King Kong Review

Roger Ebert, on his syndicated television program, called King Kong this year's greatest entertainment. It's so not. I've sat on the fence about this film since I saw it several weeks ago, but now I'm taking a stand. This is not a good film. Peter Jackson, much like George Lucas before him, has so many visual toys at his disposal that he feels he must use every one. The original King Kong was 80 minutes long; Jackson's version is 187 minutes of bloated unnecessary action set pieces amongst a handful of truly touching scenes between Naomi Watts and the remarkable Kong. Those were the longest three hours I've spent in a theater since Titanic (and this coming from a guy who did the Lord of the Rings marathon).

Special FX are great, but for every film that uses them correctly, there are many others that fall in love with their digital creations to such a degree that they come to rule over the more interesting parts of cinema like ... say... character. And story. Special FX mean nothing if they're not in the service of a story. Titanic remains a turd that won't sink fast enough. Shock and Awe couldn't save Star Wars from becoming a shame for kids raised on its original fantasy. And King Kong suffers the same fate as so many other FX spectacles before it.

The fact that these enormous action scenes take place between scenes of beautifully transcendent filmmaking only makes their superfluousness more glaring. Naomi Watts is amazing in this film; her eyes seem to be the only thing giving this film any depth. Every scene she shares with Kong are captivating, both for the technical achievement of Kong and the Watts's performance. But these scenes are too few and too often spoiled by giant bugs or stampeding brontosauri or Jack Black.

Peter Jackson pummels us with action. Pummels. So much so that when the climactic ascension of the Empire State Building arrived, I was so burnt out on the previous 160 minutes of noise that I just wanted it all to end. I didn't weep for Kong when he fell, as apparently many critics did. I took a deep breath and dragged my ass to the parking lot.

This is a flawed film. Deeply flawed. Which is a shame, because like I said, Naomi Watts is amazing and deserves some accolades for her work here. But I can't recommend this film. If you want the year's greatest entertainment, I have two words for you: Batman Begins.