King Kong (2005)

"The beast looked upon the face of beauty. Beauty stayed his hand, and from that moment he was as one dead."
(Carl Denham, King Kong 2005, paraphrasing a quote from King Kong 1933)

"There are only four questions of value in life..What is sacred? Of what is the spirit made? What is worth living for? What is worth dying for? The answer to each is the same. Only love."
(Don Juan De Marco, from the film of the same name)

It is a rare thing when a remake surpasses the original film upon which it was based in quality. In fact, more often than not the results are disastrous. A few examples of this are the 1997 version of Psycho, the 2001 version of Planet of the Apes, and a 1976 Dino De Laurentiis movie entitled King Kong. It would seem, then, that Peter Jackson has accomplished, if not the impossible, then at least the highly unlikely. He has made a remake that is actually better than the original.

I realise that many fans of the 1933 King Kong probably read my last remark with disbelief. Not a few probably are accusing me of blasphemy. After all, the 1933 King Kong is an unabashed classic. It is one of the most influential movies of all time, inspiring filmmakers from Ray Harryhausen to, well, Peter Jackson. Its iconography is part of Anglo-American pop culture--who can't look on the Empire State Building and not think of the great ape? And I must confess that the original King Kong is one of my favourite films of all time. Indeed, I wore out my VHS copy from watching it too often and I bought it the moment it came out on DVD. But I cannot lie. I honestly think Peter Jackson has taken a masterpiece and created an even greater masterpiece based upon it.

Indeed, it is hard for me to know where to even begin. I suppose the most obvious place to start is the film's astounding special effects. Kong looks real. This is not a stop motion puppet as in the original film (which was state of the art for the era and still holds up fairly well) or a man in a monkey suit (as in De Laurentiis' mammoth piece of garbage). This a CGI creation superior even to Gollum of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. And it is not enough that this Kong battles T. rexs and climbs the Empire State Building, this Kong emotes as well as the best actors. He displays a wide range of emotions through his facial expressions, from rage to jealousy to love. The state of the art FX wizardry doesn't end with Kong. There are dinosaurs and other beasties, not to mention an incredibly accurate, realistic creation of New York City circa 1933 that involves CGI, miniatures, and a four block set. It cannot be said that Jackson and his crew did not do their research. His New York City of 1933 looks like the real thing, right down to the streetcars.

Despite its state of the art technology, Jackson's King Kong feels very much like an old time movie. Many films today would have us on Skull Island within the first ten minutes. Not so with Jackson's remake. It is nearly an hour before we even see Skull Island and its best known inhabitant. That hour is spent setting up the milieu of Depression Era New York and developing the characters. By the time the viewer reaches Skull Island, he or she will feel as if he knows actress Ann Darrow (the exquisite Naomi Watts), flashy producer Carl Denham (Jack Black), and screenwriter Jack Driscoll (Adrien Brody) as well as his or her next door neighbours. That character development is made all the easier by the performances of the actors. Indeed, I believe it would be a grave injustice if Naomi Watts does not receive an Oscar nod for Best Actress. Her Ann Darrow is beautiful, sexy, funny, and smart. It is easy to see why Kong falls for her. Jack Black does well as Denham as well, a flamboyant character who is one part Darryl Zanuck, one part Merrian C. Cooper, and one part P. T. Barnum. Kudos must also go to Andy Serkis, whose movements provided the model for Kong. Indeed, Serkis even provides the roar for the big guy!

What makes Jackson's King Kong so great goes beyond its state of the art FX and the performances of its cast. At the heart of the film is the work of Peter Jackson, who not only directed the movie, but co-wrote the screenplay with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens. Jackson has captured the heart of the original King Kong. Neither the 1933 version nor the 2005 version are giant monster movies. Instead they are both stories about love. And it is the love that Kong has for Ann Darrow that Jackson brings to the fore of the movie. Taken not only with her blonde good looks, but her spunk, intelligence, and sense of humour as well (she seems to be the only woman who ceased to fear him after a time), Kong is literally willing to die for Ann. To protect her he faces giant lizards and even an entire family of Tyrannosaurus rexs. Indeed, one gets the feeling that he even climbs the Empire State Building because of Ann. Here Kong is, the inhabitant of an ancient island facing 20th century technology. He knows that he will die in the end, but he must protect the one he loves. After years of living alone, Kong at last found a reason to live for and to die for.

Indeed, it is the climax atop the world's most famous skyscraper that makes Jackson's King Kong superior to the original. It is not simply the advanced FX technology, it is the scenes between Ann and Kong. Both know what is going to happen. Both know that in the end the biplanes will win. Yet neither will give the other one up. It is arguably one of the most tragic and most romantic endings of any film.

If the original film continues to be popular with grown men long after they have ceased to be boys, perhaps it is because we can sympathise with Kong, even identify with him. I know I do. Peter Jackson's remake increases the sympathy for Kong and identification with him. Forget that he is a giant gorilla. He is Everyman.

Here I must point out that despite the fact that it is a tragedy, Jackson's King Kong does have a sense of humour. There are some hilarious scenes between Denham and Ann, between Driscoll and Ann, and even between Kong and Ann. And there are a number of injokes for fans of Merrian C. Cooper and the original King Kong, not to mention one injoke that only long time fans of Peter Jackson will get (and it doesn't have to do with Heavenly Creatures or LotR).

I realise that there are those who will scoff, that there will be doubters who read this review. But Jackson's King Kong is a truly great film. It is an old time adventure story and a story about love that will bring out the kid in any adult wiling to be a kid again. Forget Brokeback Mountain and Pride and Prejudice. King Kong is the best film of this year.

John Spencer R.I.P.

John Spencer, best known for playing Leo McGarry, the chief of staff on The West Wing, died suddenly from a heart attack on December 16. He was only 58. He would have turned 59 on December 20.

John Spencer was born John Speshock around Patterson, New Jersey. At age 16 he attended the Professional Children's School. By 1963 he had a recurring role on The Patty Duke Show as cousin Cathy's boyfriend Henry Anderson. He attended Fairleigh Dickenson University, then New York University. He never finished college, dropping out to return to acting.

Much of John Spencer's career was spent on the stage. Early in his career he worked in regional theatre and New York, appearing in Lakeboat and The Glass Menagerie. He appeared on Broadway in such shows as Boom Boom Room (1973), Execution of Justice (1986), and The Day Room (1988). In 1981 he won an Obie for his work in the off Broadway play Still Life.

Spencer made his film debut in the movie Echoes in 1983. He went onto play in such films as War Games, Black Rain, Presumed Innocent. But it was on television that he would have his biggest impact. In 1988 he landed a role on the soap opera Another World. In 1990 he joined the cast of L.A. Law. He would go onto appear in the short lived series Trinity before being cast as Chief of Staff McGarry on The West Wing.

I must say that I am saddened by Spencer's death. While I have not been a regular viewer of The West Wing in ages, I watched L.A. Law loyally and, of course, I remember him from The Patty Duke Show. He always impressed me as a consumate professional, an actor who did his job and did his job well. It is sad that he had to pass on at such a young age.

Son of Kong

In 1933 King Kong was the blockbuster of the year. People lined up to see it. According to IMDB, the movie grossed $1,700,000--this at a time when the average movie ticket cost about 25 cents! King Kong was pretty much the Star Wars or Titanic of its day. Such success naturally demanded a sequel. Son of Kong was rushed into production and released the same year. Sadly, it did not do as well at the box office as the original Kiong Kong.

Much of this is perhaps due to the fact that Son of Kong is simply not as good as King Kong. It does not have such iconic scenes as Kong's battle with the t rex, let alone his final moments atop the Empire State Building. And there is not nearly as much as action or excitement. That having been said, it is not a bad film. In fact, it is a rather good one that holds up well today.

Indeed, the movie is rather realistic in portraying the aftermath of Kong's romp through New York City. Filmmaker Carl Denham finds himself burdened with dozens of lawsuits and about to be indicted by a Grand Jury. Going into the shipping business in the East Indies, he eventually finds his way back to Skull Island where he encounters Kong's offspring.

If the film's reputation has suffered over the years, it is perhaps because of comparisons with the original King Kong. While King Kong moves the viewer swiftly to Skull Island, Son of Kong takes a while to get there. And while King Kong is nearly ninety minutes in length, Son of Kong is only about an hour long. Worse yet, while Kong occupies the screen for much of the first movie, his son only gets a little screen time in the second. Finally, while King Kong is definitely an action/adventure/horror movie, Son of Kong is played largely for comedy.

Here I should point out that it is unfair to compare Son of Kong to King Kong. The movie does stand up on its own. The movie moves at a fairly good pace and involves the viewer. Once the plot reaches Skull Island, there is no lack of excitement. Perhaps the movie's biggest flaw (besides the son of Kong being on so briefly) is that its ending is rather abrupt. Earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are exciting, but they bring this movie to an all too abrupt end.

Son of Kong is a must see for any fan of the original movie. It is also a good film (although I am not sure I would grant it "classic" status) that any fan of old movies should see.

In Dreams

I won't go into the reason why, but today I am not in a particuarly good mood. I find myself in the mood for Roy Orbison songs again. One of my favourite Orbison songs is "In Dreams." The song went to #7 on the Billboard charts upon its release in 1963. It was also featured prominently in the movie Blue Velvet.

The concept behind the song is fairly simple. A fellow has apparnetly lost the woman he loves; henceforth, he can only have her in his dreams. It is one of the most depressing songs I think Orbison ever recorded (which is really saying something). It is also a song with which anyone who has lost someone can identify; I know I can.

My only caveat about the song is the reference to the Sandman as a "candy coloured clown." Maybe I've read too many Neil Gaiman Sandman comic books and listened to Metallica's "Enter Sandman" one too many times, but I never have pictured the Sandman as candy coloured...

"In Dreams" by Roy Orbison

Richard Pryor R. I. P.

Comedian Richard Pryor died this morning at age 65 from a heart attack. He had been suffering for many years from mutiple sclerosis.

Richard Pryor was born in 1940 in Peoria, Illinois. He claimed to have grown up in a brothel run by his grandmother. He dropped out of school early and served for two years in the United States Army. Following his military stint, Pryor started doing stand up comedy in comedy clubs. He made his first appearance on television in 1964 on On Broadway Tonight. This was followed by several apperances on The Ed Sullivan Show. Pryor also made guest appearances on such series as The Wild Wild West and The Mod Squad.

Although most of Pryor's material seems tame by today's standards, Pryor's routines were sometimes considered shocking in the late Sixties and early Seventies. He sometimes used obscenitites and even made free use of the "N" word. Much of his material focused on racial inequality.

It was in the Seventies that Pryor came into his own. He was a regular on The Kraft Music Hall in 1966 and in the Seventies appeared many times on The Tonight Show. Beginning with The Phynx in 1970, Pryor started appearing in movies as well. By the mid-Seventies he was one of the most successful comedians in the United States and made a series of hit films, from Silver Streak to Brewster's Millions. In 1977 Pryor had his own short lived variety show on NBC, killed because his material often offended the network's Broadcast Standards department.

In addition to acting and appearing on various variety shows, Pryor was also a screenwriter. He wrote for both The Flip Wilson Show and Sanford and Son. He collaborated with Mel Brooks on the screenplay for Blazing Saddles and wrote the story for Bustin' Loose.

Pryor's life was often complicated to say the least. He was married six times and had three children. By his own admission he was a "junkie." In 1980 he caught himself on fire while freebasing cocaine. Not surprisingly, he incorporated the incident into his routine. In 1978 he was sentenced for failing to file income taxes. In 1978 he allegedly fired at a car in which there were two of his wife of the time's friends. Eventualy he was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis.

For all his personal failings, I always did like Richard Pryor. He pushed the envelope in his early performances and refused to tone down his act even when he became famous. In 1977 he preferred for his show to go off the air rather than be cut to pieces by NBC's censors. He also focused on racial injustice at a time when the Civil Rights movement was well underway. Most of all, however, Richard Pryor was funny. As offensive as his language could be at times (I have never liked the "N" word), he could also be absolutely hilarious. He definietely had an influence on many comics who followed him, from Robin Williams to Chris Rock. I don't think he'll soon be forgotten.

When Harry Met Sally

It seems to me that since the Sixties, truly great romantic comedies have been few and far between. Aside from the films of Woody Allen, I can only think of two off the top of my head. One is rather recent--Down With Love from 2003. The other is from all the way back in 1989. When Harry Met Sally has numbered among my favourite films ever since I first saw it.

If When Harry Met Sally is one of the truly great romantic comedies, much of it is due to Nora Ephron's screenplay. Ephron created two charming characters in Harry and Sally, each saddled with his or her own neuroses. Indeed, the progression of their relationship from acquaintances who can barely tolerate to each other to best friends to soul mates may well be one of the most realistic portrayals of a relationship on film. What is more is that the film also features some of the wittiest and sharpest dialogue of any film in recent memory.

Of course, Nora Ephron's script would have been worthless without a cast to breathe life into her characters. Billy Crystal and Meg Ryan make Harry and Sally flawed, yet charming and loveable (indeed, I think if my mother had her way, I would have married Meg Ryan...). Their performances are very subtle, with both conveying emotions with a single glance or gesture. Kudos must also go to the supporting cast. Bruno Kirby as Harry's friend Jess and Carrie Fisher as Sally's friend Marie are wonderful.

I must also point out that When Harry Met Sally is definitely a movie for movie buffs. There are a number of references to classic films throughout the movie. Indeed, movies figure prominently in the lives of Harry and Sally. They share a love for Casablanca. When Harry is mourning the loss of Sally, at one point he has It's a Wonderful Life on the telly. And there are references to The Lady Vanishes, Pillow Talk, Planet of the Apes, Annie Hall, and other films. Even the climax, on New Year's Eve, is remniscent of The Apartment (perhaps the greatest romantic comedy of all time).

When Harry Met Sally centres around the truly simple question of whether men and women can ever truly be friends without sex getting in the way. It must be pointed out, however, that it never truly answers this question. Harry and Sally do become friends, but it seems clear to me that they were in love almost from the beginning. Indeed, after seeing Sally at an airport for the first time in five years, Harry goes out of his way to talk to her. Even once their friendship commences, it is clear that they are something other than friends--in everything from the way they look at each other to the way they speak to each other. When Sally gets angry at Harry after they have sex for the first time, I suspect it is not because she thinks he took advantage of her, but rather because she was forced to confront the feelings they had both repressed for so long. Quite simply, When Harry Met Sally fails to answer the question of whether men and women can be friends simply because Harry and Sally were in love all along. That having been said, it does point out something very important. At the root of every successful romantic relationship there must be friendship. Every relationship Harry and Sally have fail, until they finally get together. In real life, I fear all too often people forget that to be lovers, they must be friends as well if the relationship is to succeed. Too often I think they are blinded by mere physical appearance or other unimportant matters. Given that, I think it is perhaps little wonder it took Harry and Sally a while to finally get together....

For me this is one of the reasons When Harry Met Sally is so great. It does not create a simple boy meet girl plotline with all the traditionally romantic elements plugged in. Instead, it presents us with a realistic relationship in which two friends sadly will not admit how they truly feel about each other until years have passed. That they do finaly get together perhaps is hope for romantics everywhere.

Days in a Life: John Lennon Remembered

"All you need is love." (John Lennon, "All You Need is Love")

"Instant karma's gonna get you..." (John Lennon, "Instant Karma")

It was 25 years ago today that John Lennon was shot and murdered. It is perhaps a measure of Lennon's importance that many can remember where they were when they heard the news. I know that I certainly can. The morning of December 8, 1980, I was in the midst of a particularly vicious bout of the flu. I had no intention of getting out of bed, let alone going to school. It was a bit after 6:30 AM CST that my brother awakened me with the words "John Lennon is dead. He's been shot." My immediate reaction was to tell him that was BS--he was lying. I stumbled out of bed to the living room where Today was already on the air. Jane Pauley looked as if she had been crying. Tom Brokaw looked as if he was in shock. It was true. Lennon, leader of The Beatles, was dead.

For the next few days it seemed as if news coverage was devoted only to the life and death of John Lennon. Outside the Dakota in New York City, 5000 people gathered to mourn the man's passing. On show after show, those who knew him remembered him. Lennon's image appeared on both the covers of Time and Newsweek. And in many, perhaps most cases, Lennon's murder was described as an "assassination," a word usually used of the murders of politicians and heads of state. It would seem that John Lennon was not merely a musician in a rock band.

While it is clear that Lennon was mourned immediately after his death and is still being mourned today, it is more difficult to measure his legacy. Clearly as one of The Beatles he changed the shape of rock music. The Beatles expanded the parameters of the genre in ways that no other artists have before or since. They utilised chord progressions that had never been heard before in rock 'n' roll. They had the audacity to start songs off with the chorus ("She Loves You" was one of the first songs in which this was done). I don't know that they invented the concept album, but they did create one of the earliest and arguably the most influential one( Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band). They revolutionised recording methods. They introduced instruments never before used in rock music--the sitar, the mellotron, and so on. Indeed, they were absolutely fearless when it came to their music. They could just easily perform a simple rock tune with George on lead guitar, John on rhythm guitar, Paul on bass, and Ringo on drums, and then turn around and perform a song complete with a full symphony orchestra. Among the firsts that The Beatles can claim is that they were the first band to perform in stadiums, although this was due more to their enormous popularity than anything else. Quite clearly, The Beatles changed rock music in ways than no other person or band has. And they may have changed it more than anyone else, too.

As a solo artist Lennon's career never quite measured up to his career as a Beatle. This was not unusual, as it it is also true of the other Beatles. Still, Lennon had an impact in a way that other rock artists never did. "Give Peace a Chance" became an anthem for pacifists everywhere. "Happy Christmas (War is Over)" has become a Yuletide regular. Perhaps no other song Lennon wrote has had the impact of "Imagine." It came in at #3 on Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs and has ranked high on other "greatest songs" as well. Indeed, it is perhaps the only solo song by a Beatle to have the impact of a Beatles song.


While it is hard to gauge Lennon's impact as a musician, it is even harder to measure his impact beyond his music. He was certainly an activist, but he was not the first singer to be such. Folk singers such as Woody Guthrie, Pete Seeger, Joan Baez, and others preceded him in that regard. But arguably he brought such activism to a wider audience than any other musical performer before him. And he did so in such ways that were more outrageous than any performer before. John Lennon and Yoko Ono staged "Bed-Ins" to protest the Vietnam War. On the Mike Douglas Show he urged viewers to call people and tell them that they love them. Of course, this may point to a more important part of Lennon's legacy than his activism. Pegged as a Beatle from early in his life, Lennon was the first Beatle to break free of the Beatle image. He insisted on being himself, no matter how outrageous that may be. Earlier singers--indeed, most celebrities--insisted on protecting their images. Not Lennon, he didn't seem to care about his image that much. He posed nude with Yoko Ono on an album cover (Two Virgins). He retired for five years to raise his son Sean. No matter what happened, Lennon insisted on being himself.

Of course, it is important to remember that John Lennon was not a perfect person. As much as many of his fans might regard him as a god (and I must confess that I am guilty of that myself), he was a mere mortal. His treatment of his first wife Cynthia could quite aptly be described as abusive. His marriage to Yoko Ono was not always smooth. He was by his own admission an inadequate father to his son Julian. He was a heroin addict. Although there can be no doubt of his brilliance, Lennon could also be reprehensible. On this however, we must consider two things. First, how well would many of us appear to the public if every single thing about our lives were made open to everyone? In life and death Lennon's life has faced close scrutiny, both the bad and the good. Second, it often seems that genius is accompanied by deep personal flaws. Byron, Mozart, Kubrick, and many other brilliant people were often flawed human beings. It is perhaps the curse of being a genius in an otherwise mediocre world.

Regardless of his faults, I find myself mourning Lennon today as I do every year. I don't know what the first song I ever listened to was, but chances are it was a Beatles songs. Their songs were constantly played on the radio when I was young and my older sister (17 years my senior) owned their albums. There was even a Beatles cartoon on Saturday mourning. Even if the first song I ever listened to was not a Beatles song, they were the first group I ever got into. I have been a Beatles fan since early childhood. Their breakup was big news when I was in first grade. I continued to listen to Lennon's music even as a solo artist. Arguably, he has had more impact on me than any other musician, perhaps more than any artist in any medium. Given that, I do owe John Lennon a great debt for in part making me who I am today. And it is a debt I fear I can never repay. I don't know that anyone could.