King Kong series

  • King Kong (1933)

    King Kong (1933)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (On DVD, May 2018) While it’s a cliché to say that older movies are more impressive for their story than special effects, I found myself thinking the exact opposite about the 1933 version of King Kong—I found much of the special effects impressive, but the story underwhelming. That’s not a constant throughout the film, mind you—the first act of the film offers a compelling look at early-thirties New York City, especially when events conspire for some characters to get out of the city quickly … and finding no better place than a departing expedition. Alas! That expedition happens to go hunting for a mythical monster on an isolated island, and much of the rest of the story is familiar to the point of being dull. Fortunately, that’s when the special effects take over the story. Watching the film made me realize how indebted to the original was Peter Jackson’s over-bloated 2005 version. What the original h King Kong as in its favour is pacing—at barely more than two hours, it moves more quickly than we’d expect. When I’m not so happy is with the finale, which leads to a trite (and nonsensical) “beauty killed the beast” statement that really doesn’t wrap up anything. Still: 1933’s King Kong remains a landmark movie for the fantasy genre and for blockbuster filmmaking. It generally holds up even despite its significant ambitions in terms of special effects. And while I’m disappointed in the story, this may be more out of over-familiarity than anything else—when you can anticipate every sequence because the film’s been absorbed in the popular imagination, it’s normal to be less than surprised at the result.

  • King Kong (1976)

    King Kong (1976)

    ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

    (In French, On TV, December 2005) Some childhood memories should be left alone, and the seventies remake of King Kong may be one of them. Another look at it, post 2005-King Kong, largely serves to make the Peter Jackson effort look good: The script is even more tedious than the 2005 version and the special effects really haven’t aged well at all. (Here’s a piece of trivia for you: It won the “Special Visual Effects” Oscar in early 1977. The next winner in that category, of course, would be Star Wars.) Fortunately, there are still a few good things about it: Jessica Lange (in her screen debut) still looks great thirty years later, Jeff Bridges is delightful in an early role as a shaggy photographer and the World Trade Center is prominently featured. The opening sequences have a charming feel to them as a petroleum expedition is efficiently dispatched to The Island. Things start to sour soon after, as the film grinds down to a halt to go through all of the expected plot points. King Kong himself is a disappointing man in a suit, even if said man is Special Effects legend Rick Baker. It adds up to a fine piece of seventies blockbuster entertainment: Sometime tedious, sometime earnest, occasionally fun, but certainly not something that escapes its context.

    (Second Viewing, On Cable TV, April 2020) I have changed my mind. Having seen the other versions of King Kong, I go back to the 1976 one feeling as if it’s my favourite. There’s some nostalgia at play here—I recall seeing it on TV as a boy—but it’s also because it’s relatively well made. I like the mid-1970s feel, I like the techno-thrillerish approach, I like the links to the 1933 version (such as having an actress on board the exploration ship) without the endless CGI excesses of the 2005 version. I certainly like that we spend more time on Manhattan than on Skull Island. I like the gradual mystery—even if we know damn well that there’s a giant ape behind the gate. Even forty-some years and one 9/11 later, this is one of the most striking uses of the Twin Towers ever put on-screen. The plot is admittedly a bit dull, but the execution is fine. Some (but not all) of the special effects hold up—and Jessica Lange, in her first film role, is a special effect of her own. This is Kong filtered through the 1970s disaster movie lens (director John Guillermin had previously directed The Towering Inferno) and it has the kind of accidental details that anchor this film into a now-remarkable period feel. The 1976 version of King Kong is not the best, the slickest or the most innovative… but it just may be my personal favourite.