This movie was remade (poorly) in the 1970s, and Peter Jackson did a decent job with his version more recently, but nothing compares to the original. King Kong was a success from its first series of showings, where it sold-out ten shows a day for four days. It didn't get any Oscars, though...unfortunately for Kong the visual effects category didn't exist yet in 1933.
But still, a fantastic story about a huge ape on an island with dinosaurs and giant snakes, with a beauty and the beast motif snuggled inside it, that's what movies are all about, in my opinion. I love films that wrap many different elements together and present a visual spectacle driven by a compelling story.
I've never seen the original King Kong on a big screen. I wonder if that would enhance the experience or call out some of the technical disadvantages of the early days of film? I don't think I'll ever know, but if I do get the chance to see Kong in full 70-mm glory, I know I'll take it.
#
4 comments:
The 70's remake was awful. I really liked Jackson's version though. Like LOTR, he made it with thoughtful consideration to the original source material.
I liked Jackson's remake, but they made a terrible video game out of it. The original, as usual, can't be beat.
I prefer the original, as well. The femme fatale was better in that one.
I did see the King Kong (could have been a copy) at Universal Studios, California, in the early nineties when we took our kids to Disneyland. (the background lot tour)
play bazaar mainly helping to wealthy people for making so much good money earn and satta king alos in this bike race make money and London and paris.
Post a Comment