‘Kong’ needs a knife

“King Kong” is one of the better two-hour movies of the season. Unfortunately, it is about three hours long.

The cast is superb, the acting quite good. And as you would expect of a movie by Peter Jackson, creator of the three-movie, luxurious rendition of “Lord of the Rings,” the filmography is excellent.

There is just too much of it, Peter.

This happens to artists who achieve the kind of power that Jackson now wields in the cinematic universe after the incredible commercial and artistic achievement of “Rings.”

They have total control, and sometimes they forget an editor can be an artist’s best ally.

It happened to Capote, it happened to Thomas Wolfe, and it has happened to other directors. They fall in love with their words and can’t bear to cut a scene, even a few frames, into which, like all artists, they have poured a bit of heart and soul. But cut they must, and cut is what Jackson should have done with Kong.

The lead into the story, which took place in New York, was too long, though it did establish Carl as a do-anything kind of movie director. One wonders if we are to see Jackson himself in Carl’s single-minded purpose to get his movie made. Minutes could have been cut from scenes on board the ship as it approached Skull Island. Example? The floating map blown from Carl’s hand. Artistic? Okay, if a bit of cliché. But please, Peter, the flick is three hours already. Save us what you can where you can, okay?

Once on the island, Jackson hammers us and hammers us with action. In a way it is too bad, because the acting, especially by female lead Naomi Watts, is really very nice, but it is submerged in mayhem… Jack Black was acceptable as egotistical and manipulative director Carl Denham. Screen writer Jack Driscol was well done by Adrian Brody. The crew of the ship did a fine job. The ship’s captain is well-played by Thomas Kretschmann as a hard-bitten but honorable outlaw who saves the day more than once. Which is the point. Once was enough. For the captain to rescue the hapless actors twice or more, frankly I lost count, was unnecessary.

The stampede of brontosaurs was wonderful, even the unbelievable section where they round a cliff which is falling away, like a car race.

The NASCAR style wreck of brontosaur and raptor was waaaayyyyy too long.

And the fights between Kong and the Tyrannosaurs? It was pro-wrestling.

Hey, once a guy is knocked down and hammered with a chair, what’s with the resurrection? The entire segment with man-eating insects and giant, head-swallowing leaches was gratuitous, too long, and self-indulgent.

Do we really think cabin boy Jimmy can blow giant cockroaches off flailing shipmates with a Tommy gun and his eyes closed? The scene with the giant bats, likewise.

Cut it.

You could have gotten your hero and heroine to the river without wasting so much of the viewer’s time.

Mr. Jackson, get your scissors out, please. And while you are at it, pay a little more respect to the laws of physics. People cannot be tossed like rag dolls or fall from great height without suffering injury. This is not Middle Earth.

As it was, the long action scenes on the island crimped the movie’s climax back in New York. We didn’t get enough there of the humanity of the ape, the inhumanity of man.

An opportunity was lost to show the torture and degradation of captivity. Of course, in current times, perhaps ignoring torture and degrading captivity was a necessary omission.

“King Kong” is an entertaining movie. There is plenty of action… too much, actually. That’s the point. And we already made it. Perhaps this review itself is too long. Go see the movie. There is enough real acting by capable actors. King Kong is not and will never be considered Jackson’s best work, it is certainly no Lord of the Rings, but it will be a commercial success. Sometimes that can be enough, even for an artist.