So much for tomorrow. Sorry about that. Here's your review.
King Kong
Directed by Peter Jackson
Starring Andy Serkis, Naomi Watts, Adrien Brody, and Jack Black
Universal/Big Primate Pictures
187 minutes
PG-13
Grade: A
In the history of film, there are some pictures which, no matter the technical advances of the modern age or their own flaws, retain a certain place of honor. Citizen Kane; Casablanca; Gone With the Wind; The Wizard of Oz. And along with that hallowed place in history comes a sense of vulnerability among movie aficionados. So when the idea of a remake is mentioned, the hairs go up, the pulse quickens, the eyes widen, and the doubt becomes palpable.
King Kong is one of those films. However, to put it shortly, the remake has been done by someone who has proven his genius, and whose whole career was essentially spawned from the inspiration he found in the original Kong (that's the 1933 version, not the craptastic one from the 1970's), and it shows. Jackson's tender loving care of the Kong legacy has resulted in one of the finest movies I've seen in a long time, especially when compared to its scale and hype.
The number that most have been talking about hasn't been the movie's gross, or even it's massive budget (a record-breaking $207 million). It's the number listed above: 187. As in minutes that you're sitting there taking in the epic. Daunting? Sure. But this is not three-plus hours of exposition, nor is it three-plus hours of mind-bending action. It is a perfect balance of the two. There is a scene with Watts and Kong (Serkis) high on a ledge atop a mountain on Skull Island, and it's about as close as we get to actual interaction between the two. I remember thinking, "this is the kind of scene that would make a movie this long feel like it's dragging," but the reality was that it was as important to the story as anything else, and I was wrapped up in the drama between the two characters.
Most have seen the 1933 version (I actually haven't - for shame), or at least know the general plot, so a long explanation probably isn't necessary. We begin in New York, with the loose strings of the story drifting through a very moving depiction of Depression-era America (though not nearly as good as the one in "Cinderella Man"). Opportunistic director Carl Denham (Black) is rapidly becoming a failure. His most recent production has the studio men so bored that they opt to scrap the whole film and use the footage as background for other projects. Denham needs a hit.
Ann Darrow needs a break. The popular performer has just lost her job after the poor economy makes it impossible for her vaudeville show to continue. She tries to get in with another stage producer, but the only thing he can give her is a card with an address for a burlesque show. She goes to the building, but her better angels get the best of her and she walks away from a lucrative but soul-sapping option. As it happens, Denham is looking for an actress. Scratch that. He's looking for an image. A woman to take a role normally reserved for the biggest and brightest female stars of the age. He finally sees it. Now he's got to convince it to take a trip to an island nobody thinks exists, to film a movie nobody wants to pay for.
The rest is the stuff of your memory (and the previews). Darrow and writer Jack Driscoll (Brody) become closer on the voyage to Skull Island, but a larger power is waiting for them there. That larger power is Kong, and of course, he's the true star. He is big, he is mean, and he is in many ways endearing. Not lovable, but endearing. We recognize that he is a beast, that his temper is that of an animals, and his capacity for destruction and death is always with us. But we also see a soul in the animal. It's not a softer side, per se, but a depth to the character. He is more than a beast, more than the animatronic character that attacks your subway car at Universal Studios. He is real.
Most of the credit for that is due to Serkis, who through an elaborate and amazing system of motion capture technology creates a being unlike any ever seen on the screen. Serkis was very, very good as Gollum in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. He is great as Kong. If you're willing, you can allow yourself to get lost in the magic and forget that what you are seeing is a computer-generated image. You begin to recognize facial features and body language the same way as if you were watching a human.
The reason this film is so good, though, is that it goes beyond the mere "wow, what a realistic-looking ape!" novelty. Because we can get beyond the initial mental block of looking for flaws in the animation so easily and early, we can connect with Kong. That's why the above picture is so evocative for me. You'll understand if you see the film.
Onto the performances. Serkis, as mentioned, is stellar. As is Watts, who updates the 1933 damsel in distress with a deeper character, one with a story, with motivation, with a connection to the ape that is real, that straddles the line between powerful and disturbing, but never goes over it. She drives the picture, makes us love Kong, and makes us ultimately feel for him as he fights for his life, confused, on top of the Empire State Building. Brody is fine as a fairly static character. We're not really supposed to feel much for him, but there is an interesting subplot to him, because he plays much of the movie as the hero, and yet at times he is an enemy to the character we are most connected to. Finally, Black is very good as Denham, and even loses the John Belushi clone image that he has cultivated quite nicely as an actor and pseudo-rocker. He works the maniacal Denham perfectly, although his last line (you know it, whether you realize it or not) feels a little false (and it should, it wasn't uttered by the Denham character in the original).
The movie is three hours long. I'm willing to bet you'll forget that by the end. It is a wonderful piece of work, with rich detail and great pacing. The environments feel wholly authentic, and most importantly, so does the creature. Peter Jackson effectively kickstarted the hype for his newest masterpiece back in April, 2005 when he began broadcasting production diaries on the kongisking.net website. More than 30 weeks of speculation and mystery is tough to justify, but Jackson did it, and did it big.
No comments:
Post a Comment