King Kong Comparison
In 1933, Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack created a film that would change cinema forever. The image of Kong a top the Empire State Building is one of the most iconic images in the history of film and popular culture. Kong remains one of the greatest giant movie monsters of all time even making himself an American icon. When people think of the empire state building they can instantly relate to King Kong. One of the most significant changes in the 2005 remake of King Kong is the amount of character development. Peter Jackson who directed the newest version of the classic film really explored each character and their individual arc to improve how they were presented on screen. In the original film Ann's back story isn't too clear or
…show more content…
One newspaper critic in particular described the film as "A Fantastic Film in Which a Monstrous Ape Uses Automobiles for Missiles and Climbs a Skyscraper." Although the film sadly didn't win any awards at the Academy Awards of 1933 or 1934, the 2005 remake did win 3 awards at the Oscars for Sound Editing, Sound Mixing and Visual Effects. While these awards aren't huge like best lead actress, best film or best director they're still good and something for the creators to be proud of. Many people’s opinions before the release were negative and thought that it should have been left alone, seeing it as another pointless remake. But people enjoyed the film and a lot of critics have said they thought the film was very good. Rodger Ebert even gave the film 4 stars claiming it to be "One of this year’s best films". “For instance, in the mid-1970s King Kong was seen as a ‘natural’ for remaking, not only because of the success of the original, its pioneering special effects and cult status, but for the opportunities it provided for promotional tie-ins, from Jim Beam King Kong cocktails to 7–11 store slurpy drinks in special Kong cups”. In these examples, remaking is not only evidence of Hollywood being an ‘aesthetic copy-cat’, but (worse) of ‘cultural imperialism’ and ‘terroristic marketing practices’ designed to block an original’s competition in the US market.” As the classic film is seen as a
One newspaper critic in particular described the film as "A Fantastic Film in Which a Monstrous Ape Uses Automobiles for Missiles and Climbs a Skyscraper." Although the film sadly didn't win any awards at the Academy Awards of 1933 or 1934, the 2005 remake did win 3 awards at the Oscars for Sound Editing, Sound Mixing and Visual Effects. While these awards aren't huge like best lead actress, best film or best director they're still good and something for the creators to be proud of. Many people’s opinions before the release were negative and thought that it should have been left alone, seeing it as another pointless remake. But people enjoyed the film and a lot of critics have said they thought the film was very good. Rodger Ebert even gave the film 4 stars claiming it to be "One of this year’s best films". “For instance, in the mid-1970s King Kong was seen as a ‘natural’ for remaking, not only because of the success of the original, its pioneering special effects and cult status, but for the opportunities it provided for promotional tie-ins, from Jim Beam King Kong cocktails to 7–11 store slurpy drinks in special Kong cups”. In these examples, remaking is not only evidence of Hollywood being an ‘aesthetic copy-cat’, but (worse) of ‘cultural imperialism’ and ‘terroristic marketing practices’ designed to block an original’s competition in the US market.” As the classic film is seen as a