I'm ready for the hate mail. I seem to be in the minority when it comes to hating the recent remake of King Kong. While most others are placing it in their end of the year top ten lists, Kong is almost surely going to make an appearance in my bottom ten list (look for those lists soon). It truly is that bad. I don't know what those other critics are seeing. Well, see for yourself as you read my criticism of all three Kong movies. I'll be back with more later. After all, I still need to bring you Capote, both versions of The Producers (so you can see how that remake got screwed up, too), Match Point, Hostel, Saw, and I'm currently watching the work of experimental filmmaker Mark O'Connell, and I'll have a full report of that as well. There's a lot to see so that you'll have a lot to read. Keep on coming back. You don't want to miss it.



King Kong (2005)
Review by Jon Waterman

*1/2

Movie director Carl Denham needs a hit. His claim to fame is exotic documentaries, but these days everybody wants romance in their pictures. So that’s what he’s going to give them, only he’s going to do it his way. Desperate for an actress, he plucks Ann Darrow from the streets and takes her on his boat/makeshift movie set. Along with the movie star Bruce Baxter and the writer Jack Driscoll and a large crew, they drift along the ocean looking for a secret filming location. It is there that Denham hopes to find his movie. He has heard legend that a giant monster lives on this uncharted island. If he can get footage of the beast and incorporate it into his romantic adventure picture, he would be set for life. The only problem is getting everything to go according to plan.

Peter Jackson (director/co-writer along with Philippa Boyens and Fran Walsh) revisits the movie that made him want to become a filmmaker. He really should have let well enough alone. Why would anyone want to remake a classic film, especially one that they hold in such high regard? Do they honestly believe they can improve upon the original? Why not just take some of your mega millions and hype up a massive mainstream re-release of your favorite movie of all time? Or if you really feel the need to remake something, remake something bad into something good. That’s how we got the 1939 version of “The Wizard of Oz.” No matter what you do, don’t create a brand new, flashier update that’s nearly twice the length of, and completely ruins what was so good about, the movie you fell in love with. I just it’s too late. The damage has been done, and not by a 25-foot tall ape.
(more....)


++++++++


King Kong (1976)
Review by Jon Waterman

1/2 star

Fred Wilson, a smarmy oil mogul, packs up a crew to what could be the largest untapped resource of crude oil left on the planet. The place is an uncharted island that may not exist at all. They sail away from Indonesia to this unknown destination, but not before they pick up an environmentalist stowaway named Jack Prescott. Jack is under the impression that there could be a legendary creature on that island and he wants to make sure it’s preserved. Well, before they can even find out, the boat acquires a new passenger in the form of a young starlet named Dwan (not a typo) who looks to be the lone survivor of a yacht accident. The unlikely bunch find the island and the creature and in the process, an adventure bigger than any of them could have imagined.

They may not be able to imagine anything bigger, but anyone who has seen the original King Kong certainly can. I don’t know if this was part of the strategy to differentiate itself from its predecessor, but Kong only gets into one real fight. Sure there’s the climactic bit with the planes (or should I say helicopters – where I think they reuse some footage), but the only creature to creature combat is with a giant snake. And that only lasts for at most two minutes. You won’t find dinosaurs or giant lizards or birds or any of that cool stuff that made the landscape of the original so interesting and magical yet dangerous. Without the action it’s really not much of an adventure.
(more....)


++++++++


King Kong (1933)
Review by Jon Waterman

****

Well-known filmmaker Carl Denham set sail towards his biggest motion picture undertaking yet. After packing a ship with a massive crew, they drift away to an uncharted location. Denham hopes to bring pictures of the exotic landscape and its people back on film as part of his newest fictional masterpiece. But that’s not all he’s after. He has heard stories of the legendary Kong, a giant ape that haunts the primitive natives of Skull Island. This will be the real star of the picture. The only problem is getting the king of the land to play along.

This is the epitome of a great action movie. There’s an air of mystery surrounding us from the time we open on Denham at the boat, and as secrets are revealed throughout the picture, other questions arise in their stead. Especially when Kong enters the fray, you’re not sure if he’s fighting everything in order to save his sacrificial wife or if he’s looking to protect his dinner from other predators. You’re always on edge as the film continually picks up the pace and doesn’t let up until it reaches the climactic, tragic, yet extremely satisfying ending.
(more....)