by Georgie


 Being a nostalgia addict, I had to see the King Kong remake on opening week and it had to be at a real theater. I do not wait for the DVD with stuff like this. This particular film really brought me in touch with my great-grandparents, great uncles, great aunts, etc., most of whom died off by the 1980s. Mind you, I would guess that a few of them probably saw the original 1933 film in some Louisville theater that has been torn down in once nice neighborhoods that are now decayed ghettos. I would even imagine that a showing of the original was a date night that came before a marriage and children who were to become my grandparents. Take your girl to see King Kong. It seems like a moment in the 1930s that is worth replicating. On that premise, Peter Jackson's remake delivered.

Simpler times... A love affair between a big ol' ape and Fay Wray and we think we live in times of deviant perverted behavior nowadays. That movie was not really a monster movie at all and certainly not a horror film. The ancient Greeks wrote all the good stories and we've just been recycling them ever since. If you think about it, even the movie Billy Jack is really the same goddamned story as King Kong. Considering the simplicity of the story and the fact that the classic Greek stories always work, this movie almost can't be ruined as long as it has a budget and the monkey doesn't look silly.

I went into the theater thinking that the movie would probably be visually stunning with a good looking monkey, beautiful computer generated effects, a shitload of product placement and no real substance. I also expected the Fay Wray role to be played by some flat-ironed blonde hack actress with big tits who is probably afiliated with both Scientology and PETA that would be the perfect image for suburban teenaged boys to think about when they jack off. Casting like that insults me but fortunately they casted Naomi Watts who was not incredible but at least she almost looked like a old-time actress in the film. I was pleasantly surprised to find that King Kong was a period piece set in the 1930s, which is something I had so badly wished for with Spielberg's War of the Worlds. The 2002 version of The Time Machine was a great looking period piece (although it became an absolute mess of a movie in the last 30 minutes). The acting in King Kong is a little better than you'd expect in a Star Wars movie but wasn't great. Jack Black did not pull off this particular role. The product placement was there but it actually added to the 1930s feel because that era was heavily commercialized anyway. It's a three hour movie and it really only needed to be two and a half hours long.

No complaints with King Kong. It's a well-spent $8.50 for sure and just getting that old-time cinema feeling from a good looking modern movie is an amazing feat for Peter Jackson. It's really nice A- movie.



Back to Movie Reviews
1 1