A Few More Thoughts on "King Kong" and "Narnia"

"But I cordially dislike allegory, and have always done so ever since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence." --J.R.R. Tolkien

Having just rented the 1933 "King Kong"-- ohmigod it was a stinker! Not the effects, which were darn good for the day (though "Metropolis", six years earlier, had MUCH better ones) but the-- I hesitate to dignify it with the name-- "plot" imploded. The movie was a poorly acted, hokey excuse to get effects onto the screen (and not incidentallly, clothing off Miss Wray.) The Jackson version actually has far fewer plot holes. It is, however, impossible to put the same effects on the screen without having a less-than-logical plot leading up to them.
And for those who are complaining, you didn't see Kong until 1/3 of the way through the original either.
Santa managed to get the Chronicles of Narnia (yes, all seven books) into my stocking for Christmas. And C.S. Lewis was a preachy, boring... so-and-so. No wonder I abandoned the Narnia books at 12 and fell in love with Tolkien at age 14. If I want to read Genesis, the Gospels, and Revelations I much prefer to read the originals.

Posted: Mon - December 26, 2005 at 11:17 PM | | | | |