That’s what makes the first film so interesting–we, as the audience, are aware of his feelings for Ann, but she as a character never shows any appreciation for this protection and rescue. He always remains singularly a monster to her (and everyone else); it’s only Denham who seems to understand that the Beast’s curious commitment to her (I think affection is too strong a word) caused his downfall. Kong is a tragic hero since his “love” (as much as a monkey can express it) is misunderstood and maligned, even by the one he’s attached to.
For me, part of what fails with the Jackson version is that they make this “relationship” too obvious. It’s to Naomi Watts’ credit that she makes this premise convincing, but it literalizes something that’s only opaque in the first, and what is originally complex and sublime (because Kong is still unquestionably a Beast) turns a little too derivative as a love story–to these eyes at least.
They explore this theme much more fully in King Kong vs. Godzilla, in which they even added red berry juice as an obvious metaphor for liquor and a giant octopus as a metaphor for Zionism. What?
I always figuring it was a metaphor for the conflict between the rural and urban lifestyles. Kong represented rural life - he was the biggest thing around where he grew up but he lived in a area with small horizons. Fay Wray represented the lure of the city - she enticed Kong into leaving his hometown and going off to experience the excitement of big city life. But the city was too much for the simple country boy. He didn’t know how to handle himself and ended up dead.
Nitpick: Skull Island is supposed to be somewhere in the Indian Ocean south and west of Malaysia. The use of African-American actors to portray the natives is (marginally) less racist in that the natives are supposed to be similar to the Andamanese, who would have been considered “black” by anyone other than anthropologists in the 1930s.
I think King Kong is symbolic of man’s recent and newly conceived Darwisnism and that psychologically Kong is archetypical to the early birth pangs of the Theory of Evolution. It is a story of a cryptid animal that had only been known commonly in the "Civilized
World for some 60 years, similarly young was the Theory of Evolution. It was a monster movie… not a racial polemic.
It’s worth noting that Merian C. Cooper, the driving creative force behind King Kong–he had his hand in the writing, producing, and directing of the film–started out making what were essentially adventure documentaries. The character of Carl Denham is loosely based on Cooper (who would later go on to have even greater impact on American cinema through his longtime producing partnership with John Ford). Cooper would trundle camera crews around the globe capturing footage of exotic lands to amaze stateside audiences. Legend has it that the idea for King Kong grew out of a simple extrapolation fantasy of one of Cooper’s own adventures. Wouldn’t it be keen if, instead of just filming your ordinary run of the mill crocodile or charging bull elephant, he discovered some heretofore unheard of, unthought of monster whose capture and unveiling would rattle the world? So again, his conscious intentions were pretty innocent; any cultural detritus you manage to shake loose from the celluloid was more likely a product of the time than of a specific agenda.
Personally, I interpret King Kong as a metaphor for the black European ruling class in Europe from 1500 to 1789 (as exemplified by Charles II Stuart, who was described as The Black boy, a tall black man and the swarthy Stuart). Having climbed to the pinnacle of civilization and creation of Empire (!), the swarthy ruling classes (Blue Blood is Black blood) were overthrown by their albino-bred white European underlings with the aid of modern technology (as represented by the biplanes).
A metaphor for the slave trade? If that’s the case what’s the symbolism of Ann Darrow’s character? Is Tarantino claiming that there was something about slavery that Africans found attractive?
In the movie Inglorious Basterds, which is what he’s talking about.
A bunch of German soldiers are sitting in a bar and playing “Who am I?”, which is where you have a card on your forehead with a name on it. You can’t see the card, but the other people can. So you have to ask them yes or no questions in order to figure out who you are.
So the German soldier, after asking a bunch of questions, sums up what he knows about his card:
Soldier: Who am I? I came to America. I came to America to benefit some one else. I used to live in a exotic area of the world. I came over in a boat. I came against my will. I was chained up. I was put on display. Who am I?
Am I an enslaved negro?
Everyone else: No.
Soldier (With a smile on his face): Am I King Kong?
I’ve heard this too. And if it means that to you, then that it what it means to you. Art can be interpreted many ways. And this interpretation particularly fits.
For me King Kong, the original with Fay Wray in black and white, is one of the best monster movies ever made. The two remakes are awful in comparison, but not for lack of effort. They just did too much of a good thing.
No, but The Planet of The Apes is about our Primate brethern. Or was it about slaves? (I mean everyone wants a Monkey Butler, or a roomba, or a cylon sexslave.)
I read somewhere that Cooper originally planned to do just that, get a gorilla, get a komodo dragon and film the two duking it out. If this is true, I’m glad they changed their minds.
To keep this on topic, I’ve heard this theory before but I’ve never really bought it. Movies around this time weren’t exactly PC. If Cooper et. al wanted to make a movie about black men swooping in and stealing white women, they probably could have done so without repercussions let alone hide behind a giant ape allegory.
What you see in art is usually yourself.
I see Kong as frustrated sexuality. He gets this girl that is promised to him but then what. T-Rex comes up and tries to take her. Then some other bug. Then some Pterodactyls come along and try to take her. Then this new guy who got a 4.0 at Yardale comes along and really takes her. Then you chase after her and get arrested and put in chains and everyone laughs at you for even wanting that girl because she is so out of your league you must be joking. And no matter how mad you get or how high you climb they will come and tear you down for wanting the blond. And the sad truth is that the blond was never that into you dude.
(nobody was ever stupid enough to remake this film, well, except for The Cider House Rules)
