DATE: 1933

DIRECTOR: Merion C. Cooper

WRITER: John Ashmore Creeland and Ruth Rose, from Cooper's story

CAST: Fay Wray, Robert Armstrong, Bruce Cabot

IMDB RATING: 8.0/10 (top 200 of all time)

BUDGET: $670,000

BOX OFFICE: $1.7 million in 1933 dollars, plus more in later re-releases; adjusted for inflation and such, that's approximately equal to $250 million today (which incidently, is about the same as the adjusted values for the two remakes)

DVD NOTES: Woah.  Just... woah.  This is one impressive freaking DVD.  Considering it's a film from 1933, it looks pretty dang good.  And the sound is crisp and clear.  As for the special features... first, there's an audio commentary featuring Ray Harryhousen, Willis O'Brien's successor in the stop-motion fx department, fx guy Ken Ralston, as well as the late Fay Wray and equally dead Merion C. Cooper (the latter two were added in using archived footage). 
Then there's the second disc.
There's a documentary on Cooper, who had just about the most amazing life ever in the history of Hollywood lives.  Then, there's a Peter Jackson-produced documenatry on the making of the film, which goes on for 2 1/2 hours, telling absolutely everything you would ever want to know about the movie.  What's most amazing is the section on the special effects.  Lacking actual behind-the-scenes footage, they made behind the scenes footage: Jackson's fx company completely recreated the visual effects as O'Brien originally did them.  That is just plain cool.
Oh, and there's the part about the "lost spider sequence," a sequence filmed but later deleted after audiences were sickened.  So, Jackson and his crew made their own version of what the sequence may have looked like, recreating period film stock and effects.  THIS is how you make a DVD.

King Kong

1933

* * *

            Filmaker Carl Denham (Robert Armstrong) decides that for his next film, he will venture to the mysterious Skull Island.  Dragging along his friend, Jack Driscoll (Bruce Cabot) and wannabe actress Ann Darrow (Fay Wray), Denham makes it to the island... and finds that not only are there natives to contend with, but there are also creatures thought long-extinct, as well as a twenty-foot ape who will go down in history.

            This is considered not just an adventure classic, but possibly the adventure classic.  Those who saw it as kids remember it fondly; those who saw it as adults remember it just as well.  And there is a reason: the film's wonderful story, adventurous spirit, visual look, and everything else somehow combine to make this magical.  Now, many films can be called magical, but this is a rare sort of magic: a film that creates such a sense of wonder of adventure, fun, and sheer being and sheer filmmaking that it overcomes any flaws, any boundries, and soars to heights few films can even dream of achieving.  Not a dozen films in history have captured this same feel, and King Kong is one of those films.

            Unfortunately, underneath that sheet of magic, this movie has flaws - and not just little ones; these go beyond just little problems and go into truly amateurish levels of badness.  The acting is terrible.  Fay Wray was a good actress, but her performance here is totally over-the-top when it isn't just wooden.  Many people call her performance "classic," but that's not a good word for it.  Classic is defined as "of the highest mark or calibre," and Wray is truly awful on any objective level.  She is iconic, but that doesn't mean she's any good here.  Cabot doesn't even achieve that much; he?s just boring.  The supporting cast is about as good as Cabot.  The only exception is Armstrong, who does create a memorable character.  He does it in a pretty flat way, but he does manage that much.

            Of course, the actors didn?t have much to work with.  The story may have been good, and there are bits of good dialogue, but for the most part, the script is about on the level of the script a friend and I were going to write back in third grade - we were going to write "Twister 2," hopefully starring Jim Carrey.  Fortunately, we never wasted time on it, deciding instead to waste our time playing "Star Wars" on the swingset during recess, but you can imagine how that would have turned out. (in recent years, my screenplays and stories have improved at least a little) King Kong is about like that.  An example of the dialogue: after having had about four lines of conversation with Ann, Jack says, "Hey, I guess I love you."  I think that pretty much speaks for itself.  The characters are just names.  On top of that, it's stupid and makes no sense on any level.  I'm not complaining about the idea of a gigantic ape; I'm complaining about how, when Kong is loose in New York City, Jack saves Ann, and runs into the a building within eyesight of Kong and says, "You'll be safe here."  Then, Kong marches straight for that building, and the first window he looks in is - gasp! the same one our heroes are in!  That's about the level of the entire script.

            Merian C. Cooper's direction is on a higher plane than the writing and acting, but that isn't saying much.  Visually, though, the movie looks very pretty and moves along at a pretty decent pace.  Individual scenes are truly classic, because of the visual and the story behind it.  Actually, this might have worked better as a silent film...

            With all that in mind, it must be said that on any objective criterion, this film is an amateurish mess.  However, it's still great entertainment.  Willis O'Brien's special effects are the best part of the movie (excepting, of course, the story).  They aren't convincing, of course, but they're impossible to forget, and only add to the spell that the film casts.  In spite of its flaws, the movie works.  It's not a great film, and it sure as heck ain't the classic everyone says it is, but it's about as enjoyable as anything else on film as long as you let it cast its spell over you.