANT MALE,THAT DOES NOT MEAN HE HAS TO BE ABUSIVE TO HER.
WOMEN WANT A MAN WHO WILL PROTECT THEM, NO MATTER HOW MUCH EVERYONE CRIES EQUAL RIGHTS AND ALL THAT GREAT SHIT WOMAN STILL WANT SOMEONE WHO WILL STAND UP FOR THIER HONOR.WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME ANY OF YOU STOOD UP AND SAID HEY THAT IS MINE AND YOU CANT HAVE HER…………NEVER
YOU FIND IT TO BE JUEVENILE AND NOT WORTH THE AGGRAVATION MEANWHILE WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU ALL HAD SUCH WONDERFUL RELATIONS. YOU DON’T…I WILL INCLUDE MYSELF TO IM A LITTLE WARPED IN THE HEAD THOUGH SO I DONT KNOW HOW MUCH I SAY HOLDS WATER….
WOMEN DON’T WANT A JEALOUS THUG WHO WILL KILL ANYONE WHO LOOKS AT HER BUT A GUY WHO WILL COME UP BEHIND HER TALK WITH HIS HAND PLACED FIRMLY ON HER LOWER BACK TO SAY I KNOW THAT SHE IS GOING HOME WITH ME NO MATTER WHAT SO TALK WHILE YOU CAN AND THEN BACK OFF BUDDY.WICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPEN WHEN THE DINOS WERE TRING TO GET HER AND SHE JUST BACKS UP AGAINST HIS BODY TO SAY HEY IM WITH HIM IF YOU WANT TO PUSH IT WELL HAVE A PROBLEM BUT YOU CAN SAVE YOURSELF THE TROUBLE AND LEAVE…
THIS IS WHAT WE ALL WANT SOME ONE WHO IS AT OUR SIDES WITHOUT BEING IN OUR LAPS.SOMEONE YOU CAN GO TO THE PARTIES WITH AND HE IS NOTICABLY THERE AS A MAN NOT AS “HER BOYFRIEND” BUT ALLOWS IT TO BE KNOWN THAT HE IS HER MAN AND WILL BE GOING HOME WITH HER SO IM ALL FOR THE DATING KONG THEROY I THINK THERE MAY JUST BE A GORILLA IN MY MIST AT THE MOMENT AND DANM ITS GOOD
GANTOR
Sounds like you took this more personally than I did Gantor, but its good to have you back. My jaundice is now your jaundice. Let us celebrate.
Just one thing. I didn’t mean to imply all women wanted this. There just seems to be an inordinate ratio that do in small town areas like this and who have a somewhat unrealistic vision of the guy you described (as men have unrealistic images of the ideal woman), and in lieu of that ideal would prefer Kong and the primal jungle life to Brody and the cultured city life.
There is a legit debate as to which is better. The former might even be more truly human. It’s certainly been more natural for much of human development. It may still be so. It’s just not my cup of tea. I’ll gladly play the freak role here and admit my own shortcomings as far as many women’s vision of that kind of guy. Women should just be careful what they wish for because the attributes you describe are often mutually inclusive of some of those other less desirable qualities you allude to as well. I for one am more than willing to fight for my friends and loved ones in a protective way, but it’s nmot who I am to be domineering about it, or to feel that way merely because the woman has slept with me. I hate getting too personal with this whole Kong analogy since it’s not a deep movie, but these are all factors of personality types that kept me and my last girlfriend from getting on the same page. In her case she is one of the women who most want the type you describe, and deserve it least because she courts that danger like Watts who turns to Kong for help, is endeared by him for saving her, and never quite getting that it’s his fault and the world he’s a part of, that shes constantly in danger.
That made her a woman to push away rather than pull close in some symbolic public gesture asserting my possession of, and claim on, her. I am more than willing to stand up for a woman’s honor. Not all women or men have honor to stand up for. You are an exception and i would be glad to rumble on your behalf provided alcohol is not involved, but you are wrong when you say none of us have stood up and laid a claim on someone we cared about. As much as you know about me you dont know more, so never say never. IT was not ultimately worth it, and I wish I had taken more agressive measures with some others that might have been. But they were never mine to pull closer so I can’t count them. But others were fought for to the point of highly charged scenes and huge stands. This was done merely because the girl was a part of my life and seemed to demand it, and need it due to all the erraticism and craziness. The better part of me knew that these were indications that they were not worth it.
I will take a stand and fight for anyone or anything I believe in. But I will not beat my chest for chest beating sake again. It may be part of the reason I have been single most of my life and may stay that way. But I require a worthy cause to fight for. I have my causes but I’m not angry enough to fight for one that is part of the problem.
MY WONDERFUL DUDE YOU HAVE AGAIN MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT I AM SAYING WE DONT WANT SOMEONE TO RUMBLE ON OUR BEHALF WE JUST WANT SOMEONE TO FEEL AS THOUGH WE WOULD BE WORTH THE BATTLE.I AM SO PLEASED TO KNOW THAT I AM ON THE LIST OF PEOPLE YOU WOULD STAND UP FOR AS YOU KNOW NOT ONLY WOULD I KILL FOR YOU BUT ID ALSO ALWAYS HELP YOU SHOVEL
LOVE GANTOR
“I AM SAYING WE DONT WANT SOMEONE TO RUMBLE ON OUR BEHALF WE JUST WANT SOMEONE TO FEEL AS THOUGH WE WOULD BE WORTH THE BATTLE.”
THis seems contradictory. Maybe it’s just the wording but it sounds like there’s no real difference here.