Movie Review

King Kong

King Kong is the epic action flick fans have been waiting for. At three hours and fifteen minutes, the film feels more like two and a half thanks to director Peter Jackson?s terrific pacing. If only the first hour had seen major script changes, King Kong could?ve stood up with Jurassic Park (B+) in terms of becoming a classic in the genre and easy repeat viewing flick in theaters and on DVD. I found the first hour to be absolute campy and cheese-ball material very much like the first Spider-Man (C+/B-); but if you can last an hour, you?re in for a real fun ride for the next two hours.

The film focuses on a desperate filmmaker (Carl Denham, played by Jack Black) in the 1930?s who leads a crew to what appears to be a deserted island and the perfect setting for his next picture. Before the trip, Carl discovers an aspiring actress (Ann, played by Naomi Watts) in Manhattan coming off of Broadway who he?d like to star in it, and persuades her on over. The crew ends up crashing into this dreary-looking island only to discover that it isn?t so desolate after all; village people hold them prisoner while a big mean ape shows up and takes away Ann. The rest of the story involves the film crew tracking down the ape to capture epic footage of him for their film, and of course rescue their darling actress. But Ann finds herself in a surprising position: the ape appears to be strangely attracted to her, and she too starts feeling for him.

The first hour of King Kong is very family-friendly, and that?s perhaps my biggest complaint about the film (it?s a little like The Mummy Returns). It?s very loose in tone with cheese to boot and just has too much camp for my taste. In regard to the first Spider-Man, I didn?t feel that Sam Raimi was the proper director for the job, and I didn?t think the movie was that exciting as a result of his cult-sensibility background. Various parts of the film (including the beginning, which is a bad way to begin) were corny, and the action sequences lacked a pulse; it was fairly traditional. But despite my tonal issues in the first act of Kong, the presentation of Manhattan with the detailed production design and the cinematography just about makes the stretch of film tolerable. I was going along with it just barely thanks to Peter Jackson?s very whimsical technical direction, and it wasn?t until the arrival at the island that the film gave me a lot of hope for what was to come.

I often complain that directors today just don?t know how to execute action and suspense properly. Most of the movies that I think are great in that regard are long of the past, which makes for continuously frustrating moviegoing seasons that are all about ?the traditional.? But as I was watching Kong, I was starting to see light at the end of the tunnel after so many years: the suspense at the island had my imagination going wild, and the pursuit of the ape induced an adrenaline rush out of me that I rarely experience from movies (it was like seeing Jurassic Park for the first time and finally seeing a filmmaker deliver with such a rich imagination).

I?m usually not looking to be wowed by visual effects in movies, and yet here I was very impressed in that regard. From the creation of King Kong to the detailed facial expressions and eye movements that are pulled off, the ape quickly turns into a personality of its own; and I found myself caring for the guy rather soon, which I never expected to happen. And the love story between Kong and Ann bears minimal dialogue by Ann ? it?s all done through facial expressions and physical movements by both characters, and it?s believable to the point that it?s unbelievable. And even though a few of the pursuits can remind you of Jurassic Park, the staging is very well done considering you know there?s a blue screen behind the actors as they run and tumble from the beasts; the sequences are handled terrifically and are a hell of a sight.

The movie is a little like Pirates of the Caribbean (B) in its fun factor. There are some scene setups that are almost out of a jungle gym (no pun intended), and even though the basic setup behind some of the action sequences is somewhat familiar, the execution makes for a wild time. None of the actors live up to Johnny Depp?s classic screen presence, but the acting across the board is nevertheless solid. If anyone stands out, it?s Naomi Watts for pulling off her minimalist role so genuinely ? it?s roles like hers that make you realize what a true talent someone is. In a way, the movie depends on your connection with Ann and the ape ? and if you don?t believe the relationship, your involvement in the film could very well be screwed early on.

King Kong is a film that I was pretty sure I was going to like, but it was better than I expected. The film might?ve blown me away had the first act been tweaked a bit, but for an action flick these days, this sure delivers with the kind of energy that most filmmakers dream of inducing.

Lee's Grade: B
Ranked #9 of 143 between Cache (#8) and A History of Violence (#10) for 2005 movies.

A	0.4%
B	30.0%
C	61.7%
D	8.0%
F	0.0%