Landmark film in cinema history. One can only imagine how audiences of the day were amazed at what they saw when this was released. And Willis o' Brian begat Ray Harryhausen, the genius that shaped my youth and my love of all things sci fi/fantasy. Great review!
I actually absolutely LOVE your format in going though the history a bit as well as talking about the film itself. Really fascinating and well done mate!
The very young Ray Harryhausen saw "King Kong" on the big screen at Grauman's Chinese Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard, perhaps the most spectacular cinema of its time. (He didn't know it at the time but another 13-year-old boy who would become a lifelong friend also saw "King Kong" at Grauman's Chinese, Ray Bradbury.) Seeing that seminal film in such a wonderful movie palace must have enhanced Harryhausen's experience considerably. According to his own account, he watched it through many times, often doing odd jobs here and there to raise the price of a ticket. His first viewings were for the sheer experience of excitement and awe, later he concentrated on the technique hoping to learn the secrets of Kong's movement and expression, though without much success. Inspired, at age 13 Harryhausen decided to make dimensional animation his life's work. Using modeling clay and paperclips he tried to re-create the fantastic creatures "King Kong" had brought magically to life. A few years later Harryhausen arranged to be introduced to Willis O'Brien, the uncredited genius behind the film, in hope of gaining an apprenticeship of sorts. O'Brien critiqued his models and advised him to study art, particularly sculpture, and anatomy. In 1949 O'Brien took him on as an assistant animator for "Mighty Joe Young", Harryhausen's first experience in animating a feature film. He learned a lot by studying under Willis O'Brien and he put that experience to work in his own career. A notable example is a sequence where the giant gorilla named Joe Young is lassoed by several mounted cowboys led by future Oscar winner Ben Johnson. Combining the live-action of horses, riders, and flying ropes with O'Brien's model, a more technically sophisticated piece than his original Kong, proved especially challenging. The technique that finally worked was largely developed by Harryhausen, and he used it again twenty years later in "The Valley of Gwangi" (1969) to allow cowboys to lasso a raging allosaurus. Willis O'Brien made his bones, so to speak, animating the dinosaurs of 1925's silent classic, "The Lost World". His work did not impress professional paleontologists, however, who advised him to spend more time studying museum exhibits and reading the most up to date literature, which he did. The much better dinosaurs of "King Kong" show he learned at least a few good lessons, particularly regarding the tyrannosaurus that fights with Kong to the death. (The tyrant lizard king nonchalantly scratching his head just prior to spotting his enemy is particularly charming though probably impossible in actual fact.) I find the pteranodon attack on Anne Darrow to be one of the animation highlights of the film, not only for the complex animation and matte effects but for the accuracy of the pterosaur model. Though the model portrays an animal about 50% bigger than the largest known member of the genus (some of the more recently discovered azhdarchid pterosaurs were very bit as large as Willis O'Brien's pteranodon) he got a key feature of the real flying reptiles correct -- a wing supported by a single finger. (i.pinimg.com/736x/fa/6a/9b/fa6a9bb9b99a3fe2ed5ec433741821cb.jpg). It's a curious thing that O'Brien's pupil used the same idea, pterosaur attacks human, at least twice ("One Million Years B.C." and "The Valley of Gwangi") but his models incorrectly portray pterosaurs with distinctly bat-like wings. (www.midnightonly.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/One-Million-Years-BC-8.jpg and i.pinimg.com/originals/38/11/0f/38110fb623761ee8c1f7ad26ead83dd4.jpg) Artistic license, one assumes.
First and third URLs text corrected: 1) i.pinimg.com/736x/fa/6a/9b/fa6a9bb9b99a3fe2ed5ec433741821cb.jpg 3) i.pinimg.com/originals/38/11/0f/38110fb623761ee8c1f7ad26ead83dd4.jpg The second URL functions with no errors. The close-parenthesis character (")") got caught in the URL at the very end in both cases, in the (sub-)standard UA-cam text-editor that you used to peck in the Comment. Without the typos corrected, clickers of the URLs never reach the still photos at your URL-pathway's ends, and get an error message instead, boooo! I already told the UA-cam sysops a lot for many years, many years ago to quit being douche-y college-boy armatures and adapt the BBCode like everyone else on the Web since before there was UA-cam yet, but no, so you gotta watch the formatting of your post if you use URLs mixed with ordinary text on the same line. They're stupid, and never listen to me, well I...
I think the very nature of stop-motion gives Kong a more 'prehistoric' feel than we get with liquidy CGI. That, plus the fact it's in black and white and the island is based on Doré's illustrations which gives the film an 'engraved' look that is so cool.
You inspired me to watch this last night! I found it on HBO and I was blown away by it. It makes me think about how differently we see special effects over time as technology advances. I remember seeing Clash of the Titans for the first time and I was BLOWN AWAY by the effects - because, at the time, I had NOTHING to compare it with. That was some of the most advanced, expensive use of stop motion at the time (Harryhausen is my hero), but today I've seen digital effects that can look exactly like the real thing, so I literally view it differently. 1930s audiences had nothing to compare this with so this must have been heart stopping in so many places.
What an amazing movie that for me still retains all of its raw energy and magical charm at every viewing. Whenever I watch the original KING KONG I can sense the grit and guts that went into its making. No remake, spinoff, or what have you even comes close. They caught lightning in a bottle in 1933 and it will never die.😊❤
I have a collection of the original King Kong, Mighty Joe Young and the remake of King Kong. I love them all. My favorite scene in Mighty Joe Young is the "Beautiful Dreamer" song played on stage with Jill on the grand piano. I saw this as a young child on TV and I loved it. This scene is still one of my most favorite movie scenes.
I've always loved the fact that Max Steiner went from scoring "King Kong" to writing the biggest hit single of 1960, "Theme From A Summer Place." (In the Rock 'n Roll era, yet!) He was disappointed that his recording of it was eclipsed by Percy Faith's version, but its huge success enabled him to enjoy his retirement with zero money woes.
The last film I saw in the Theaters was the Fathom Event of 'King Kong'! Not sure when (or IF!) Cinema Screening of films will be a thing for me again! Oh well... least I can say my last flic was a classic!
"King Kong" takes a lot of the later half of the film from the 1921 animated film "Dreams of the Rarebit Fiend: The Pet", giant monster attacking a city, the army trying to kill it. However in that film the creature starts off small, and becomes giant.
My preference is for the original Kong, although Peter Jackson's Kong (which could certainly do with debloating) has Naomi Watts' performance as Anne Darrow, which is I think better than Fay Wray's. Both are heaps better than the 76 de Laurentis Kong (although I otherwise quite like Jessica Lange as an actress -- just in other films). The original was more of a technological breakthrough, even more so in light of what you say about Steiner's score. Great video!
The two Kong remakes fail for the same reason -- the girl falls in love with the gorilla. In the 1933 version, Ann Darrow never sees Kong as anything but a giant monster. She completely misses the fact that Kong cares for her. So it's really a story about unrequited love. When Kong falls to his death at the end, we the audience grieve for him because nobody else does.
I really appreciate that you've supplied more of the context leading up to the making of King Kong, especially referencing Cooper's military exploits and filming adventures. Have you read the book, "Living Dangerously: The Adventures of Merian C. Cooper, Creator of King Kong" by Mark Vaz?
I hope one day you're planning to review all of Ray Harryhausen's films along with George Pal's. Did you know they used to work together? History can be fun. 🦍
The metric I use to determine if a movie is a classic, is its re-watchablilty, if I may coin a term...by that I mean how often I am drawn to watch the movie again and again. King Kong is up there in all aspects. That it came out in 1933...almost 90 years ago is an achievement the film industry, RKO in general, and all involved in its making should be very proud of. Seeing this originally at a big screen theater must have been a fantastic event.
Very much liked your video. Nice all-around informative and lively presentation...but hated the synopsis done in a "funny" performance manner. This kind of cute/glib/or whatever it is has become such a monotonous cliche of podcasts they are a turn off, as well as hard to get through, hard to listen to. I skipped almost all of it. Otherwise, top of the line overview of this great classic. The theme, romance, visual beauty, boldness of its vision AND its CHARM are, to me, what is so memorable about the film. The effects would mean very little without these wonderful elements. And it has one of the things that few films ever seem to be able to create,: A perfect ending, one that has action, theme and the heart all coming together in perfect balance. Thank you for your work on this presentation. Well done.
Watched it over and over and over when i was a kid. Agreed, one of the greatest films of all time. And for sure the best creature fight of all, until the remakes fight vs. THREE rexes outdid it.
Superb review of the original King Kong. Wondering why you had nothing to say and completely skipped over any film (even a moment or two) from the mega remake with Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange from 1976. That’s my only criticism, other than that.....it’s excellent.
When you see KING KONG full screen in the Academy ratio picture size you see things in the bottom sixth of the film usually overlooked, including O'Brien's signature inclusion of real water "matted" into the model sets. This is not an old movie, this is a classic film and rightly so. Watch this start to finish with someone who never saw it before and with little background as to what will unfold and see how they react. I bet the dynamism of the narrative holds the attention, and the film details help to suspend disbelief.
One thing I find interesting about Kong is how it *could* be viewed as an anti-colonialist narrative, or (and admittedly this is unlikely) even a stab at Hollywood arrogance. After all, literally EVERYTHING that happens is Denham's fault, and that "beauty killed the beast" BS comes off more like deflection. But the movie doesn't ever seem to acknowledge his culpability, so it's ambiguous.
I do. Science as the study of nature is why we even know about dinosaurs, evolution, and the potential for giant beasts like Kong. Not all science-fiction is spaceships and laser beams.
It certainly is if you'll accept that cryptozoology is a science. In fact, even if you insist that it's a pseudoscience, a film that elevates it to the level of science is science fiction.
"Skull Island" is NOT a remake of 1933's "King Kong." It is a movie that features King Kong. There have only been two remakes of the original "King Kong" and those are the versions that were released in 1976 and 2005.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Bruce Cabot is great in this -- his character is a surrogate for Kong in how he is transformed by beauty. This is one of Cabot's few heroic roles -- he had a long career playing villains and gives the character of Driscoll a sarcastic edge which nice guy Joel McCrea would have missed.
@@anthonycrnkovich5241 Yes I totally agree with what you said there, and he actually convinces me that his character really would have the balls to follow Kong alone, unlike Adrian Brody in Jacksons remake. I found it distasteful that Jacksons film mocked the Cabot character and ignored him at the end in the credits when paying tribute to those involved in the original.
The 1933 is my favorite monster movie and then anything from Harryhausen !!!! I did see the 1975 remake as a very young boy but its not great especially as Kong was a guy in a fursuit !!!
I plan on talking about the 76 remake in a future video, but I haven’t seen the Peter Jackson one since the theaters. I remember then that I thought it was seriously bloated but that I liked the NY scenes. I’d have to watch it again to say for sure. As for Kong: Skull Island, I think it’s a stupid movie that I really enjoy watching. 👍🏻
@@TheUnapologeticGeek The Peter Jackson one is a bit over stuffed! Might be a film that benefits from trimming instead of lengthening. Skull Island made really odd choices as a follow-up to Godzilla IMO. That said, watching Sam Jackson do his thing is always a bunch of fun 😄
Landmark film in cinema history. One can only imagine how audiences of the day were amazed at what they saw when this was released. And Willis o' Brian begat Ray Harryhausen, the genius that shaped my youth and my love of all things sci fi/fantasy. Great review!
The original classic monster movie that still holds up 90 years later
I actually absolutely LOVE your format in going though the history a bit as well as talking about the film itself. Really fascinating and well done mate!
The very young Ray Harryhausen saw "King Kong" on the big screen at Grauman's Chinese Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard, perhaps the most spectacular cinema of its time. (He didn't know it at the time but another 13-year-old boy who would become a lifelong friend also saw "King Kong" at Grauman's Chinese, Ray Bradbury.) Seeing that seminal film in such a wonderful movie palace must have enhanced Harryhausen's experience considerably. According to his own account, he watched it through many times, often doing odd jobs here and there to raise the price of a ticket. His first viewings were for the sheer experience of excitement and awe, later he concentrated on the technique hoping to learn the secrets of Kong's movement and expression, though without much success. Inspired, at age 13 Harryhausen decided to make dimensional animation his life's work. Using modeling clay and paperclips he tried to re-create the fantastic creatures "King Kong" had brought magically to life.
A few years later Harryhausen arranged to be introduced to Willis O'Brien, the uncredited genius behind the film, in hope of gaining an apprenticeship of sorts. O'Brien critiqued his models and advised him to study art, particularly sculpture, and anatomy. In 1949 O'Brien took him on as an assistant animator for "Mighty Joe Young", Harryhausen's first experience in animating a feature film. He learned a lot by studying under Willis O'Brien and he put that experience to work in his own career. A notable example is a sequence where the giant gorilla named Joe Young is lassoed by several mounted cowboys led by future Oscar winner Ben Johnson. Combining the live-action of horses, riders, and flying ropes with O'Brien's model, a more technically sophisticated piece than his original Kong, proved especially challenging. The technique that finally worked was largely developed by Harryhausen, and he used it again twenty years later in "The Valley of Gwangi" (1969) to allow cowboys to lasso a raging allosaurus.
Willis O'Brien made his bones, so to speak, animating the dinosaurs of 1925's silent classic, "The Lost World". His work did not impress professional paleontologists, however, who advised him to spend more time studying museum exhibits and reading the most up to date literature, which he did. The much better dinosaurs of "King Kong" show he learned at least a few good lessons, particularly regarding the tyrannosaurus that fights with Kong to the death. (The tyrant lizard king nonchalantly scratching his head just prior to spotting his enemy is particularly charming though probably impossible in actual fact.) I find the pteranodon attack on Anne Darrow to be one of the animation highlights of the film, not only for the complex animation and matte effects but for the accuracy of the pterosaur model. Though the model portrays an animal about 50% bigger than the largest known member of the genus (some of the more recently discovered azhdarchid pterosaurs were very bit as large as Willis O'Brien's pteranodon) he got a key feature of the real flying reptiles correct -- a wing supported by a single finger. (i.pinimg.com/736x/fa/6a/9b/fa6a9bb9b99a3fe2ed5ec433741821cb.jpg). It's a curious thing that O'Brien's pupil used the same idea, pterosaur attacks human, at least twice ("One Million Years B.C." and "The Valley of Gwangi") but his models incorrectly portray pterosaurs with distinctly bat-like wings. (www.midnightonly.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/One-Million-Years-BC-8.jpg and i.pinimg.com/originals/38/11/0f/38110fb623761ee8c1f7ad26ead83dd4.jpg) Artistic license, one assumes.
First and third URLs text corrected:
1) i.pinimg.com/736x/fa/6a/9b/fa6a9bb9b99a3fe2ed5ec433741821cb.jpg
3) i.pinimg.com/originals/38/11/0f/38110fb623761ee8c1f7ad26ead83dd4.jpg
The second URL functions with no errors.
The close-parenthesis character (")") got caught in the URL at the very end in both cases, in the (sub-)standard UA-cam text-editor that you used to peck in the Comment. Without the typos corrected, clickers of the URLs never reach the still photos at your URL-pathway's ends, and get an error message instead, boooo!
I already told the UA-cam sysops a lot for many years, many years ago to quit being douche-y college-boy armatures and adapt the BBCode like everyone else on the Web since before there was UA-cam yet, but no, so you gotta watch the formatting of your post if you use URLs mixed with ordinary text on the same line. They're stupid, and never listen to me, well I...
The movement of Kong's hair, caused by Willis O'Brien's hands, is perfect: it appears the wind caused it!
I think the very nature of stop-motion gives Kong a more 'prehistoric' feel than we get with liquidy CGI. That, plus the fact it's in black and white and the island is based on Doré's illustrations which gives the film an 'engraved' look that is so cool.
You inspired me to watch this last night! I found it on HBO and I was blown away by it. It makes me think about how differently we see special effects over time as technology advances. I remember seeing Clash of the Titans for the first time and I was BLOWN AWAY by the effects - because, at the time, I had NOTHING to compare it with. That was some of the most advanced, expensive use of stop motion at the time (Harryhausen is my hero), but today I've seen digital effects that can look exactly like the real thing, so I literally view it differently. 1930s audiences had nothing to compare this with so this must have been heart stopping in so many places.
What an amazing movie that for me still retains all of its raw energy and magical charm at every viewing. Whenever I watch the original KING KONG I can sense the grit and guts that went into its making. No remake, spinoff, or what have you even comes close. They caught lightning in a bottle in 1933 and it will never die.😊❤
I have a collection of the original King Kong, Mighty Joe Young and the remake of King Kong. I love them all. My favorite scene in Mighty Joe Young is the "Beautiful Dreamer" song played on stage with Jill on the grand piano. I saw this as a young child on TV and I loved it. This scene is still one of my most favorite movie scenes.
My favorite film of all time. I’ve been intrigued to watch Ingagi as well despite the controversial background.
Tortadillo is our Lord and Savior
The original is my favorite. Thanks for the filling in the details of the production.
I am amazed I am still learning new facts about the all time best classic! Thank you
Surprisingly I have not seen King Kong , though I'm going to send off for a blu ray copy and take a look.
Thank you 😃
I've always loved the fact that Max Steiner went from scoring "King Kong" to writing the biggest hit single of 1960, "Theme From A Summer Place." (In the Rock 'n Roll era, yet!) He was disappointed that his recording of it was eclipsed by Percy Faith's version, but its huge success enabled him to enjoy his retirement with zero money woes.
I'm a fan of 'The Most Dangerous Game'. One of the DVDs has a great commentary on it.
King Kong saved RKO from bankruptcy, changed the way music was used in movies and the first feature film to be re released.
The last film I saw in the Theaters was the Fathom Event of 'King Kong'! Not sure when (or IF!) Cinema Screening of films will be a thing for me again! Oh well... least I can say my last flic was a classic!
A classic. For the time , state of the art SFX / stop motion. A gateway movie.
"King Kong" takes a lot of the later half of the film from the 1921 animated film "Dreams of the Rarebit Fiend: The Pet", giant monster attacking a city, the army trying to kill it. However in that film the creature starts off small, and becomes giant.
well done
Love to be able to go back and be in a movie theatre to experience how the audience reacted to this blockbuster.
Just watched again today after many years! Suffice to say I am still in awe ❤
My preference is for the original Kong, although Peter Jackson's Kong (which could certainly do with debloating) has Naomi Watts' performance as Anne Darrow, which is I think better than Fay Wray's. Both are heaps better than the 76 de Laurentis Kong (although I otherwise quite like Jessica Lange as an actress -- just in other films).
The original was more of a technological breakthrough, even more so in light of what you say about Steiner's score. Great video!
The '76 version was blasphemy, 2nd rate effects, stupid dialogue.
The two Kong remakes fail for the same reason -- the girl falls in love with the gorilla. In the 1933 version, Ann Darrow never sees Kong as anything but a giant monster. She completely misses the fact that Kong cares for her. So it's really a story about unrequited love. When Kong falls to his death at the end, we the audience grieve for him because nobody else does.
Excellent point!
Yes, that's really the heart of the film -- we feel for Kong because he is misunderstood.
It marked the debut of the Empire State Building,it just opened in 1930.It was the other star of the movie.❤️💚💙💛🗽🇺🇸🏁
I did not know that! I bow to your excellent trivia knowledge. 👏
I really appreciate that you've supplied more of the context leading up to the making of King Kong, especially referencing Cooper's military exploits and filming adventures. Have you read the book, "Living Dangerously: The Adventures of Merian C. Cooper, Creator of King Kong" by Mark Vaz?
I have not, but it's been on my Amazon wish list for a while now. 😂
5:53 That's African-American actor Noble Johnson in whiteface! Wow! (He played the leader of the natives in King Kong.)
...great info ...on this ground breaking classic...
U showed a RCA disc which isn't close to a laserdisc
This film is my Most Favorite of all my Most Favorite film. I literally watch it 4-5 times a year.
Armstrong even looks like Cooper!
I hope one day you're planning to review all of Ray Harryhausen's films along with George Pal's. Did you know they used to work together? History can be fun. 🦍
The metric I use to determine if a movie is a classic, is its re-watchablilty, if I may coin a term...by that I mean how often I am drawn to watch the movie again and again. King Kong is up there in all aspects. That it came out in 1933...almost 90 years ago is an achievement the film industry, RKO in general, and all involved in its making should be very proud of. Seeing this originally at a big screen theater must have been a fantastic event.
interesting trivia: cooper and his screen double, armstrong, died within 16 hours of each other.
Excellent review.
Agreed. One day I hope to have the courage and origination to make a Kong puppet to honor O'Brian's.
Very much liked your video. Nice all-around informative and lively presentation...but hated the synopsis done in a "funny" performance manner. This kind of cute/glib/or whatever it is has become such a monotonous cliche of podcasts they are a turn off, as well as hard to get through, hard to listen to. I skipped almost all of it. Otherwise, top of the line overview of this great classic. The theme, romance, visual beauty, boldness of its vision AND its CHARM are, to me, what is so memorable about the film. The effects would mean very little without these wonderful elements. And it has one of the things that few films ever seem to be able to create,: A perfect ending, one that has action, theme and the heart all coming together in perfect balance.
Thank you for your work on this presentation. Well done.
More fantasy than sci-fi but fantastic movie I enjoyed since I saw it in tnt in 89
Watched it over and over and over when i was a kid. Agreed, one of the greatest films of all time. And for sure the best creature fight of all,
until the remakes fight vs. THREE rexes outdid it.
(≧∀≦) Ah yes, the one and only Kong.
Great job.
It's hard to believe you don't have more subscribers!
I agree! Thanks for the kind words.
The modern block buster was born in 1975 Jaws!
Superb review of the original King Kong. Wondering why you had nothing to say and completely skipped over any film (even a moment or two) from the mega remake with Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange from 1976. That’s my only criticism, other than that.....it’s excellent.
I did that because I plan to cover the remake as its own video some day. 😁
When you see KING KONG full screen in the Academy ratio picture size you see things in the bottom sixth of the film usually overlooked, including O'Brien's signature inclusion of real water "matted" into the model sets.
This is not an old movie, this is a classic film and rightly so. Watch this start to finish with someone who never saw it before and with little background as to what will unfold and see how they react. I bet the dynamism of the narrative holds the attention, and the film details help to suspend disbelief.
13:06 And $5,000,000 in 1933 would be the equivalent of $11,808,692.31 in today’s money.
12:30 $50,000 in 1933 would be the equivalent of $1,180,869.23 in today’s money.
One thing I find interesting about Kong is how it *could* be viewed as an anti-colonialist narrative, or (and admittedly this is unlikely) even a stab at Hollywood arrogance. After all, literally EVERYTHING that happens is Denham's fault, and that "beauty killed the beast" BS comes off more like deflection. But the movie doesn't ever seem to acknowledge his culpability, so it's ambiguous.
They try to get into that a bit in the sequel, Son of Kong.
Thanks.
Thank you for this video..
You're welcome!
I don’t think that it is a science fiction film.
I do. Science as the study of nature is why we even know about dinosaurs, evolution, and the potential for giant beasts like Kong. Not all science-fiction is spaceships and laser beams.
It certainly is if you'll accept that cryptozoology is a science. In fact, even if you insist that it's a pseudoscience, a film that elevates it to the level of science is science fiction.
Fantasy.
"Skull Island" is NOT a remake of 1933's "King Kong." It is a movie that features King Kong. There have only been two remakes of the original "King Kong" and those are the versions that were released in 1976 and 2005.
The "gorilla" in Skull Island was far too big and had better posture than I do.
Wow, as Bruce Cabot is really the only weak link in the film, just imagine his role played by Joel McCrea!
Naaaw...
Bruce Cabot is not a weak link at all.
@@lyndoncmp5751
Bruce Cabot is great in this -- his character is a surrogate for Kong in how he is transformed by beauty. This is one of Cabot's few heroic roles -- he had a long career playing villains and gives the character of Driscoll a sarcastic edge which nice guy Joel McCrea would have missed.
@@anthonycrnkovich5241
Yes I totally agree with what you said there, and he actually convinces me that his character really would have the balls to follow Kong alone, unlike Adrian Brody in Jacksons remake. I found it distasteful that Jacksons film mocked the Cabot character and ignored him at the end in the credits when paying tribute to those involved in the original.
This film was the Star Wars of its day.
Yeppppppppppp😮
The 1933 is my favorite monster movie and then anything from Harryhausen !!!! I did see the 1975 remake as a very young boy but its not great especially as Kong was a guy in a fursuit !!!
Huge monster classic! Watch also my short tribute film at the link below:
ua-cam.com/video/tRmHiWp7-EU/v-deo.html
How do you feel about the remake(s)? In particular the 1976 film?
I plan on talking about the 76 remake in a future video, but I haven’t seen the Peter Jackson one since the theaters. I remember then that I thought it was seriously bloated but that I liked the NY scenes. I’d have to watch it again to say for sure. As for Kong: Skull Island, I think it’s a stupid movie that I really enjoy watching. 👍🏻
@@TheUnapologeticGeek The Peter Jackson one is a bit over stuffed! Might be a film that benefits from trimming instead of lengthening.
Skull Island made really odd choices as a follow-up to Godzilla IMO. That said, watching Sam Jackson do his thing is always a bunch of fun 😄
If it was blacks in white face would it still be problematic ?
Great video man u should do one on the 2005 one also!!! 🐵