King Kong (2005)

King Kong, was released in 2005, and directed by Peter Jackson, who had just become famous for his work on the Lord Of The Rings trilogy. The film starred Jack Black as Carl Denham, Naomi Watts as Ann Darrow, and Adrian Brody as Jack Driscoll. The film was mostly a true remake of the original 1933 classic, set in the same time period of the 1920s, and followed the same basic plot line. The only major change from the original was Jack Driscoll was the ship's first mate in the original, and is a playwright in this version.

Peter Jackson is a long time fan of the original King Kong, and it had a huge impact upon his own film making, from his low budget cult horror classics, to his big budget block busters. Skull Island was even referenced in his 1992 film Braindead. In his opportunity to make his version of the 1933 classic, he stuck pretty true to the original, but used modern technology to make it updated, and to become a classic for a new generation of film goers. The movie was filmed entirely in New Zealand (not sure if Peter Jackson is aware that other filming sites actually exist), and honestly the sets are perfect.

Speaking on sets, the film looks really good, and pleasing to the eye. Kong himself was an effective use of motion capture and CGI, and honestly the method works in this film. Sadly most of the effects in the film are digital, but for digital effects it looks really good, and smooth. If you've been following my reviews, then you know that I prefer practical effects, but if you are going to do a film with digital effects, then this is a great example of how to do it right. The dinosaurs look good, and in many ways an improvement on the dinosaurs in earlier CGI films like Jurassic Park. The sets look beautiful and otherworldly which one might come to expect after seeing Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy. I feel like this film is as good as it is because of Peter Jackson honing his direction skills on the Lord of the Rings. The streets of NYC were all done in a back lot in New Zealand, and the shipwreck scenes were done on a full scale ship constructed in the studio's parking lot, with a green-screen behind it, and it turned out looking pretty good. The NYC street scenes do look like a model, and the ship wreck scenes do have an overly CGI feel to them, which I will criticize the entire film of having.

The actors were mostly wonderfully cast, especially Naomi Watts as Anne, she really did a great job at capturing the character as she was portrayed by Fay Wray. She is beautiful, and her amazing blue eyes captivate the audience and convey her emotions so perfectly. I think she was actually perfectly cast for the roll. Adrian Brody was also perfectly cast for his part, his part is a big change from the original Jack Driscoll, so Brody didn't have that previous model to work on, but he portrayed the roll of a sensitive playwright who writes plays for the love of the art rather than the profit. His character starts as a reluctant captive on the voyage, as Carl Denham basically kidnaps him and forces him to finish the script for his film. Adrian Brody makes Jack a sensitive hero, and a great leading love interest (in a story where two love stories are going on, one between Jack and Anne, and the other more bizarre love between Kong and Anne). Now, Jack Black...if there is one thing that ruined this film for me it is Jack Black. Black spent time studying hucksters like PT Barnum in preparation for this film, when honestly I think he should of studied Carl Denham in the original film for inspiration. Jack Black plays Carl as a heartless bastard who doesn't care who gets hurt or killed in his quest to make a profitable film. I mean that's fine and all, but the way that Jack Black plays that up, is over the top, and his facial expressions are just creepy for no reason. I honestly enjoyed nothing about his performance, and the two things that will keep this from being one of my favourite movies, is the over use of CGI and Jack Black. Don't get me wrong I don't hate Jack Black, I thought he was great in Water World (where he didn't speak), and School of Rock was a decent film...okay who am I kidding, I really don't think Jack Black is a very good actor, and he totally failed in this roll. Carl Denham is an interesting character in the original two films, and I feel like all of that complexity and depth is thrown out the window in favour of two-bit huckster in this film.

The reception of this film was very positive. It made huge returns on its well over budget production costs, which is always a risk. The critics also had generally favourable reviews of the film. The film was a box office success and won tons of awards, which seems pretty common fare for Peter Jackson since breaking big with his versions of Tolkien's classics. I do feel like this is a great and faithful remake of the original film, though if I were to choose, I am probably going to choose to throw in the original, because it has an element of magic, that I feel is lack in the digital age of film making. I miss the days of stop motion animation, I miss when the effects were done by hand or through film techniques. It seems feels like when nearly any vision of the imagination is possible with digital effects, it cheapens it, and makes it less magical. But that is my view as a person who is rooted deeply in the nostalgia of classic film magic.

Would I recommend this film. Yes, wholeheartedly I recommend this beautiful work. Whether your are a die-hard fan of the original King Kong, or even if you are new to the film, this is a great film. It has the nostalgia of keeping pretty true to the story, feel, and concept of the original King Kong, and it also has the ability to capture modern audiences. The only drawback is that some film-goers might find the 3 hour run time a bit daunting, and that is fair. But I definitely think everyone should watch this film.