Film studies assignment 26.2

***ASSIGNMENT TASK 26.2*** 

Introduction

This assignment in a form of a report will create an understanding what incorporates how the production context and relationship differs between an original film and a contemporary remake. This report will focus on how different decades change the way we appreciate films. The focus of this report will be looking into the production context. The production context is defined as the social and economical aspects around the film. The film I have decided to look into for this report is King Kong. The original film was published in 1933, where the remake of the same name was published in 2005. This remake was the second remake of the 1933 film and there is exactly 72 years between the original and the remake I am analysing. The original was made in San Pedro, located close to Los Angeles Harbor. The original was created by RKO Radio Pictures Production Company. Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schowdsack directed this film. The remake was created in New Zealand and was directed by Peter Jackson. The production companies for the remake are: Universal Pictures, WingNut Films, Big Primate Pictures and MFPV Film. I believe that these two films are different because of the use of colour. When the original was first filmed there was little to no opportunity to create a colour film so when Peter Jackson came to create the remake the film he chose to film it in colour instead, this adds a contrasting factor between each version of the film as the original was completely back and while, the first remake was just using colour and the second remake mastered the use of colour. Another reason these films are different from each other was due to the technique used to bring Kong to life. In the original Kong was a model used in the method of stop animation where the 2005 remake created Kong through a C.G.I method. The difference results in a whole difference experience for the audience, the more modern version of Kong allows the viewers to read his facial expressions and feel sympathy for him. 

Synopsis

King Kong is about a film crew in the 1930's that sets sail on a voyage to a mysterious tropical island for a location shoot. Once there the crew discovers natives who for centuries had guarded a huge wall to protect their village. As we later find out, the wall was built as protection from a gigantic gorilla named locally as King Kong. The beast upon the discovery of the film crew, Kong creates a bond with the only female cast member and kidnaps her. On a heroic rescue Ann is returned to the ship but Kong follows, leaving the film crew and sailors no choice but to engage with the giant monstrosity. The film director Carl Denham, set on gaining money from this voyage knocks out Kong with a smoke bomb, and brings the ginormous gorilla back to New York City to be used in a public exhibition. Upon the first evening of the Broadway show Kong breaks free, taking Ann with him, he creates havoc on the roads of New York City and eventually retreats to the top of the Empire State Building where he loses to aeroplanes.   

The 2005 remake and the original 1933 film of King Kong both have very similar story arks. The 2005 version took the already developed story line and added newer visual and graphical effects. Saying that there is one key difference that the 2005 remake has while the 1933 version does not. This includes the spider pit scene. In the original when King Kong knocks members of the crew and cast of a tree stump they fall and the audience does not see where they fall too. In the remake the members of the crew and cast that are knocked fall to the bottom of a crevasse where there is a scene revealing that low life such as giant spiders live down here and it is in this scene where the members of the cast and crew that died when falling of a bridge in the original, died instead to bugs and insects of a giant nature. Another difference between the versions is also in this scene. In the Original John Driscoll, a member of the cast, escapes Kong by hiding in a small rook in the side of a mountain where Kong cannot grab him. In the remake John Driscoll is another member of the cast who gets knocked into the crevasse.   

Production context comparison 

The original film had an assigned budget of $670,000 (£546,358.97) where the remake had an assigned budget of $207,000,000(£168,800,458.05.) The remake of the film King Kong had almost triple the budget the original film had. For the time the 1933 release film was very high tech and used completely new technology for sound effects, visual effects and all parts of the filming in general, an example of this was the stop animation used for bringing Kong to life, but as time evolved better techniques for creating effects and computer generated images (CGI) were invented and with the creation of these techniques unfortunately came the huge cost for using them. This therefore meant the remake of the action-adventure drama had a huge budget in comparison to the original.

At the period in which the filming of the original, King Kong in 1933, was taking place different cultures were less acknowledged. For the time the original King Kong was filmed, those of different skin colour or different heritage where frowned upon and racism was unfortunately something very prominent in America. African and South African were less known and so in the original the natives are played  by actors who may never had before seen technology or performed on such a huge scale. Because of this, to properly exaggerate how native tribal people act the whole tribe was exaggerated to fit in with popular stereotypical belief at the time.In the 2005 remake, racism was much less of a popular belief in comparison and because of this the tribal men and women were portrayed less stereo-typically than the original interpretation of the film and instead were more historically accurate as not to offend any audience member. Owing to this the remake was made more politically correct and so would not offend audience members as easily as the original did. It is also worth noting that in the remake many of the sailors have black toned skin, this was now normal for films in this decade due to films generally being more politically correct than older films, where this would not have been seen as well done for example in the original. Below shows the contrast of natives in the original and the recent remake:

Original

Remake

The production houses responsible for the creation of each of the films have differences and similarities.  Embarking onto a huge project like the creation of these films would have taken courage, this was primarily true for the original King Kong because at the time of fabricating the film, no other film had matched King Kong with its ambition of a horror adventure and no one knew how successful it would be, in conjunction with this, the film as we discovered earlier had a huge budget compared to normal budgets for that time and so had even more relying on a great success of the film. The remake of the film had expectations to live up to because of the success of the original film. The original film was created by RKO Radio Pictures Production Company, where Universal Pictures, WingNut Films, Big Primate Pictures and MFPV Film created the remake. The single difference about the production companies used between the original and the remake is about the expectations, before the release of the first creation of King Kong no one was expecting it to do as well as it did so when it did do amazingly well, the first remake in the 2000's was the remake everyone thought would top the original and so other companies wanted a part in the films creation. Which is one reason the budget is so much bigger in the remake than the original. 

Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schowdsack where the remake was directed and produced by Peter Jackson directed the director of the original film. Merian C. Cooper had only produced one film before Kong and had done quite successfully. Ernest B. Schowdsack had directed the film 'The most dangerous game' and received a nomination of the Venezia Classici Award for best restored film. He received two other nominations as well. The director of the remake, Peter Jackson, had previously directed the Lord of the Rings trilogy along with many other films, the Lord of the Rings trilogy was a great success and so expectation for the remake to be as great as the original were high. Peter Jackson at the time of the remake being filmed had been nominated for many different awards and won awards such as the Golden Globes and the BAFTAs for his skill as a director and producer. The main stars in the original, from IMBD.com include Fray Wray as Ann Darrow, Robert Armstrong as Carl Denham and Bruse Cabot as John Driscoll. All three of these actors in their own right were well known and had been in several other films before King Kong. The main stars in the remake introduce Naomi Watts as Ann Darrow, Jack Black as Carl Denham and Adrien Brody as Jack Driscoll. These actors/actresses had also been in other films before King Kong and had a reputation to keep up. School of rock is an example of previous work Jack Black was involved in. 

When the original film was created the idea of stop movement animation was recently new and so to use it to bring to life a giant fictional gorilla would have astounded audiences. The art of stop motion animation is done in postproduction and then edited over the top of the film. Taking a photo of the model King Kong and then moving the model and taking another photo until the scene is filmed would have done this process. Once filmed the images would be blended together in an editing software and then the footage would be put on top of the film as a separate layer so that Kong seems to be in the film. Finally the footage of Kong would be enlarged so that King Kong looked like the gigantic character he was meant to be. Had this method not yet been invented, creating a realistic Kong would have been even more difficult as computer generated imagery (CGI) was years away from existence. However when the remake was being designed CGI was available and was considerably less time consuming than the first method. The process of CGI used took information of movement recorded on a special suit that allowed programmers to add an animation to it, for this the actor would first play Kong as if Kong was a person then that information would be transferred into computer generated images that represent and bring Kong to life. The screenshots below show the difference between the methods used to bring King Kong to life in the original and the remake.

The model used for stop motion in the original

The suit and actor used to capture movement for the CGI

 When the remake was in production the technology that changed the future product from that of the original was the camera that filmed in colour. From the early 1960's cameras were able to film in colour but it was only when the remake of King Kong was in development when an improvement to colour filming resulted in the best solid colour recording cameras for its time. This allowed the new version of the film to capture elements that the original was incapable of doing. Because both films were set at the same period the technology used in the screenplay as props, such as the cameras were practically identical. This shows that both production teams researched the history of the period in which the film is set unquestionably well to insure everything was historically accurate. The production of the original film was on a big scale for the time it was made but now a film of that size would had been classed as a small-scale film. The film was a large scale project despite the budget being a small amount this was because of the time the film was in production the currency was yet to be inflated and therefore the budget of $670,000 would be worth $12,042,084 in money of today. The remake was a huge scale production, as mentioned above because of the popularity of other films by the director, the remake was given sufficient funding and so the outcome was a massive scale film from the colossal budget of $207,000,000. Obtaining funding for films is difficult, this was especially true for the original version of the concept of King Kong where a film that features a giant ape causing chaos and destruction to a tourist state in America, may not have been the ideal film audience members would have wanted to see. This is also justified from the reactions the audience members gave after seeing the film for the first time. The quote "the audience was so terrified that many would faint in their seats and even adults ran screaming from the theatre" conveys the thoughts Earnest and Merian must have had before continuing to produce the phenomenon that was King Kong. Leading back to the funding part of the project however, the film eventually got the funding it needed after campaigning to RKO pictures in 1930 and other than that had no difficulty with finance for the film. Peter Jackson, because of his recent triumph with the achievement of the Lord of the Rings trilogy he did not have to campaign for funding but instead he had many different production companies almost lining up to have a be a part of the next very profitable film by the great director and producer. This would have determined why the budget of the remake was so much bigger than the budget of the original film. The funding for the original and the adaptation of King Kong all came from the production houses and would explain another reason why the remake has a budget that is bigger that the original. The original film was all filmed in the United States of America. The production company for the film was RKO radio pictures and was American. Because of this any problems that the film crew and cast had whilst filming in the country would have been allowed because of the company being American. The picture was located in several states including; Los Angeles, California, New Jersey and New York. Examples of laws and regulations that would have had to been followed in the filming company was from another country would have included: the restriction policy that informs that all records must be disclosed only in accordance with the provision. The recreation was all filmed in New Zealand. Two of the production companies were American, another two were from New Zealand and the final one was from Germany. As several of the production companies are from the country where the filming was done many of the restrictions for the filming in that country would have been relaxed, however some still apply regardless. Examples of regulations that were relaxed include filming in public spaces without a permit. Public spaces included footpaths, playing fields and regional parks. Locations used in New Zealand for the remake include; Wellington, Cook Strait and Auckland. If both of these films did not have a production company based in the country they wished to film or were not from the country they would have had to pay a sum of money for permission to use to the country in their film. This sum of money would go to the government that runs the country. The original King Kong initially was filmed in the United States. Film tax incentives are tax benefits offered on a state by state basis throughout the United States to encourage the in-state film production these incentives came about in the 1930's as a response of the flight of the movie productions to other countries. The remake of King Kong was filmed in New Zealand where there were similar tax incentives to the ones in the United States but being 70 years apart these tax incentives were more modern, and in brief allowed the filming of King Kong in the country because of a production team that was from the country. In the original version of the film, the special effects usage was minimal and often was only used when they had to be used. A huge margin however of the budge was spent on the special effects. This proves that the special effects were expensive. A reported $230,000 of the budget was spent on the special effects, which included the stop motion animation, the smoke bombs and minor explosions. CGI and 3D imaging were both special effects that were not invented when the original was in production 72 years before. These new effects as mentioned earlier allowed a more realistic creation of the beast Kong and unfortunately because of the expense of this a bigger part of the budget was spent on the special effects. An estimated further $160,000 was spent on the sound engineering and voice engineering for the original film, this included sound effects for the mighty Kong and his commanding growl. As the remake was on a much bigger scale than the original it would be comply and make sense that the remake spent more than double of that figure on the sound and voice engineering at $356.000. The original film was first released to the pictures where it was open to the public to see. There was ten viewings a day. Within its first four days, tickets were priced at $.35 to $.75 before inflation and at least one of the ten viewings were sold out. Over the four-day period the film grossed $89,931. It was only in 1956 when there was a re-release where the film was then distributed television where once every day it would be shown. This film was created before some technological discoveries and because of this the film was only improved in its distribution form when they were invented. This is why the film was only put on to VHS in 1981 a good five years after its invention. The Remake was released on a Wednesday and grossed $9,755,745. On its first weekend it grossed $66.1million. This remake grossed an additional $332,437,332 and became in the top five highest grossing films of the year. During its home video release the recreation of King Kong sold over $100 million worth of DVDs. Which translates to 7.6 million DVDs.

Due to both interpretations of the film are set in the 1930's decade, product placement was limited and so only a few examples were identified in the films. In the original a total of four product placements are used. In both the original and the remake the American car brand building Chevrolet is seen on the streets of Time Square in New York. This product placement is used in both films and is the first of two that does this. This would have mainly been done because the car brand was quite s popular at the time the films were set. Below shows the comparison between the product placement:

The original product placement

The product placement in the remake

Secondly a Coco Cola van is seen on the street on New York. 

Thirdly the Yellow Taxi Corp is featured driving the yellow taxis in New York. This is shown below:

Fourthly both the original and the remake use product placement for the American toothpaste brand Pepsodent is seen on the streets of Time Square in New York. This product placement is used in both films and is the second of two that does this. This would have mainly been done because the product was popular at the time the films were set. Below shows the comparison between the product placement:

The product placement in the remake

The original product placement

At the time the original King Kong was in production the favourite film genres for audiences to seek out included crime dramas and action films. A big name film that was introduced in this decade was The Adventures of Robin Hood. As mentioned earlier, King Kong was a phenomenon. A action horror hybrid such as King Kong was never estimated to do well as this genre was scarcely seen before and infrequently enjoyed by viewers. When the original film was in production the most popular genre was action and comedy. What the actors and stars bring to the table can help the popularity of the film, for example Fray Wray who played Ann Darrow in the original film had only been in a few films before but had a very strong fan base that upon seeing her in the advertising media such as a poster would have decided to see it for that reason. In the remake Jack Black played Carl Denham. Jack at the time that the film was in production had been in several films, mainly comedies, and so his fan base would have been eager to see him in another. For his fan base to see him in an action drama, thriller film would have drawn attention to both the film and himself which therefore would have resulted in a 'win/win' scenario.

 When the first trailer, which only featured a teaser of the remake, was released on YouTube, over the years since a total of 1 million two hundred thousand, eight hundred and twenty nine people have viewed it. By the second trailer the viewership had more than doubled, this therefore illustrates the following of fans that showed interest in the remake due to the success of the original. 

Conclusion

In conclusion both films broke even and made a massive profit, this was the main goal or aim for achievement from the production companies. Despite the remake using different actors the majority of the film was true to its prerequisite and because of this, the film was a big hit with the following of fans that enjoyed the original. Both films had very different sized budgets but because of the time difference both budgets were huge sums of money at the time and more than the production companies were riding on the success of the films. Both films took unknown actors and transformed them into a huge success, an example of this is the original was Robert Armstrong as Carl Denham who during his life time went on to be nominated and even win great acting awards such as the BAFTA award. 

The original King Kong received a 98% rating on the film critic website; Rotten tomatoes and a 86% audience rating. This shows that the film did exceptionally well.

The remake of King Kong received a 84% rating on the same website and a 50% audience rating. This suggests that even though the remake lived up to expectations of the original, it was not as successful or enjoyed as the original. 

I personally enjoy both films, my personal preference however is the remake, and this is most likely because of the time I grew up in and how a film with CGI is more appealing to me. I also like the aspect of colour and to me combining the two creates a better film than one without both. I also prefer this film because of the spider pit scene, which was left out of the original but helps to engage the audience and inform the audience of what lives on Skull Island.

Bibliography 

• (1933) Available at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0024216/ (Accessed: 3 March 2017).
• (2005) Available at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0360717/ (Accessed: 3 March 2017).
• Green, J. (2014) King Kong comparison (1933-2005). Available at: https://prezi.com/75go0wtvmmre/king-kong-comparison-1933-2005/ (Accessed: 3 March 2017).
• A,Smith. (2008). King Kong..A Different Story To Gollum! Available: http://guide2cgi.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03/king-konga-different-story-to-gollum.html. Last accessed 21/03/17.

• J, Beach. (2014). How did they do it? King Kong (1933). Available: https://videoartlex.wordpress.com/2014/03/12/how-did-they-do-it-king-kong-1933/. Last accessed 21/03/17.

• S,Tailor. (2013). King Kong (1933). Available: http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/King-Kong-(1933)#tab=summary. Last accessed 21/03/17.

• D,Butcher. (2011). Laws and regulations. Available: http://www.aucklandnz.com/screen/lawsand-regulations. Last accessed 17/03/17.

• P, Clancy. (2012). King Kong 1933. Available: http://godzilla.wikia.com/wiki/King_Kong_(1933_film). Last accessed 21/03/17.

• Youtube. (2009). King Kong Official Trailer #1 - Jack Black Movie (2005) HD. Available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYaTCPbYGdk. Last accessed 21/03/17.

• Wikipedia. (2014). King Kong (1933 film). Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Kong_(1933_film). Last accessed 17/03/17.

• Wikipedia. (2014). King Kong (2005 film). Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Kong_(2005_film). Last accessed 17/03/17.

• BrandSpotter. (2012). Brands in King Kong 1933. Available: http://www.brandspotters.com/movie.aspx?id=955. Last accessed 20/03/17.

• Rotten Tomatoes. (2011). King Kong 2005. Available: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/king_kong. Last accessed 21/03/17.

• Rotten Tomatoes. (2011). King Kong (1933). Available: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1011615_king_kong. Last accessed 21/03/17.