Montgomery Blair High School's Online Student Newspaper
Friday, July 20, 2018 6:40 am
Dec. 20, 2005

"King Kong" is a new classic

by Payal Patnaik, Online Editor-in-Chief
The timeless tale of beauty and the beast is the sweet story of Ann Darrow and her devoted protector King Kong, which was rekindled last Wednesday in theaters nationwide. The original "King Kong," directed by Merian C. Cooper, who also shares writing credits, enamored audiences in 1933 and launched the story to celebrity status. After years of movies based on the King Kong legend, including the 1976 flop, this new release directed by Peter Jackson finally does justice to the original.

The film opens conveying the Depression-era hopelessness of New York City and its unemployment, soup kitchens and shacks. Ann Darrow's (Naomi Watts) vaudeville theatre company closes down after attracting a bare and scattered audience. Hungry and unemployed, Ann is discovered by Carl Denham (Jack Black), who intends to use her in his movie production. Ann accepts after she finds out that the playwright she worships, Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody), is writing the script. Black takes Watts to a foreign place he names "Skull Island," where paint-covered natives and dinosaurs run wild.
King Kong, performed by Andy Serkis, and Ann (Naomi Watts) in Peter Jackson's "King Kong."
King Kong, performed by Andy Serkis, and Ann (Naomi Watts) in Peter Jackson's "King Kong."

The film then capitalizes on the audience's imagination, offering dinosaurs and scorpions, as well as other figments of the Jackson's imagination. One after another, the sequences between Ann's encounters and the crew's escapades include gripping and suspenseful scenes that would satisfy any action aficionado.

The attempts to create an aura of mystery are clichéd and cheesy, especially with Black's explanations of the island in hushed tones. Instead of sounding like a dreamer, Black sounds stupid, overdramatic and insane. But Black tends to play these obnoxious characters anyway, so he fits the role of an insensitive self-promoting jerk almost perfectly.

Like the gripping scenes in his movie, Jackson also does a phenomenal job with "King Kong." Slightly changing character roles and altering the plot to better suit his interpretation of the original film, Jackson creates a new remake with new perspectives and better special effects than the 1933 version has. For example, Jack's (Brody) role as a mate on the ship changes to a playwright, which gives a romantic foil for Ann (Watts).

In addition, Jackson adds more depth to Ann, deleting her original characteristic as a helpless damsel in distress. Instead, Watts portrays a woman who is intelligent, angelic and beautiful. For once, a film director in today's movie industry does not capitalize on a pretty actress like the remake preceding it. The connection between Kong and Ann is important, and Jackson leaves us with a sense of controversial love and friendship. The scenes of connection between Watts and Kong are breathtaking, heartwarming moments, capturing the emotion they share filled with naivety and childishness.

"King Kong's" superb animation and graphics enhance the film's quality and action-packed allure. The film melds humor and drama together with dynamic clashes between beast and man, appealing to a wide range of audiences. Too many splotchy-eyed women and uncomfortable looking men looked nervously embarrassed as the theater lights went on. Nevertheless, the film drew also both laughs with its juxtaposition of emotion and funny situations to keep the plot moving.

Don't be deterred by the 187 minutes duration of the film. The actual plot may start off slowly, but Jackson skillfully keeps the film moving with sub-story lines that introduce the characters. "King Kong" is a movie one doesn't want to miss, for it has everything only for the price of an admission ticket.

"King Kong" (187 minutes) is rated PG-13 for frightening adventure violence and some disturbing images.

Share on Tumblr

Discuss this Article

Silver Chips Online invites you to share your thoughts about this article. Please use this forum to further discussion of the story topic and refrain from personal attacks and offensive language. SCO reserves the right to deny any comment. No comments that include hyperlinks will be posted. If you have a question for us, please include your email address or use this form.

  • :-) on December 20, 2005 at 9:52 PM

  • Everybody who has a brain on December 21, 2005 at 10:23 AM
    this movie sucked. really hard. my girlfriend and I left halfway through because watching it made my eyes bleed.
  • sourish (View Email) on December 21, 2005 at 11:18 AM
    this is a good comment but can give information about the prise and staff
  • af on December 21, 2005 at 5:04 PM
    This review is exactly coorect.
  • lily on December 24, 2005 at 8:31 PM
    Are you insane? This movie was about 2 hours too long.
  • re: lily on December 29, 2005 at 7:01 PM
    Are YOU insane? You want a 67 minute movie? Great description, Payal. I thought your review was right on.
  • compie25 on January 3, 2006 at 12:48 PM
    i guess 'king kong' is one of those movies you either love or hate.. i loved it. it had a little bit of everything.. nice review, patnaik.
Jump to first comment