Movie Column: Going Ape For King Kong

(andPOP) - Spoiler Alert: This week we?re talking about King Kong, and I?m not going to talk about the ending, I should be able to. The original movie came out more than 70 years ago, and it?s listed as 43 on the American Film Institute?s list of the best films of the 20th century. If you haven?t seen it yet, or at the very least, if you don?t know how it ends, I don?t know what you?re doing wasting your time reading this, go out and rent it!

Now then, down to business.

Before I start talking about King Kong, I would like to have it on record that I really didn?t like any of the Lord of the Rings movies. I thought they were unimpressive to any serious moviegoer (those people who are interested in more than computer-generated battles, and sweeping landscapes.) I also thought it was a downright offensive adaptation for anyone who had read the books before they saw the movie.
I understand I am in the minority in these opinions (I am, nevertheless, right) and the only reason I bring it up, is that I want it to be clear that I am not the sort to pull any punches on Peter Jackson ? the guy who directed the Lord of the Rings trilogy ? just because I?m a fan of his work.
That being said, King Kong definitely makes it onto my list of movies to see over the holidays.

It?s the story of a struggling filmmaker (played by Jack Black,) who goes to incredible lengths to make his masterpiece film, traveling to an exotic island to get the best footage.

Once there, they discover a giant ape (King Kong) who kidnaps Anne Darrow the film?s leading lady (Naomi Watts) and falls in love with her.

Finding Darrow missing, the film?s previously bookish writer, played by Adrien Brody, turns into a rugged hero who goes to great lengths to save her, fueled, presumably, by the fact that he is also in love with her.

This is the same plot that 1933 audiences were treated to with the original King Kong, which Jackson lists as the movie which inspired him to go into film. Apparently Jackson had written the script for the King Kong remake before he ever started working on Lord of the Rings, but no one would give him the go-ahead until after he proved himself.

I refuse to compare the two movies though. Such a comparison would be like a fight between a WWI tank (the few they had were made out of wood,) and an M1-Abrams tank (the kind currently used in Iraq, capable of conducting a small battle all by itself.)

Of course the technology today is better, and Jackson?s King Kong is a lot more expansive thanks to computer generated images (CGI) and other modern special effects.

But Jackson?s version falls short of the original in several important ways as well.

It?s beginning to become clear to me exactly what Jackson?s strengths and weaknesses are, and they are exemplified by his Kong adaptation.

He has an excellent vision and imagination, but works best within an already established structure. In Kong, he really fleshed out the island they go to, with all manner of disgusting and dangerous critters.

He?s also a pretty good storyteller. He?s written the screenplay for pretty much everything he?s directed, and through both Kong and The Lord of the Rings, he expertly manipulated his audience and wove complex and interweaving plotlines.

Jackson?s biggest weakness is that he doesn?t know how to edit, and he seems to think it?s bad luck if a movie is under three hours long. The first two installments of the Lord of the Rings were 2h 58mins and 2h 59mins, and he made up for those shortfalls with the final movie, which was 3h 21mins. Each one was anywhere from 30 to more than 50 minutes longer on the special director?s cut extended edition.

King Kong comes in at a modest 3h 7mins ? the original was just over an hour and a half ? and while for the most part it doesn?t drag, the first hour, which sets up the story and covers the boat ride to the island, could have been cut in half without any serious loss.

All in all, I really enjoyed King Kong, and while Jackson has been quoted as saying it?s the version of King Kong he would have liked to see at age nine, there were a few scenes that were sufficiently violent that I could barely handle them at age 20.

And while I?ve basically dwelled on Jackson the entire time, I would like to briefly mention the acting.

Jack Black proved what I always believed, that he can be more than just a buffoon. Adrien Brody is at least as good as a popcorn adventure hero as he was as a Jew in Nazi era Germany.

And finally, I would like to compliment Naomi Watts. I don?t think that Anne Darrow is her most challenging role, but she did provide us with what I would consider one of the best movie screams I have ever heard.