For bad movies, seeing something once when I was six is enough. For classics, 20-25 years is too long not to check back in.
I'm not sure why King Kong is such a cultural phenomenon. It's an 80 year old film that everyone has heard of. The film has been remade or continued many times. The original movie was a hit, but not Gone with the Wind. Contemporary critics didn't rave about it. Even modern critics trying to speak about its legacy sound like they are reaching for something nice to say. They have the same tone as talking to your grandfather about how much you like Patton. You find something nice to say about the movie because you don't want to pick a fight. But really, you don't have much of an opinion. From my understanding, King Kong wasn't even the only movie of its ilk in that era. It's probably the best and, in some cases, least overtly racist, but it's hardly unique.
I think a lot of it has to do with that scene on the Empire State Building. In general, if a film has a single universally recognizable shot, it's going to outlast movies that might be overall better or even more popular at the time. Kong is also an easily identifiable creature. Simple concept. Simpler name. It makes for an easy sell.
I'm certainly more interested in the evolution of this franchise than the 1933 film itself. The film is fine. It's refreshingly short and simply plotted. Skull Island is a great invention and there's something about him being found by a movie crew that I find quaint. Of course, the effects don't hold up today, but they look good for something that remembers FDR's first term.
Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend
No comments:
Post a Comment