
King Kong
When Peter Jackson left Samwise Gamgee at his garden gate and finally closed the door to Middle-Earth last year he answered many questions: the movie-making world was left forever changed by the scope of Jackson’s vision, the brilliant crafting of his production; his (admittedly few) critics were finally silenced come the Academy Awards; and the world was once more free from evil.
But one question arose from all the answers as the world started to wonder, what next? How could Jackson possibly follow what must surely be the pinnacle of his life’s work? In other words, to what will we be flocking in droves to watch come this Christmas? The answer lies not in the future but in the distant past: 72 years ago, in 1933, the world was treated to a spectacle not often seen since - until, that is, Jackson gave us The Lord of the Rings - namely, King Kong.
The classic film is much more than just the story of film-maker Carl Denham’s ill-fated trip to an unknown prehistoric island. A tragic Beauty and the Beast tale, a sly indictment of mankind’s need to conquer all that he sees, and a gripping Boy’s Own adventure all in one, the movie was one of the world’s first blockbusters and has proved the inspiration for many more since.
Boasting splendid stop-motion special effects from Willis O’Brien - it is hard to believe that most of the Kong footage was of a model that stood 18 inches tall - the story of the giant ape is tragic on many levels. Much like Boris Karloff’s portrayal of Frankenstein’s monster two years earlier, Kong is presented more as a victim than a victimiser, an intelligent and brave decision given his irrepressible violent tendencies. The strength of the character is his ability to love, something that audiences to this day can identify with, and is also his ultimate undoing as he breaks free from captivity and terrorises Manhattan in his search for his beloved Ann Darrow.
Despite grossing 1.7 million dollars at the height of the Great Depression and rescuing RKO studios from bankruptcy, King Kong was recut in 1938 to reflect the new Production Code. Gone were the scenes of Kong killing humans; gone was the tender scene of the inquisitive ape undressing Fay Wray. The new version was also made much darker to hide much of the incredible detail of the special effects work, including shots of a tyrannosaur bleeding to death, to make the film more acceptable to the public, and so generations missed out on the true brilliance of O’Brien and directors Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack. Happily the original version of the movie has recently been restored.
Despite the poor reception of the 1976 Kong remake, starring Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange, Jackson remains convinced that the time is right and the world is ready for the film he has wanted to make since way before he even started thinking about hobbits. His confidence is well-founded as he is virtually able to hand-pick his cast and write his own budget thanks to the success of the Rings saga. His main advantage over the previous attempt to update the story though is the computer power of WETA, the effects house that brought to life Middle-Earth and gave us amongst other creations Shelob and Gollum.
Kong himself is a natural progression from Gollum, and Jackson has once again cast Andy Serkis, here to play the pixellated primate. Footage from the first trailer, recently released in cinemas, suggests that Jackson may well continue his run of success when King Kong is released in December. It certainly seems that he has managed to evoke the atmosphere of the thirties, and the glimpses of Kong and the island’s dinosaurs look frankly amazing.
Whether or not they manage to raise the bar once raised so high by Steven Spielberg’s first two Jurassic Park movies (of which the second, The Lost World, owes much to the original King Kong) remains to be seen, as does the more important issue of whether or not the relationship between Jackson’s digital creation and Naomi Watts’ Ann Darrow can capture the public heartstrings in quite the same way as O’Brien and Fay Wray managed, all those years ago - but then again, there are always more questions to be answered.
![]()