Life in an aquarium.

Day-to-day goings-on.

March 27, 2006

Kong me

King Kong, the remake. It’s okay, but only just. If ever a movie called for better editing this is it. I’ve got nothing against three hour movies; I actually prefer longer movies to tell the truth. The thing is, this movie is an action/adventure movie masquerading as a cheesy noir throwback, disguised as a heady mind bender along the lines of Heart of Darkness, but it just doesn’t do any of these very well. I wish the director had taken out all the expensive, predictable, conventional CG ape-on-dinosaur action sequences and spent more time developing the characters so that the viewer could be more invested in them. That way those longing looks between the chicky (and that’s all she is to us as the director portrays her) and the ape wouldn’t come off so very awkward and I wouldn’t be tittering under my breath at the admittedly juvenile joke that just occurred to me.

I also wish the director had been a little more subtle and smart about developing the potentially very interesting themes raised in the film. Instead, he uses the oh-so-corny monolog chock full of literary references and sage sociological commentary uttered by lightweights who have no business speaking like a bad fortune cookie. They’re so over the top, though, that you aren’t quite sure if the director/writer is merely trying to copy the feel of a classic noir film or if he’s inviting us to laugh at this ham fisted parody of that old-timey style. I settled for the intermediary position and uttered an uneasy chuckle at the closing line of the movie: “Oh, no, it wasn't the airplanes; it was beauty killed the beast.”

3 Comments:

  • At 3:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I love King Kong, the remake. Perhaps it's my fondness for director, Peter Jackson, or the fact that I saw it for the first time during my trip to New York, the day before I went to the top of the Empire State Building, or maybe I'm just crazy, but I love it. Just bought the special edition DVD of it this week. :)

     
  • At 12:08 AM, Blogger anchovy said…

    I never saw the original. Might that have helped? Well, I did say it was ok. The movie just tried to do too many things and didn't do very many of them well.

    I probably should have said something about what I did like about the movie. I liked, for example, the simplish stereotypes like the boat captain when we first meet him and the stowaway kid with a haunted past because they lend a feeling like...hmmm...like I'm watching an old black and white Superman episode. I think the director was going for that feel and it was campy and kinda funny.

    I love movies, by the way, but I can be pretty picky just like I am with my reading.

    I love DVD goodies too! So what does the director himself say about what he was trying to do with this movie?

    With your literature background I wonder what you thought of Pride and Prejudice if you saw it? (I give you this link at the risk of pooh-poohing another of your favorites. Yikes!)

     
  • At 11:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I love the 5 hour British version of Pride & Prejudice, it's actually one of my favourite movies. I went through a Jane Austen phase in Jr. High that will never leave me. :) Anyway, the new one was all right but superfluous considering the other one is much better.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home