King Kong 1933 vs 1976 vs 2005

 

My least favourite King Kong out of the three is definitely 1976. It strays from the original premise created in 1933. It doesnt have the famous line about beauty killing the beast. It isnt about shooting a movie but it is about oil. Perhaps the focus on the environment and oil is more about the 70s and the oil crisis. Anyhow, one thing I never liked about King Kong is that the antagonist never suffers the consequences of his actions. Frederick Wilson the oil executive escapes justice for his crimes. If I was the screenwriter I would have the bad guy get eaten by King Kong, but that is just me. King Kong 1976 wasnt that great in my opinion. I found myself looking at my phone half way through the movie.

My second favourite King Kong is the 1933 version. Yes it is in black and white and yes King Kong and the monsters on Skull Island look cartoonish but the acting is solid. 1933 lays out the blueprint and skeleton that is used later on. There is a lot of screaming and roaring. There is less emphasis on the bond between Kong and the white woman. And the cast on the ship is mostly white men and an Asian because in the 30s they did not have to worry about diversity. Once again the ending does not feel right because Carl Denham does not suffer any consequences of his actions. I still would have liked to see Kong eat Carl Denham. 

My favourite King Kong movie is 2005. It is hands down one of my favourite movies. I almost cried at the end. It may be 3 hours long but it does not feel like it. The visuals, the acting, the script, the graphics are impeccable. It is a movie to be enjoyed in the cinema with popcorn. My only criticism is that Carl Denham does not get eaten by Kong in the end. Carl gets to throw his line about beauty killing the beast when in fact it was Carl Denham and his greed who killed the beast. 

King Kong 2005 focuses on the bond between Kong and the woman. Seeing Kong on the ice with the character Ann. However, King Kong 2005 differs from the other two because in this one the hero played by Jack, is a Adrien Brody, a Jewish man. Without sounding like a conspiracy theorist, having the hero being a Jew shows how power dynamics have shifted in America. In 1933 Jack the hero was a white man and in 2005 the hero is a noticeably Jewish man. Also Hayes a black character is thrown in there who dies a martyr's death and is the most honourable character in the show. Moreover, the natives of Skull island are not of African descent illustrating racial sensitivities in the modern world.

The moral of the story

Dont be greedy and dont be cruel to animals. (Even though Carl Denham gets away with his crimes.)

Final thoughts

A lot of people say King Kong is about the enslavement of Africans in America, the chaos that is a result of their freedom and the inevitable downfall of the African man. I agree. King Kong is a parable about the African slave and his freedom. I prefer my movies and stories to have double meanings, symbols and subtext like Animal Farm. But analysing movies is subjective. Some people think King Kong is just about an ape others think it is about the black experience in White America. Tarantino seems to think so.

Truthfully speaking African Americans have caused havoc in America. American jails are full of black criminals. The statistics show that although they are 13 percent of the population African Americans commit 60 percent of the crimes. Black Americans have turned once great cities like Detroit, Compton and St Louis into slums and crime infested hell holes. Like King Kong African American criminals are literally like feral apes running amok, raping, killing and stealing. White women are getting raped by brown and black outlaws at an industrial scale. And like King Kong black criminals will be put down like the untamed beasts that they are. People like OJ Simpson and Bill Cosby are examples of black celebrities who fell from grace because of their lust for white women. Their life stories resemble King Kong in many subtle ways. In many ways comparing black criminals to King Kong is an insult to King Kong and wild animals in general. White Americans should have sent them back to Liberia when they had the chance but now it may be too late for that.  

But King Kong is not just about black slaves in America. It is about animal cruelty by humans and the need for animal rights. It is also about respecting nature and our fellow mammals that we share the world with. 

With that being said, the Trans Atlantic slave trade was a tragedy and a dumb idea. If white Europeans had just picked their own cotton they would a majority in the Caribbean Islands and America would not have to deal with racial tensions. Unlike the Arabs who castrated their black slaves white Europeans allowed their slaves to multiply and today their descendants curse them for bringing black slaves to America and for not sending them back. In some twisted way African Americans are better off than the Africans who remained behind so there's that. Mohammed Ali after seeing Africa said, "Thank God my grand daddy got on that boat!"

But slavery does not only pertain to African Americans. All throughout history we have slave revolts similar to King Kong. Spartacus was a King Kong. Simon bar Kocbha was a King Kong. The Palestinians are King Kongs. Humans have a need for freedom and when they are chained and dehumanised they react like wild animals to get their liberty. Freedom is a need and not a want and people and animals alike will die in pursuit of their liberty. That is the moral of the story in King Kong. 

Buy my book

I wrote a short book that deals with slavery and the fight for freedom. It is entitled The Trees of Liberty. Link below. 

https://www.amazon.com/Trees-Liberty-Saint-Dismas/dp/B0DG2TPDBJ