Don’t you just love Kong? His devotion to Ann is just written on his warm, human face. The way he gently caresses her as though she’s not just a plaything but a love-interest, a real ‘bride of Kong’ is just charming… And gee whiz can he fight! (Why has my language descended into thirties slang? I guess it’s just such a swell movie!) The fight with the tyrannosaurus rex was especially enjoyable – and Kong shows he’s got a bit of (Tarantino-esque) humour as well with the needlessly, ridiculously brutal snapping of the dinosaur’s head.
Why is Kong such an appealing figure? I think it’s because he’s portrayed in the movie with all the attributes of a ‘real man’ – he is a trope of the natural man.
It is only the truly wild man that can be tamed by the sexual power of Ann Darrow’s beauty. The civilised man, as signified by Carl Denham, is concerned only in her beauty for its superficial use - Denham regards Ann as the ideal prop (read: commodity) for his film. The natural man, however, desires Ann for her innate femininity. Ann is not simply A woman, she is THE woman. She represents an incursion of the feminine in the more primal world of men.
And (going back to the theme of my Picadilly blog) she’s a white woman – more pure than the black virgins of Skull Mountain (six times more so, according to the native chief). Jack, the ultimate man’s man, is immediately drawn to Darrow against his nature. Kong, who we see throughout the movie is not averse to mindless killing, risks his own life to save her from various giant creatures and eventually the NYPD. Ann has a power over the natural man because she represents everything which they are not. She is representative of the civilised world – which is soft and affeminate.
Kong is also a man of integrity. Why does he break free from his chains on the Broadway platform? Why- because he believed that the flashbulbs were injuring Ann. Kong may be naieve, but he is the good guy of the narrative. Kong doesn’t choose to wreak havok on New York – instead it is the greed of Denham the civilised man that leads to this misadventure and Kong’s eventual demise.
Lastly, of course Kong is appealing because he is convincing on the screen as a giant ape. The use of stop-motion animation is particularly apt for the recreation of the films giant creatures, the slightly clunky movements suggestive of giant muscles labouring under the weight of their heavy load. Kong’s skin moves effectively as well, the fingers of the animators occasionally ruffling his rabbit-fur outer layer gives the effect of muscular ripples beneath the surface. And lets be frank – Kong is possibly the best actor in the film. Kong is incredibly realistic - one of the greatest acheivements of the film, I believe, is his appearance on a Broadway stage. His body tensed against his shackles, Kong is frighteningly present in the scene – even to one as jaded by special effects as I am! The beauty of the film is its success in integrating Kong and its other fantastical creatures into live action footage.
I can see why some people may object to the film on the grounds that it has little plot, farcical scenarios and wooden acting. But the characterisation of Kong, to me, makes the film deserving of its reputation as a classic and unmissable film.
1 comment:
Hi...
I think you make a good point! I was not a huge fan of the film but I loved Kong himself. I wrote in my own blog I wish my boyfriend could be as powerful as Kong sometimes to defend me- although he thinks he is! I did really identify with Kong and I was drawn to him a lot more than the other characters because of his obvious humanity.
Post a Comment