Yuku free message boards

Jackson's movie, with its many strengths, seems primarily to me to be a reading of King Kong: the original's subtextual romance/rape fantasy of Kong & Fay is made explicit in Jackson's movie. I don't think this derives necessarily from De Laurentiis' movie, since it's certainly part of the wonder of the original: for me, much of the power of King Kong is the room it allows for the viewer's imagination, even given the incredible generosity of Willis O'Brien's onscreen magic. I don't find much of that room for wonder in Jackson -- it's all about Jackson's wonder, for me.

I do enjoy the way he made his love-letter to Kong pretty well bulletproof, though: Jack Black's casting aside, Jackson's Denham is so clearly a self-portrait it's practically a cameo, and in this version, Carl Denham's all about finding the wonder, and killing it.

Influenced by 1976? Don't think so.

Wich2 wrote:

---

"the original's subtextual romance/rape fantasy of Kong & Fay is made explicit in Jackson's movie"

In the original, the relationship is indeed seen in terms of Rape only, beginning to end.

Maybe... I'm not sure about that, though. I think it's difficult (especially these days, maybe) to entirely untangle the romantic ravishment motif here. I think the story's events jive with the "Fay as victim, Kong as monster" reading -- but even within the movie, we've got the bogus epigraph and Denham's "beauty slew the beast" take on things, so Kong's pretty clearly being allowed room to be a romantic hero, albeit one consistent with period fantasies (Valentino's sheik, say, a slightly earlier transgressor). He defends Fay from (other) monsters, is struck by her beauty, and dies romantically enough, plus he gets to eat people and rip up New York city subways. Our simultaneous identification with Fay as victim means we get our thrills both ways. I'm not sure about thirties romantic fantasies, but I'm pretty sure that audiences have always seen Fay & Kong as starcrossed lovers. All Jackson did here was make the fantasy (ludicrously) literal.

Rather than Kong '76, I actually thought Beauty and the Beast was more of an influence -- I'm thinking Cocteau, but also Disney - that ice skating scene, say.

I took a quick refresher run through King Kong last night, watching specifically for Fay Wray's reactions to the big mug, and it's pretty clearly a one-sided romance: her terror might be a little mitigated by some moments of awe, but it's not dwelled on. She is always terrified of Kong.

(I don't think I'm saying anything new about either Kong here, I'm just trying to clarify what I think, and trying to make a post without using the "r" word.)

Kong, on the other hand, is portrayed in a way that allows the audience to develop their own romantic reading. At the first reveal, the monstrous head close-up keeps going in, until it's the eyes we're seeing: from that first shot, we've got sympathy for the beast. Everything he does with Ann is readable (and explicitly read that way by characters in the film) as heroic. (Except maybe the bit where he rips her clothes off...) The very act of snatching her is readable as rescue -- he's saving her from the islanders; he protects her and rescues her from the various wildlife of the island; and when he chases her to the shore, he's trying to save her from Driscoll's abduction. In New York, he escapes because, as Denham says, he thinks the photographers are attacking Ann; he rescues her from Driscoll again; and once again seeks safe high ground with her.

The structural symmetry of the movie's two parts (Skull Island/Manhattan island) plays up our reading of Kong as sympathetic and romantic. Kong's parallel enemies (dinosaurs/subways, savage islanders, and flying beasts that attack even in his aerie) let us see his murderous NYC rampage in the light of his earlier fights to defend Ann. And Kong's tied up exactly the same way as Ann was on Skull Island -- we're terrified, but cheering when he breaks loose.

Kong's the bad guy, but he's in love, so he's got our sympathy: that's all pretty explicit in the movie. Is there any reciprocation on Ann's part? Despite the heady eroticism (delicate, satin-draped frame; disrobing; the bed-drag abduction), I don't think so. But not until the rise of "slash" fiction would there be such a great opportunity for the audience to bring their own romantic fantasy to the story -- and that is pure fantasy.

I don't think Jackson took much, if anything from the 76 Kong -- I think he just filled in all the blanks.