 ""Why'd you think I brought all those gas bombs?"" | 2009-10-07 |
| - Reviewed By orbmagnet |
To be perfectly honest, I always have mixed reactions about all three King Kong films: the original 1933 version, the 1976 remake, and the 2005 remake. I love 2005's special effects and the perfected image of the giant ape, but having it set in '33 again didn't make it all very special. I found Grodin's performance in 1976 very over-the-top, but the chemistry between girl and ape really improved. Now with 1933, it's also a mixed bag. Yes, it's am absolute classic and it brought an entire galaxy of upcoming monster movies. Fay Wray, Robert Armstrong, and Bruce Cabot gave terrific performances. The music is authentically primitive. The special effects are still spectacular and revolutionary, even if they do look very outdated in our modern time. But why did I give this movie four stars instead of five? Well, it's because, since it was still a very early time, King Kong and Ann Darrow are both very . . . two-dimensional. Here, Kong is just a monstrous ape, and we see him only as a plain antagonist. At least 1976 and 2005 gave him a slightly better personality: he's a beast who finds himself someone that he has fully cherished for the first time. Ann Darrow does nothing but scream whenever she's with Kong, and since it was way back in 1933, she's really a typical damsel in distress, and she finds nothing fascinating about Kong.
So yes, I have mixed feelings for all three Kong films. I do like them all for very specific reasons, but I don't consider any of them as a favorite of mine. |
| |
 "One `monster' of a classic..." | 2009-09-24 |
| - Reviewed By User: ANCOMAI0I7LVG |
I guaranty you that when `King Kong' was released way back in 1933 that no one, and I mean NO ONE, even entertained the notion that it would turn into a classic to redefine classics. Sure, they probably thought it would rake in the big money and that the special effects (which are quite unbelievable even today) would be the start of something wonderful, but to become a cinematic staple; I highly doubt that idea was even considered. But, regardless of their initial thoughts, `King Kong' has become as legendary as the title character, and for good reason.
Now, I will let you know this right off the bat; I have seen both this film and Peter Jackson's 2005 remake and I firmly believe that Jackson's film is superior. Know that, because, while I am going to praise this '33 classic I am also going to try and point out the reasons why Jackson's is the better film.
Please, devoted fans, don't click the `unhelpful' button just yet.
Most everyone knows the premise of `King Kong', but here is a quick rundown. Carl Denham is a movie director who wants to give the public something they've never seen, and so he gets a large crew to travel to a distant island no white man has ever seen (well, except the one that gave him the map) to film a moving picture with the mythical beast known as Kong. When they arrive his leading starlet, Ann Darrow, is taken hostage by the natives and offered to Kong, who falls in love with her.
What this '33 version does extremely well is take the standard `movie monster' formula and perfect it, with state of the art effects that are still mind blowing today. Don't get me wrong, there is no way that these effects can technically hold a candle to those of today, but they are still impressive. I couldn't believe that these came out of 1933, they are truly remarkable. Most of the older films suffered from the lack of reality in their special effects, but nothing is taken away from this film at all. The action sequences are all superb, and there are a lot of them; each one as exciting as the last and completely engrossing. The acting is also quite good for a film of this nature. One has to remember that you have to understand the genre before you can critique a film. Monster movies are made much differently than dramas or comedies or epics and so you have to judge accordingly. For a monster film, the acting is spot on. Fay Wray is totally believable as the wide eyed damsel in distress and Robert Armstrong is fabulous as the greedy in-over-his-head director; and macho man Bruce Cabot makes good use of his character to create a hunky (and even realistic) hero.
So, for a monster film this one is top, top notch.
But, and here is that dreaded `but', this is just that; a monster film. Now, I admit to having seen Jackson's film first (how did THAT happen?) and so I was expecting something else from this version, but regardless of what I was expecting or what I saw first I feel my opinion would still be the same. What is so glorious about Jackson's reinterpretation is that he takes the genre and adds so much warmth and depth. Devoted fans of the original have attacked the '05 film rabidly, but I feel that is unfair.
IT IS POSSIBLE TO ENJOY BOTH FILMS PEOPLE!
Yes, Jackson's film is three hours long but what he does with those three hours is phenomenal. I don't understand the complaints about the beginning, for Jackson actually establishes these characters as real people and makes us like or dislike them depending on their depictions. We get to know who they are, which helps us to follow their storylines later in the film; and his reinterpretations of Skull Island are impeccable (those graphics are TO DIE FOR), and the pacing is flawless, that final Empire State Building scene is flawless (and one of the best scenes in cinema this decade) and the fact that he actually gets a deep rooted emotional response from the audience based on the love blossoming from a woman and an oversized monkey is just remarkable.
So, I don't want to review Jackson's film (I'll do that later) but I just wanted to point out that they are two separate films. In the 30's you just didn't make relatable monster films. The point for `King Kong' was not to reach out emotions but to excite and thrill us, and it did just that, but as Jackson (and many other modern filmmakers) has proven, today you don't have to make a conventional anything anymore. It is possible to blur the lines between genres and offer us something that excites all of our senses, giving us something funny, scary, moving and all around engaging without slacking in your delivery.
Yes, the original `King Kong' is a classic, and deservedly so; but Jackson's `Kong' is a much more complete `film' in every sense of the word.
And `YAY ME' on review #1,000!!! |
| |
| "Incredibly Dated? Sure, But That's Part Of IT's Charm" | 2009-06-30 |
| - Reviewed By mwarren122 |
King Kong was groundbreaking on all counts, but one would probably realize that this movie may not be a movie that has held up. I digress on that one. The special effects may be incredibly dated, but unlike some bad effects, the obviously slow and stop motion look gives it an incredible charm. Besides, I have always loved stop motion (really made famous by The Lost World, which by the way is another film worth watching), so King Kong actually benefits from stop motion.
Another thing that makes it great to watch is the plot actually holds up. Like Gary F Taylor said (on a different version of King Kong), it's got a good story to see why this movie is entertaining. Sure, it's a rip-off of the corny and boring beauty and the beast fable, but that's not a real big deal. It's still great to see a Monkey (portayed as a monster) to actually show a bit of compassion (come on, I know that word and I have it, even if it doesn't seem like it). And there's plenty of action scenes, as watching a stop motion dinosaur attack a crew going down the will never lose it's charms. Never.
Still, King Kong is not without it's weak points. The stop motion isn't a big deal, it's just some of the scenes that are utterly mundane and boring. When the monstrous ape isn't even on screen, the scenes tend to drag a bit, and, such as the beginning or whenever they are on the ship, the movie turns into a borefest. The wooden dialogue (not in part of the actors, the script) are about as interesting as watching paint dry. Sure, it's supposed to move the story, but at that time, I was hurrying up the story. Thankfully, there aren't a whole lot of this, but it's still boring as _____.
I'll admit I admire the film more than I enjoy it (to think this kind of movie was made in the Great Depression!), and my high rating comes from that (which kind of makes it obsolete for it to climb anywhere in a personal list of my favorites). King Kong is still an important film, and still is quite entertaining. I was intially skeptical about watching this, considering it was mostly for historical facts and nothing else beyond that, but it's not that. Besides, I was actually quite surprised how much I enjoyed watching King Kong come to life. Certainly a lot better than watching him come alilve in CGI, I think (not to knock Peter Jackson, but still).
B+ |
| |
| "THE GREATEST GIANT MONSTER FILM OF ALL TIME!" | 2009-06-03 |
| - Reviewed By User: A1ER6IYOMM8VCT |
I am a huge fan of stop motion effects and what better example of this process than King Kong! Harryhausen would take over as king of Stop Motion, but without Kong, there would be no Harryhausen!
This is one of my favorite movies of all time and the DVD is nothing short of spectacular! Not being old enough to have seen this iconic film in a theater, I was finally able to watch it in my home theater on a 10 foot screen! As the movie began I was amazed how clear the print was and I noticed little things I had never seen before. This is pretty amazing considering I've seen this film over 100 times. The sound is still mono, but it's clear and it's would be hard to really improve on this. The film holds up amazingly well and is the definitive giant monster movie!
King Kong is the ultimate adventure film and I doubt it will ever be surpassed. One of the most intriguing things about this film is that Kong is a rampaging monster and never steps out of character, but in the end when he's being attacked on top the Empire State building, you can't help but feel sorry for him! Never has an eighteen inch puppet ever evoked so much sympathy! It truly is a masterpiece and I can't even imagine never seeing this film!?
The second disc in loaded with wonderful bonus features including two long and interesting documentaries. I bought the box set which includes the original Mighty Joe Young and Son of Kong on separate discs, which are sold separately for those who only want certain films in this set.
All three films are great examples of Stop Motion, so it's an essential set for fans of the genre. The set includes the same 2 disc special edition of King Kong and two other classic stop motion films! All the films have been re-mastered and look better than ever!
I know that many were disappointed that the original "spider" sequence was not included on the Kong set, but the footage has yet to be unearthed! They did the next best thing and it is interesting to see the re-constructed scene.
I had reviewed this film several years ago, but somehow it disappeared!? |
| |
| "Still the King" | 2009-05-31 |
| - Reviewed By mackshere |
Man, this is totally freakin' awesome. Filmed nearly 80 years ago, this classic King Kong film still is completely fascinating. The stop-motion animation is outstanding and very realistic looking.
Ebert said "the effects are not up to modern standards"??? Huh? I strongly disagree. Compare this to Indiana Jones 4, I Am Legend, The Mist, Anaconda, or any of the new CGI footage inserted in the original Star Wars trilogy. It's not even close.
Now, the recent King Kong adaptation did have some remarkable computer effects. But this original, filmed in glorious black & white, harnessed a certain energy that was much more ferocious and primeval. There is no drawn out buildup to the action. No cute little ice skating scene. No Jack Black/comedic elements. Oh no no NO! This is no friendly, oversized gorilla. This is KONG, the 8th Wonder of the World.
It doesn't get any better than this. |
| |
| "Not just a movie..." | 2009-05-06 |
| - Reviewed By barrie7 |
but a major event in American movie history. Friday evening, March 24, 1933, was when the motion picture changed forever. A movie with horror, romance, action, adventure, and full of trills. King Kong was a masterpiece of story and special effects and NOW it is back newly restored and digitally mastered with TONS of extras. Besides the commentary you can listen to during the movie there is a second disc full of features, from The Making of Kong to a documentary on RKO Radio Pictures, plus postcards, a 20 page reproduction of the original 1933 program and much more. Hours more!
And the film has been restored - all the scenes that were cut out have been replaced!
Pop the popcorn, dim the lights and enjoy one of the best movies EVER made. All in a cool tin!
|
| |
Expedited Available
