I saw King Kong - I WAS SHOCKED

Peter Jackson of Lord of the Rings fame has remade King Kong.

I saw this film.

I cried after seeing this film.

I have no hatred for Peter Jackson or his team of amazing folks. What this person... hates...… cannot stand and thinks should be relegated to the same dark, murky hole in Hades that hopefully holds the entire body of black-face entertainment is the story.

King Kong, which was made famous as a 1930’s film, is the story of a white, very white...extremely white and Aryan the way Ann Coulter wishes she was Aryan...woman who some how ends up on a tropical, very tropical, WILD and untamed island populated by…NATIVES! Yep, natives who become entranced with this Aryan representation of civilized female beauty even though they have never set eyes on a white woman. Depending on the version, they either have always worshiped white women or simply begin to worship them once they set eyes on the blond bombshell that plops down on their island.

Now, they have a secret. A big f******* secret! There is a giant highly sexualized primate lurking on the island! Oh no! Jesus, why would a loving Gawd ever create such a beast? In the words of Wolf Blitzer…he’s so black!

In order to pacify said giant black primate, the natives offer up sacrificial women. The giant primate then takes the women and leaves the natives alone for a while. ‘Cause…well, you know…he's getting his freak on. And everyone knows that giant sexualized primates are soothed and calmed by the company of a terrified nubile woman.

Even though the regular offering of native women has pacified the giant primate, the natives know that this stunning white woman will put his ass over the top. S***, they started coveting her right from the start! No way is their giant highly sexualized primate going to turn down a tryst with an unwilling blond beauty.

So, they capture the girl, tie her ass to a stake and offer her.

The giant primate, who represents society’s notion that black men are obsessed with white women and are driven into uncontrollable frenzies by them, comes upon the blond and…well…becomes obsessed with her and is driven into an uncontrollable frenzy.

It gets better!

The blond, at first disgusted and terrified by the giant black primate, begins to fall under its spell. This is vital, because EVERYONE knows that the black man…oh, sh**…no that would be the 'giant black primate' has skills and, given enough time, can seduce pure untouched blonds with his sexual prowess!

Lets see...ummm...oh yes...blond is freed, primate is captured, marketing blitz hits New York, blond feels sorry for primate, primate is obsessing over blond, primate gets loose…city is terrorized, blond is kidnapped by obsessed primate, they get to the Empire State building and somehow the primate gets to the top. Makes sense since we’re talking about a GIANT primate who just has to be used to climbing tall buildings and sh** like that. Anyhoo… the primate, with blond in hand, is shot and falls to the bottom. Terrorized blond cries and primate dies with one...

large...

extremely large and black...

...f****** GIANT and BLAAAAAACK hand reaching out towards said virginal blond symbol of white pure beauty.

Sigh.

Yeah, a modern civilised well educated person f****** hates this story. My ass knows that Hollywood can’t and/or won’t get its sh** together regarding portrayals of them minorities. But f******* this f****** ****!

F******* everyone involved in bringing this historic insult back to the screen…to insult the f******** **** out of me again! F*********!

WAKE UP!.. WAKE UP..... it's the 21st f******** century !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And as far as the portrayal of women…oh sh**, that requires another post. Suffice it to say, King Kong is a revival of the pedestal and blondie sits right on top of it. Virginal, untouched, coveted…she is the ultimate possession…a literal theatrical attraction.

Between the portrayal of women and the resurrection of antiquated racial stereotypes, this self aware person can find little good in the King Kong story. Which means that this remake will join the other blockbuster films of 2005 on the worst films of all time list.

WAKE UP! WAKE UP! ITS THE 21 ST CENTURY.RIGHT?

I hardly think that the entire point of remaking King Kong was to demean women....keeping with the original movie was probably the reason behind having her blonde still....

It's a classic movie...people shouldn't look too far into movies. They are there for entertainment not to try and revive some sexist ideals.

Until I can see a giant ape punch the crap out of a giant lizard in real life, I'll keep watching King Kong.



However, Peter Jackson didn't win any awards from diversity activists for LOTR, the bad guys were all savage and black and brown (in fact it goes on a sliding scale, the blacker the character the more evil - the witch king is pure black beneath his armor, right?), and the good guys were all white, riding white steeds, yadda yadda.

Doesn't mean you can't appreciate the movies for other reasons...

For the same reason I can't see an ape fight a lizard in real life, neither can I see an armored cave troll smashing into a fortified keep.

Anyone who goes to see King Kong for the female empowerment or minority image redux is going to get a rude awakening. It's a spectacle flic.

It's just ancient belief and ideals.

Light V Dark

It's not any racist properganda or hidden agenda.

Sun brings the light, which brings safety. The Night brings the Darkness which brings creatures of the night.

Star Wars - Lightside/Darkside of the force.

Hell the whole storyline of Lost is based around the Dark V Light.

I just think people look too hard for 'racism' at times.

This is one of the most ignorant threads I have seen here.

Racism in LOTR\King Kong because of archetypal color schemes????....get a grip!

Go out on the street and ask people if they agree with you - the whole premise is just stupid. STUPID. Find one person that feels that black\dark skinned people are inherently more evil than anyone else because of this film. Not gonna happen. STUPID!....

I was SHOCKED to read this ignorant tripe.

There is truth to the post, however I think it's more a case of Pater Jackson faithfully recreating the original, with all it's creepy racial and sexual undercurrents intact.

Besides, how "sexualized" can a 40-foot anatomically incorrect gorilla be? It seems poor Kong is, err, "missing" something. Kinda explains why he's the last of his kind...

i think youve got some serious issues you could do with some help assesing....

Between the portrayal of women and the resurrection of antiquated racial stereotypes, this self aware person can find little good in the King Kong story.

just a suggestion...why not spend your time assesing something of real value and post a comment.

It would appear obvious to me that this hollywood blockbuster, that has re created a famous love story between animal and human is nothing to do with degrading women nor does it have racist undertones?

Would you like to Ban 'Gorillas in the mist' aswell?

Regards.

Talk about seeing something that's not really there. I think the whole point of "King Kong" escaped the OP here. I didn't see any racial stereotypes or a bad portrayal of women either.

esecallum, I think you're reading waaaay more into it than was intended.
It's a great movie, and a pretty good story.

As was pointed out, even if there was a giant ape craving white women, he's missing the parts he needs to complete the whole scenario. If they would have made him with his "stuff" intact, it would have been so large that the woman wouldn't be able to,,,, you know.

It's just a story, I believe that's all that was intended even in the original version.

The story of King Kong was based on previous stories about traveling to far off islands and capturing wild exotic creatures. Whether it was concious or unconcious, white America had a desire to see exotic things under their control. This being a horror movie , what greater horror than to lose control. It brought disorder to the otherwise calm streets and buildings. It stole the most desired beuty of the time, and eventually had to be killed.

If you combine that with being tightly packed into the belly of a ship to be brought across the world to make a greedy white man some money, then you've got a story.

Originally posted by esecallum

Between the portrayal of women and the resurrection of antiquated racial stereotypes, this self aware person can find little good in the King Kong story. Which means that this remake will join the other blockbuster films of 2005 on the worst films of all time list.

WAKE UP! WAKE UP! ITS THE 21 ST CENTURY.RIGHT?

Methinks you've totally missed the point.....

One of the - perhaps more subtle? - undertones in the story is how 'modern sophisticated western society' is, in reality, no better than the wild, savage jungle.

Hence Kong - revered and respected on Skull Island - is killed in New York by screaming, wild, flying savages.....

Any racism is thus directed at White America



[edit on 10-5-2006 by Essan]

Originally posted by ArchangelOfCool
I hardly think that the entire point of remaking King Kong was to demean women....keeping with the original movie was probably the reason behind having her blonde still....

It's a classic movie...people shouldn't look too far into movies. They are there for entertainment not to try and revive some sexist ideals.

bingo.

if your looking for all of that crap in a movie, you shouldnt be allowed to see movies!

If he's missing...bits...then why is "he" a he....heh.....
Maybe theres some homoerotic undertones to the movie....lesbian action with a monkey? Peter Jackson might be a bit stranger than I thought....

Originally posted by optimus fett
i think youve got some serious issues you could do with some help assesing....

Between the portrayal of women and the resurrection of antiquated racial stereotypes, this self aware person can find little good in the King Kong story.

just a suggestion...why not spend your time assesing something of real value and post a comment.

It would appear obvious to me that this hollywood blockbuster, that has re created a famous love story between animal and human is nothing to do with degrading women nor does it have racist undertones?

Would you like to Ban 'Gorillas in the mist' aswell?

Regards.

NO.

Its not JUST a movie.

ITS MASSIVE PROPAGANDA.

It seems Peter Jackson has suceeded in taking your money and making some people like you into gullible useful idiots as Khrushev said.


Its brainwashing people on a global scale to hate blacks and portray them as rapists of white woman.Its a huge advert to portray blacks as bestial savages and promote race hatred and devision.


It promotes internecine hatred and warfare.

It promotes blacks as savages.That scene on the (racially named) Skull Island was racially ridiculous where as soon as they see white women they go crazy with their spears and bongo drums and their evil chantings.

You explain that to us.

It stereotypes them as savages and kidnappers who make banging noises when they see a white woman with blonde hair.

For example when YOU see a banana you automatically associate it with monkeys and black people because of the 60 years of associated imagery in your head from books,magazines,tv,movies.

Your attempt to belittle the issue shows you to be insensitive and accepting of racial stereotyping so that your ego can feel superior.

Originally posted by esecallum


For example when YOU see a banana you automatically associate it with monkeys and black people because of the 60 years of associated imagery in your head from books,magazines,tv,movies.

Your attempt to belittle the issue shows you to be insensitive and accepting of racial stereotyping so that your ego can feel superior.

Oh dear, please don't assume because that's what you think, that's what we all think. When I see a banana, I think of a large source of potassium.

I won't be read this thread any longer, and sadly this is a poor example of everyone being able to have an opinion. If anything, this thread is more offensive and 'racist' then the claimed 'King Kong' film is alleged to be.

If I remember correctly some of those 'savages' on the (so called Racially named) Skull Island were white as well.
The fact is, I didn't see any racism/racist stereotypes in this film, I don't think it's because of been brainwashed in anyway, but rather that I've grown up in an area that doesn't have much 'widespread visable racism' (NE England) so I guess I've grown up not knowing all the age long stereotypical racist slurs that have been in circulation in America.

A large part of making racism a thing of the past is for posts like this, which go in great detail of explaining what you believe to be racist, which in turn could create a new wave of racists, say if you had said any of this at a school with young minds hearing that you believe 'bananas are for monkeys and black people are monkeys so they should have bananas', then it's very likely that they'll start to do that in the playground.

Just let it go, you seem to be the only person that believes this film has hidden meaning and is trying to encite racisim across the world again. I almost think you want to be flamed.

Originally posted by esecallum
NO.

Its not JUST a movie.

ITS MASSIVE PROPAGANDA.

YES.

It is JUST a move. Propaganda? please....

Its brainwashing people on a global scale to hate blacks and portray them as rapists of white woman.Its a huge advert to portray blacks as bestial savages and promote race hatred and devision.

Ummm... I really liked the movie and I don't hate anyone of any race. I've seen the movie three times and not ONCE did any racial hatered cross my mind. I think you're really going overboard with this.

It promotes internecine hatred and warfare.

You just keep telling yourself that...

It promotes blacks as savages.That scene on the (racially named) Skull Island was racially ridiculous where as soon as they see white women they go crazy with their spears and bongo drums and their evil chantings.

How is "Skull Island" racially named?
And how does it promote blacks as savages? Yes there was a tribe of aboriginal type people on the island. So? There are still tribes of primative people all over the world to this day. What's your problem?
This tribe of people on the island sacrifice there women to Kong. They only really seemed to have gotten excited when they heard her scream which I believe got Kongs attention. Thus the tribal people getting excited too (that's how i remember it anyway)
And why do you say there chanting was evil?

For example when YOU see a banana you automatically associate it with monkeys and black people because of the 60 years of associated imagery in your head from books,magazines,tv,movies.

what the hell!??! i've never associated bananas with black people. Monkey's yes, but black people? That's ridiculous, if not just plain retarded.

Your attempt to belittle the issue shows you to be insensitive and accepting of racial stereotyping so that your ego can feel superior.

There is no issue to belittle. Your over active imagination has created something that isn't there to begin with. It's rather sad that you see things that way though.

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by esecallum
NO.

Its not JUST a movie.

ITS MASSIVE PROPAGANDA.

YES.

It is JUST a move. Propaganda? please....

==============================


======================
Look Ira I am white and this movie offended me.YOU seem to be either complacent or easily brainwashed by the mass media hype.

I can prove my arguement point by point.


Look you need to check the history of the 1933 King Kong film
and the people who made it.

just type in "King Kong racist" in google and you will see the origins of the film were based on profound racism.

I fear you do not want to address your own prejudices and thats why you never had a decent argument.


Look I can prove my point without insulting anyone unlike some people above.


I can prove it.

When you see nature/animal documentaries on tv the genetalia of animals is not removed or blocked or pixilated.


right?

you got that?

in fact you see programs on discovery channel etc showing animals mating on daytime tv......including monkeys,apes,gorillas.

right?

you got that?


now in the film the penis of King Kong was conspicous by its absence.

why?

this is a very important point.

if he was meant to be portrayed as an animal they would not have removed his penis.

but BECAUSE HE WAS MEANT TO PORTRAY A BESTIAL STEREOTYPICAL BLACK SAVAGE WHO WANTS TO KIDNAP/RAPE WHITE VIRGIN BLONDES THAT WHY HIS PENIS WAS NOT VISIABLE BECAUSE because that is not allowed on mainstream dytime tv/mainstream none x -rated fims.

King Kong is meant to SYMBOLIZE a black person that why his penis was removed.If he was meant to portray an animal then his penis would not have been removed as proved in the discovery nature channels programs
on daytime tv.

you got that?

i.e full frontal nudity of men is not allowed on mainstream daytime tv/non x-rated films.

you got that?


this proves that king kong was not just a gorilla on the rampage but meant to symbolise blacks.



When you say you dont see apes as blacks you are either lying or self delusional. White people see blacks as apes.Thats why when you see a banana you associate IT with blacks and apes.



On Skull Island blacks were portrayed as crazy drum banging savages.Why?

Why did they kidnap a white blonde girl.The film portrayed them as rapists and kidnappers of white virgen blonde girls.

And portrayed blacks as killers, savages,kidnappers and bestial savages.

Did you see the bones?

Why?


When you see images of a jungle the mental picture conjured in your heads is of black cannibals boiling people to eat them and blacks living in mudhuts or swinging from the trees throwing spears.

Look at the Tarzan films.

When you see blacks on TV you hate them even more because they have a better job then you and you feel even more justification for your intense hatred and loathing of all blacks.

For example if you had a black friend and you fell out and had a fight the FIRST abuse you would use against the black would be "black bastard" or "'n-word'".

In King Kong blacks are portrayed as rapists of white blonde women and must therefore be machine gunned to death.

In King Kong the giant ape had no penis?

Where was it? well?

This as an attempt to portray blacks as bestial savages but without an actual penis.

Even when King Kong was standing erect we could not see his penis yet blacks are portrayed as rapists of young blonde virgin white women.

Even when the blonde was between his legs we could not see his penis.

How could she be raped without a penis?

It makes no sense.

Why?

Why?

I ask you why?

For once you could actually try to address the profound and very logical arguments put to you instead of evading them.

King Kong is meant to SYMBOLIZE a black person that why his penis was removed.If he was meant to portray an animal then his penis would not have been removed as proved in the discovery nature channels programs
on daytime tv.

King Kong is not a documentary. No animated animals in movies have genitalia. Lion King, anyone?

When you say you dont see apes as blacks you are either lying or self delusional. White people see blacks as apes.Thats why when you see a banana you associate IT with blacks and apes.

Hold on just a minute there, sporto. I am neither lying nor delusional. If anyone (including you) sees the protrayal of King Kong as a big, black, penis-less rapist symbol, I suggest it's not 'all whites' who need to evaluate their racist tendencies and attitudes.

When you see blacks on TV you hate them even more because they have a better job then you and you feel even more justification for your intense hatred and loathing of all blacks.

Where am I? WTF are you talking about?

Whoever I have quoted above needs to chill out and stop telling everyone else how they feel by saying "You hate them" and so on. If YOU hate them, at least speak in the first person and stop telling everyone else how they feel.

This was funny at first, but now I'm feeling I've never read so much crap in my life.

Seriously, tell us how YOU feel, not how WE feel. Ok?


[edit on 11-5-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]

An animal/nature documentary is not comparable to a fantasy movie. Also i'm sure a lot of people would have been a little upset seeing a giant guerrilla penis on a big movie screen. I don't know, personally i'd find it hard to take the movie seriously if Kong had a giant 10 foot penis hanging down there.

You really got to get out more though I think. I really don't see PJ as the type to do what you're claiming.

Well for one, I think the staff should deffinately be having a look at a post up a spot or two. Deffinately no need of some of that on ATS.

As for the film, something inside me pushed me to see it. With the extra push I had my girlfriend watch it. By the end of the film she was crying like a baby and I was ready to stand up and clap. Far exceeded any expectation I had, even with the length of the film.

You can break down the movie into sections.

1- The voyage to Skull Island

2- Skull Island

3- Kong Comes to America

The charachter of Kong himself was done like no other. This is what really made the film what it was. The audience connected with an ape who never had one line in the film, not exactly an easy task.

Great Film!