Review of King Kong (1933) by Donald L — 28 Mar 2010

No doubt revolutionary, there are still moments in the movie that are slip shod even for the time. I know, I know, that's borderline heresy but lets face it even in 1933 there were better effects in other movies (See The Gold Rush) than some of the sequences say like the two people falling down to the river...tastefully done by toppling two small dolls into a pool of water. Yikes. Kong also seems to grow with each new scene, by the end towering on a building that would have dwarfed the wall they used to keep him in.

Still, the actual acting/plot was enjoyable and its definitely a cultural icon. Yeah, its campy in parts, but its the fun sort of camp that would later define special effect big houses. All in all not a waste of my time, but nowhere near as earth shattering as its spot in Cinema History would make it out to be...at least not to me.