TALKBACK: King Kong (1933)

[Alpha OTS]

[canofhumdingers]

[mr.negativity]

[heroforhirerob]

[lhb412]

[lhb412]

Just read the original novelization by Delos W. Lovelace. I recommend it: a light, enjoyable read and while the version of the script it is based on is in many respects the one that made it to the screen (it feels like most of the dialog is the same) there are some differences. I feel that most of the difference is just cuts for budget reasons, like the triceratops fight.

Peter Jackson actually lifts some of the details for his movie from this one: Lumpy instead of Charlie; a more agile, leaping Kong who employs his prehensile feet; and a dejected, pitiful Kong when we first see him in chains.

Everyone's heard that they decided pretty late in the game to beef up Kong's NYC rampage, right? That's in evidence here. The entire ending in NYC is only like a dozen pages.

[Outkaster]

For the movie or that book?

[lhb412]

[lhb412]

Watching the making of doc on the disc again (it's really great), and it always amazing to me that they had like four different methods for compositing live action and animated footage together. The variety of techniques they used is really key in making the film look so great, because when you're mixing up techniques it confuses the eye, as opposed to seeing the same technique over and over and you becoming more accustom to the 'trick.'

[Outkaster]

[tbeasley]

Just how impossibly cool is this movie? It's just insane. We all know the biplanes and the Empire State Building, but to me the real showstopper is the T. rex fight. That's simply one of the greatest movie scenes of all time... all the Skull Island stuff is just phenomenal. You get the feeling Kong has to beat the crap out of dinosaurs and monsters everyday just to stay alive, after the rex there's still a plesiosaur and pteranodon to look out for! It seems like overkill but it's just too cool.

[mr.negativity]

[mr.negativity]

THR:

The beloved movie monster that hits screens again in "Kong: Skull Island" was originally supposed to be an actual gorilla — battling a just-as-real Komodo dragon.




From Fay Wray to Brie Larson: King Kong's Leading Ladies

[jellydonut25]

With iconic movies, it can be very difficult to find new things to say, especially if the movie is over 80 years old, and invented a genre, but it sometimes still bears repeating how incredible the movie is, and King Kong is no exception. The variety of techniques used to bring Kong to life, and the craftsmanship of the film are unparalleled, especially in their time, and the film's excellent pacing and likable (even if a bit one-dimensional) characters keep things moving along enough even for modern viewers.

I'd bet this has been said before, but in an effort to say something "new," I'll mention that the early dialogue between Denham, Englehorn, and Driscoll, about bringing a woman along on the voyage, while definitely laced with standard 1930s-era sexism, still rings true in a way today. Denham laments that his films, though quality efforts (as stated by pretty much everyone in the movie), don't make enough money because there's no love story and no pretty face to sell tickets, and he's being squeezed by studios and audiences to include a good looking woman. This is a practice that STILL happens today and evidence of it can be seen in films as recent as Dr. Strange, where Rachel McAdams was shoe-horned in to have the requisite love interest and hit the four quadrants, despite having no real role in the story. At least Denham, when pressured to put a woman in a movie of his, planned to make his the star of his film. Does that counteract the notion that all dames are just distractions and not good for much? I don't care. There should be some kind of law that states a movie can either be important, or great, but not both, because it's unfair to the other movies.

This movie is perfect.

[mr.negativity]

[mr.negativity]

[mr.negativity]

[The Giant Pacific Octopus]

Wow its going to play in 600 theaters. Pretty cool.

[canofhumdingers]

I’m hoping to take my kids to this. They’ve not seen the original Kong yet, so this would be perfect. Only problem is I just sold my house and am in the process of moving 1600 miles across the country and we haven’t found our new place yet (will be staying with the in-laws while we house hunt) so I’m not really sure where exactly I’ll be on 3/15...

[Gwangi]

If you go to the link , it will have a "See All Theater Locations" link. It is a pdf, and by clicking, it will be asking you to print or save the list (and it is a long list!). Or, just simply type in your zip code and see if there will be a showing nearby.

I've seen the original on the big screen several times. And each was a joy!

[canofhumdingers]

Yeah I’ve seen it in theaters at least 3 times (the first was an actual 35mm print at and old restored theater from the ‘20’s with chandeliers and a Wurlitzer organ and everything! Will never forget that!).

But my kids have never seen the film at all and they are just the right age to get introduced. Seeing in a theater would just make it even better. My issue is my plans are fluid and I’m not sure what zip code we’ll actually be in on that day... but as it gets closer I’ll figure it out I’m sure.

[The Giant Pacific Octopus]

I've always wanted to see Kong on the big screen. When King Kong was sold to television in 1956, Ray Bradbury wasn't a fan. He said that Kong has to be bigger than you. You need to look up at him on a huge screen where he towers over you. Watching him on a small screen inside a tiny glowing box doesn't do him justice.