Skip to content

King Kong

King Kong

1933′s King Kong is monster movie paradise. It lacks a great deal of character development or plot substance and, instead, revels entirely in its remarkable achievement to bring the monstrosity of a tale to the screen. Make no mistake about it, King Kong is one heck of an achievement. The film is a landmark, bringing to life an engaging horror-adventure story involving everyone’s favorite giant gorilla in delicious black-and-white.

King Kong was made by RKO Pictures and was based around Merian C. Cooper’s concept. Cooper led film production for RKO Pictures in the 20s and 30s, making mostly documentaries before the idea for Kong came to him. He was a major proponent for exploring the technical side of film, which led to his determination to complete a big project like King Kong. Cooper also directed the film, along with Ernest B. Schoedsack.

Bruce Cabot, Fay Wray and Robert Armstrong starred in the picture. The film gained fame not only for the stop-motion Kong and the plethora of other beasts, but also for the screamingly delightful performance from Fay Wray. Wray, actually born in Alberta, had a fairly extensive filmography before King Kong. She had appeared in several short subject pictures throughout the 20s and was in several features, too, including The Four Feathers and The Wedding March. Wray’s portrayal of Ann Darrow, however, would be the biggest role in her career.

Many people are aware of the basic plot of King Kong. Carl Denham, a film director known for shooting in exotic locations, taps the struggling Darrow to come along to a mysterious island for his latest picture. Once they arrive at the island, known as Skull Island, the girl is eventually captured by natives and offered up as a sacrifice to Kong. The first mate of the ship gets a crew together to go find Darrow and they eventually capture Kong, dragging the big ape back to the big city where they attempt to put him on display. Kong escapes and races around New York City, only to be shot down in monumental proportions atop the Empire State Building.

The film’s ending is one of epic proportions and is one of the most influential film endings of all time. The film has been remade twice, with countless updates and additions to the story being featured in several offshoot films involving Kong and other popular movie monsters such as Godzilla. The character of King Kong in the original isn’t much of a character at all, however. He is purely a monster and there doesn’t appear to be any motivating factors for what Kong does, other than purely instinctual. The majority of the characters act the same way, often discarding any real wonder (save for Fay Wray) at the sight of dinosaurs or Kong himself. This makes much of the film feel uninspired, although the impact at the time must have been immense.

Still, 1933′s King Kong is a tremendous achievement in technical work. The stop-motion animation looks somewhat off now in our day and age of CGI, but there is still something amazing about the shots and the work that Cooper and the crew poured into King Kong. The score is quite good, too, with King Kong being considered the most ambitious early film to feature and all-original score. Max Steiner’s compositions drive the action remarkably well, even though some of the effects fall flat as the film ages.

The film is a true classic, there’s no doubt about that. One wonders, though, if the impact of the film might have lasted longer and outlived some of its predecessors had the script been stronger and had more time been spent on character development and putting these people together before flinging them in front of Kong. Perhaps more fleshing out of Kong would have been helpful, too. Had the same film been translated to the screen now, I fear it would merely be an exercise in style and special effects and, like so many films of that type, would fall flat amongst its fellows.

Trailer:

Advertisement
3 Comments Post a comment
  1. Such a great classic! I liked Jackson’s movie, but the first one of 1933 is far away the best.

    April 24, 2007
  2. I’d have to give the edge to Jackson’s King Kong. I’ll be reviewing it shortly (I watched them back to back), but I found the character development and the layered plot more compelling than the original. They also added more elements to Kong and made him a more interesting character than the original.

    The fact that Jackson’s film waits over an hour to actually show us Kong shows the meticulousness he invested in the film and the attention he paid to detail.

    April 24, 2007

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. King Kong « The Canadian Cinephile’s Reviews

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

You may use basic HTML in your comments. Your email address will not be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 203 other followers