King Kong, a Review
King Kong is one of those things that really are a product of the time on which they were made. Parts of the film, such as the presentation of the people of Skull Island as pretty much savages and the use of the only female character as someone who needs rescuing and screams too much, make this film kind of difficult to watch over 80 years later.
However, when watching the film the whole room was laughing at just how ridiculous some of the scenes were, especially whenever King Kong was on the screen because while the animation was groundbreaking in the day, it just looks funny today.
 |
| [1] |
 |
| [2] |
There is evidence to suggest that this film was intended to be a horror film, or at least a film that will give the audience a fright. The evidence is behind this is mainly the types of shot they use. They have close up shot on Kong, and it seems that the people behind the Kong puppet tried to make him look menacing. Look again at GIF 2, the face on Kong (while looking funny to us) would have looked scary to people watching in 1933 because they would have believed that this was real, or at least much more real than it does to us. Also a review from what appears to be a premier describes the experience as "Terrifying" [3], further supporting this idea.
References:
[1]: Wickman and Wade, F and C. (2012). Classic Cinema in 3 GIFs: King Kong, [online]. Available at:http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2012/05/11/king_kong_1933_in_3_animated_gifs_the_latest_installment_of_classic_cinema_in_3_gifs.html {1st GIF on the page}
[2] -No Author name on page- (2012) -No Title on page-. [online]. Available at:http://rebloggy.com/post/photoset-gif-my-gifs-film-1933-pre-code-trivia-king-kong-fay-wray-photoset-king/13168422612 {1st GIF on the right hand side}
[3] Hall, M. (1933). A Fantastic Film in Which a Monstrous Ape Uses Automobiles for Missles and Climbs a Skyscraper. [online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9F03E3DC173BEF3ABC4B53DFB5668388629EDE
Hi Ollie,
ReplyDeleteFirstly, I am wondering if you have had a look at my previous comments, on your 'Caligari' and 'Metropolis' reviews? I advised you early on to have a look at Phil's guide on academic writing (here - http://ucarochester-cgartsandanimation.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/fao-caa-yr-1-invisible-cities-2017.html) and my tips for film reviews (here - http://ucarochester-cgartsandanimation.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/fao-1st-yearsfilm-review-tips.html). It is important that you look both at the advice, and also at the examples that are provided as guidelines as to how a film review should look.
At the moment, your written tone is far too chatty and unacademic; one simple way to bring a more serious tone to your writing, is to avoid using the 'first person', so no more 'I thought' etc. You should also avoid phrases like "Kong's face just looks ridiculous." This is subjective writing, and is based on your own personal interpretation. You need to write objectively - that is keep it fact-based and quantifiable.
You also need to back your own thoughts up with evidence from other sources; you are asked to include at least 3 quotes from reputable sources - in this review, you have included only one, and that is only one word - 'terrifying' - which is a quote hardly liable to promote thought or discussion. The idea of including other peoples' thoughts, is as a means of providing evidence or opening up a discussion. So, for example, you say, " There is evidence to suggest that this film was intended to be a horror film, or at least a film that will give the audience a fright." At this point you should have actually provided some evidence; the one article that you have looked at (written at the time Kong was released), should have been able to provide you with more material than just 'terrifying" !
You also need to look at how you are referencing - you need to use the Harvard method, which requires you to put the author's name and the year directly after the quote, in brackets, so in the case of your 'quote'-
"Terrifying" (Hall, 1933)
Go easy on the GIFs... you would be better finding a still image that backs up your ideas, for three reasons - firstly, the still image would be easier to reference, and secondly, you will need to be using still images when you write your essays, so it would be good practice to start now. Thirdly, it makes it really difficult to concentrate on the text, when there is all that movement going on, on the sidelines!
So, Ollie, please have another look at all the advice given here, and on previous reviews... please leave a quick comment on here, so that I know that you have read this, and I look forward to reading your next one!