|
And I guess I kinda do. Actually, I don't, I hate monkeys very much. But that's beside the point. And I don't think
you're supposed to like Kong much here; that will change with Peter Jackson's version of this film though. Speaking of which,
it was EXTREMELY difficult to critique both films seperately. I was sorely tempted to group both versions together in one
review but thankfully I decided not to. One reason for this is because, while I will be making comparisons to both later
on, they are two different films and I don't think it would be right to group both and do a compare/contrast thing. Anyways.
Here it is in all it's glory. It's difficult to know which way the film director and writers, etc. were going with
this film. It's obviously racist (look no further than the island natives, and even Kong himself). But Kong seems to be
more like the noble savage here: he is mean yes, but he's an animal. And he's unjustly taken from his home to be displayed
like a museum piece in New York. He even treats Ann kindly and puts her safely away from the airplanes at the end of the
film. So I'm not sure if this film was meant to be some thing of an environmental awareness film, or a flat-out horror film
(which seems a little funny what with the horror films we have now), or even some sort of psychological film. There's not
much here in the way of psychological thriller or a 'thinking film', except for the name of the island (Skull Island) and
I don't think the film-makers would have made that sort of film at this time (critic Danny Peary would gladly disagree with
me here haha). The only way that this film is for environmental awareness is that Kong is taken from his home and more or
less abused in his trip to New York and is put on display as some sort of primeval, last of its kind wonder. But Kong does
such horrible things to people that it's hard to feel sorry for him and we're not supposed to sympathise with him here. So
the only thing I can think is that this film is a horror film. Kong certainly is horrifying; he's really big, and really
ugly, and he eats people and kidnaps Ann and does scary things like terrorize New York (you kinda do feel sorry for him as
he dies, though). The island itself is scary too. Dinosaurs are its primary inhabitants (as well as giant bugs, but that
scene was cut because Mr. Cooper said it was too horrifying; and rightly so!). I wonder if the natives were supposed to invoke
horror as well; they certainly don't now, but unfortunately I think that was their purpose in 1933. Their dance is creepy
in it's own right, even now, since any sacrificial dance is disturbing and unnerving. I can only think that Skull Island's
name comes from the idea that this is a horror film and it is meant to play with our minds and scare us; hence the name 'Skull'. There
is a sense of wonder and awe in this film. When you see it, even though it is racist and cheesy and the effects are silly
by today's standards (but you must still appreciate what they did in the 1930s; stop-motion photography was totally wicked!!)
you still get the feeling that this would have been the 'Harry Potter' or 'Pirates of the Caribbean' (you know how I had to
add that....) of its time. From the moment the old man remarks on the absurdity of the voyage at the very beginning to the
first encounter of the natives at their dance, there is a sense of greatness. Even watching this film today it feels cool.
Just really cool. However, aside from the awesomeness of this film, there are a few problems: as you already know, the confusion
as to how this film should be seen (are we advocating for giant monkey rights or are we being scared out of our minds?) ,
and also the acting. True, acting standards are different now than they were then, and so the acting here is more silly,
but I don't completely hold this to the film. I actually liked the man who played Carl Denham. But Fay Wray......all she
did the entire film was scream in the paw of a huge gorilla. If all an actress needed to do in a film was scream and act
scared convinvingly, I would be Hollywood's next favorite girl. And Ann and Jack Driscoll's romance? He knows her for five
minutes and gripes about women on ships, then says 'I love you'? No. Not even then is this acceptable. Red flag, honey.
Give him time to get to know you. Oh well. Singleton that I am, who am I to judge? This film is spectacular.
It's not fit for the current era but for past times, but oh well. It's still excellent. And one of my favorites.
|
