Review: Look! It’s ‘The Making of King Kong’! (No, Not That One.)

Dec 04, 2018 · 2 comments
Sam (Falls Church, VA)
I'm one who similarly dislikes the sexism and racism in the 1933 film, which most others revere as a classic, and sees it as ripe for satire. Also, there's the film's willful disregard for paleontology. The filmmakers probably knew, but did not care, that the brontosaurus was a vegetarian and would not eat a man. But regarding the question of rescuing artifacts of the worst human ideas, my view is that Peter Jackson's much reviled 2005 remake fixed everything that was wrong with both the 1933 and 1976 versions, except for the natives. They were over the top.
Freddie (New York NY)
The mention of "worst human ideas" along with Brooklyn College brings to mind that every week in TV/Radio class at Brooklyn College, our professor would go over the ratings. The week "Three's Company" was #1 and "Jesus of Nazareth" was #2, when he sat down at his desk, he mentioned someone on TV had referred to it as "the Greatest story ever told coming in second after the Worst story ever told." (In those days, TV/Radio and Film classes were allowed towards our Humanities credits instead of Literature and Philosophy, which still seems weird. It's great to see interesting talent and work coming from my alma mater. The better the school's reputation gets now, the more valuable my degrees from 1980 become.)