'King Kong' (1933) - Film Review

Fig 1 King Kong (1933) [Poster]

This review analyses Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack’s well known science fiction film King Kong (1933), explicitly focusing on the subject of censorship. Referring to the works of Joel Spring and his book ‘Educating the Consumer-citizen: A History of the Marriage of Schools, Advertising, and Media’ touching on the reasons why censorship was put into action. Along with Francis G. Couvares’ article ‘So This Is Censorship: Race, Sex, and Censorship in Movies of the 1920s and 1930s’ (2011) which investigates censorship within cinema during the 1920s ad 30s. An interview with the director of King Kong (2005) Peter Jackson, featuring his opinions on King Kong (1933), and lastly Chris Kaltenbach ‘How Hollywood went from naughty to nice Censorship: "Risqué Business," a 42-film festival on cable, shows the movies that led to the Hollywood Production Code and the ones that ended it.’ (1997). The review will argue, on how censorship has had a massive impact on the film King Kong (1933), and how this then compares with Jackson’s 2005 remake, exploring how censorship has changed.

King Kong (1933) tells the story of a film maker, who hires a woman to portray his leading lady in his upcoming movie. Both set out to Skull island with a crew, unaware of the danger they are in when coming face to face with the monster of the island Kong who torments the native inhabitants. During filming Ann (the leading lady) gets kidnapped by said inhabitants, to use for the bride of Kong, but what sort of adventures will unfurl with a delicate woman and a curious beast.

In March of 1930 the Motion Production Code (or Hays Code named after Will. H Hays the creator) was first published. The code sought to introduce the world of cinema to censorship, giving films guidelines as to what they could create that was considered to be moral.  The code was based on the concept “If motion pictures present stories that will affect lives for the better, they can become the most powerful force for the improvement of mankind’ (The Motion Production Code 1930 J. Spring 2003)

Fig 2 The Motion Production Code (1930)

In saying this The Motion Production code was stating that movies up till this point were not correct on displaying morals within their pictures. “July 1, 1934, restrictions on movie content varied widely, depending on local laws, mores and public taste. As a result, "pre-Code films" tend to be racier, sexier, more adult, more cynical, more socially critical, more honest and more politically strident than the films produced by Hollywood on up through the early 1960s." [Mick LaSalle - http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/ ]. In Lasalle saying this, it shows how there was a large contrast between the films before and after the censorship, as censorship changed through the years, things that were considered morally acceptable at the time then later become highly unacceptable, causing even more of a contrast between the two.

However, movies such as King Kong (1933) didn’t follow these guide lines and as a result got scenes removed and censored out.

One of scenes that got removed from the original King Kong (1933) was a scene with Kong and Ann Darrow. (Fay Wray) The scene depicted a curious Kong, peeling off the clothes of Ann while being unconscious. (see fig 3)

Fig 3 Kong and Ann undressing scene [concept art] (1933)

Due to scenes like this it raised debate amongst some audiences about the sexual relationship between Kong and Ann. However, in an interview Jackson who directed the remake of King Kong (2005) said “There wasn't so much in the 1933 film, although there were those censored scenes that kind of hinted at it a little bit.” (P. Jackson, 2005)

Jackson hated the idea of there being any form of a relationship between the two characters that wasn’t pure. Comparing the two sequences, it’s clear that the dynamic between the two characters are different. In King Kong (1933) Ann is clearly over powered and defenceless, allowing Kong to do as he pleases while showing no real emotion, apart from curiosity.  Meanwhile in King Kong the 2005 version Jackson said, “We didn't want to emphasise the sexual element of the story," (P. Jackson 2005). Jackson depicts this by still making Ann not equal to Kong yet maintaining some power. This time fully conscious Ann entertains by performing to Kong, having some control of her situation. Along with this, the viewers are also able to see emotions from Kong which allow him to be much more humanised with emotions. (see fig 4)

Fig 4 King Kong (2005)

To conclude, censorship took a huge toll on Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack’s King Kong (1933) having different scenes cut due to not respecting the morals of the 30s Motion Production Code. Leading to the film causing a stir on the relationship of characters, and how correct that relationship would be. Until other directors of later remakes such as Jackson would take a grey moral area of the original film and put it on a moral high ground for both present day and 1930s standards.

Harvard Illustrations List:

- Fig 1 King Kong (1933) [Poster]- Merian C. Cooper. (N/A). KING KONG (1933). Available: https://www.atthemovies.co.uk/gallery/484-king-kong-1933  Last accessed 05/10/2018.

- Fig 2 Will H. Hays. (N/A) [online] The Motion Pictures Code. Available: http://pre-code.com/the-motion-picture-production-code-of-1930/  Last accessed 05/10/2018.

- Fig 3 - Merian C. Cooper. (2015). In the Hands of The Creature. Available: http://kingkong.wikia.com/wiki/ File: In_The_Hands_Of_The_Creature.jpg. Last accessed 05/10/2018

- Fig 4 N/A. (N/A). King Kong - 2005 | Story & Screenshots. Available: http://www.scifimoviezone.com/kingkong05.shtml  Last accessed 05/10/2018.

Bibliography

-Brooke, M. (2003). BFI Screenonline: The Hays Code. [online] Screenonline.org.uk. Available at: http://www.screenonline.org.uk/film/id/592022/  Last accessed 05/10/2018

-J. Spring (2003). [Book] Educating the Consumer-citizen: A History of the Marriage of Schools. N/A: Routledge. 113.

-P. Jackson. (2005) [online]. No monkey business for Watt in King Kong. Available: https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/no-monkey-business-for-watt-in-king-kong-20051204-gdmkz8.html Last accessed 05/10/2018

-Chris Kaltenbach. (1997) [online] . How Hollywood went from naughty to nice Censorship: "Risqué Business," a 42-film festival on cable, shows the movies that led to the Hollywood Production Code and the ones that ended it. Available: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1997-06-23/features/1997174097_1_risque-business-fay-wray-king-kong . Last accessed 04/10/2018.