The Passion of the Kong
How to Turn a Classic into a Masterpiece
An Appreciation by Barry M. Lamont
Surface and Depth
It is a common criticism of big-budget special effects pictures - and often justified - that the filmmakers were having so much fun playing with their shiny new toy that they forgot to give us characters we cared about, or put them in a compelling (or even coherent) story. Such films can certainly be enjoyed on their own terms, as eye-popping roller coaster rides; and such films often make a great deal of money.
The problem is that they can also come to define the genre as a whole. Some people simply avoid science fiction and fantasy, believing that visual spectacle is all it has to offer; and some of the people who watch (and support) these films don't want them to offer anything more. Films which take the time to develop character, mood, or interesting ideas are often described as "slow" or "dragging" on the one hand, "muddled" or "confusing" on the other. Case in point: Sound & Vision magazine recently listed its "Top 50 DVDs of All Time" [July/August 2008]; here is part of their description of # 26:
". . . ranks among the finest examples to date of computer-generated special effects. After a belabored, 45-minute setup, the action rarely lets up . . . The relentless pounding, stomping, and battling of . . . numerous leviathans makes this DVD a superlative subwoofer workout, especially in the "Brontosaurus Stampede" chapter. The Deluxe Extended Edition adds 13 minutes of deleted scenes, including an attack by a monster fish/dinosaur . . . "
The film in question? Of course, it's Peter Jackson's King Kong. The reviewer wanted Jackson to get to the "good stuff" faster; he wasn't interested in much more than a way for people to show off their 72" plasma TV's.
The reviewer is correct in one respect: the special effects in King Kong are amazing. Beyond Kong himself, this is one of the best dinosaur films ever made. The brontosaurus stampede and pile-up is one of the most complicated CGI sequences ever attempted; Kong's battle with not one but three T Rex's, perfectly choreographed in three dimensions rather than the usual two and with Ann right in the middle of it, completely eclipses the exciting 1933 battle. The dizzying (CGI) camerawork when Kong is first carrying Ann through the jungle, and the perspective keeps shifting between Ann's point of view, Kong's, and over-the-shoulder shots of both of them, literally puts you inside that scene. People seeking visual spectacle will not be disappointed; people seeking only spectacle, however, will miss the fact that the film's most powerful moments are often the quiet ones, and its greatest "special effect" is that it creates a digital character with a soul.
What reviewers and critics miss, when they give the 1933 version four stars and this one only three, is that this is not a remake, but an entirely new film - which happens to have the same plot. Jaws, Jurassic Park, and Transformers are the spiritual descendants of the 1933 King Kong; Peter Jackson's film is more properly classified as an original literary adaptation, imaginative and compelling, in a genre which so often settles for so much less.
The Lord of the Rings is Peter Jackson's biggest film. King Kong is his masterpiece.
January - December (on and off), 2008
Barry M. Lamont, M.D .
The problem is that they can also come to define the genre as a whole. Some people simply avoid science fiction and fantasy, believing that visual spectacle is all it has to offer; and some of the people who watch (and support) these films don't want them to offer anything more. Films which take the time to develop character, mood, or interesting ideas are often described as "slow" or "dragging" on the one hand, "muddled" or "confusing" on the other. Case in point: Sound & Vision magazine recently listed its "Top 50 DVDs of All Time" [July/August 2008]; here is part of their description of # 26:
". . . ranks among the finest examples to date of computer-generated special effects. After a belabored, 45-minute setup, the action rarely lets up . . . The relentless pounding, stomping, and battling of . . . numerous leviathans makes this DVD a superlative subwoofer workout, especially in the "Brontosaurus Stampede" chapter. The Deluxe Extended Edition adds 13 minutes of deleted scenes, including an attack by a monster fish/dinosaur . . . "
The film in question? Of course, it's Peter Jackson's King Kong. The reviewer wanted Jackson to get to the "good stuff" faster; he wasn't interested in much more than a way for people to show off their 72" plasma TV's.
The reviewer is correct in one respect: the special effects in King Kong are amazing. Beyond Kong himself, this is one of the best dinosaur films ever made. The brontosaurus stampede and pile-up is one of the most complicated CGI sequences ever attempted; Kong's battle with not one but three T Rex's, perfectly choreographed in three dimensions rather than the usual two and with Ann right in the middle of it, completely eclipses the exciting 1933 battle. The dizzying (CGI) camerawork when Kong is first carrying Ann through the jungle, and the perspective keeps shifting between Ann's point of view, Kong's, and over-the-shoulder shots of both of them, literally puts you inside that scene. People seeking visual spectacle will not be disappointed; people seeking only spectacle, however, will miss the fact that the film's most powerful moments are often the quiet ones, and its greatest "special effect" is that it creates a digital character with a soul.
What reviewers and critics miss, when they give the 1933 version four stars and this one only three, is that this is not a remake, but an entirely new film - which happens to have the same plot. Jaws, Jurassic Park, and Transformers are the spiritual descendants of the 1933 King Kong; Peter Jackson's film is more properly classified as an original literary adaptation, imaginative and compelling, in a genre which so often settles for so much less.
The Lord of the Rings is Peter Jackson's biggest film. King Kong is his masterpiece.
Barry M. Lamont, M.D .