King Kong Review
by Steve Rhodes (Steve DOT Rhodes AT InternetReviews DOT com)December 13th, 2005
KING KONG
A film review by Steve Rhodes
Copyright 2005 Steve Rhodes
RATING (0 TO ****): *** 1/2
Grab yourself a couple of big tubs of popcorn and get ready to have one heck of a good time at the movies, thanks to THE LORD OF THE RINGS' Peter Jackson. Remaking the 1933 classic film starring Fay Wray, Jackson's vision of KING KONG is both a loving tribute to the original as well as a great romance, blending equal measures of JURASSIC PARK and INDIANA JONES. What is absolutely certain is that a captivating Naomi Watts, as Ann Darrow, has great chemistry with her big, hairy costar. Andy Serkis, who should have won a supporting actor Oscar for his portrayal of Gollum in THE LORD OF THE RINGS, is responsible for Kong's mannerisms and motions. Watts and Serkis turn out to be a match made in heaven. And Jackson's film is one that will rightly appear on many best of the year lists, which isn't a place where you normally find such popcorn pictures.
"Monsters belong in B-movies," Carl Denham (Jack Black), an aspiring director, says. This is a double joke, since Denham is a B-movie director who wants to be the next DeMille, while KING KONG itself is basically a very big budget B-movie. It is also a very confident picture, since it waits a full hour and ten minutes before it ever shows us the big ape.
Much of the movie follows the original quite closely, even if it is twice as long. And some of the parts that aren't in the original are some of the best bits. Do you remember an episode that has Kong hamming it up, skating on a frozen lake in Central Park? I didn't think so, but it's in this remake. There is also a stampede sequence featuring a herd of brontosaurus in a traffic jam with humans underfoot. Many of the incidents are at once completely ridiculous and wonderfully fun to watch, as when they use a Tommy gun to kill some hawk-sized mosquitoes. On the way home in the car, my wife, who did not like the film, kept telling me of one part after another that she thought was stupid. My reaction was, "well sure, but it was great fun watching it." The special effects are so real that you're never sure what is done with models, what with CGI and what with normal sets and people.
Like a long roller coaster ride, the movie provides so much entertainment that you'll almost feel like going back to the box office and complaining afterwards that you were undercharged, since you got twice as much movie and enjoyment as usual. The stunning cinematography and set decoration, particular the sunrise and sunset scenes and all of the Time Square sequences are so gorgeous your jaw will drop.
That's probably enough, since I don't want to make my review as long as the movie. My only quibble is the casting of Adrien Brody as Jack Driscoll, the screenwriter for the movie that Carl is making and the human part of the love triangle. Brody plays his character way too wimpy, and his whole performance just never works since the casting was wrong in the first place.
And I never got a chance to tell you about the big killer worms with sharp teeth and lion-sized mouths.
KING KONG runs 3:00, but I wouldn't want a single minute cut from it. It is rated PG-13 for "frightening adventure violence and some disturbing images" and would be acceptable for kids around 9 and up.
The film opens nationwide in the United States on Wednesday, December 14, 2005. In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC theaters, the Century theaters and the Camera Cinemas.
Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com
Email: [email protected]
***********************************************************************
Want free reviews and weekly movie and video recommendations via Email?
Just send me a letter with the word "subscribe" in the subject line.
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
