Editing King Kong (1933 film) (section)

== Analysis ==

=== Racial stereotypes ===
''King Kong'' has undergone extensive analysis of its portrayal of race. NPR producer Robert Malesky remarks that, "To many, the eroticism and racism of the original film are just side themes and part of the fabric of 1930s America."<ref name=":32">{{Cite web |date=2008-06-29 |title='King Kong': The Eighth Wonder of the World |url=https://www.npr.org/transcripts/92000622 |access-date=2025-02-25 |website=NPR |language=en}}</ref> Author Ryan Britt feels that critics were willing to overlook the film's problematic aspects as "just unattractive byproducts of the era in which the film was made". He adds, "the meta-fictional aspects almost excuse some of the cultural insensitivity".<ref>{{cite web |date=October 24, 2011 |title=Think He's Crazy? Nah, Just Enthusiastic. Rewatching King Kong (1933) |url=https://reactormag.com/think-hes-crazy-nah-just-enthusiastic-rewatching-king-kong-1933/}}</ref> In the 19th and early 20th century, people of African descent were commonly represented visually as ape-like, a metaphor that fit racist stereotypes further bolstered by the emergence of [[scientific racism]].<ref>Grant, Elizabeth. (1996). 'Here Comes the Bride.' In: Grant, Barry Keith (ed.). ''The Dread of Difference: Gender and the Horror Film''. Austin: University of Texas Press. p. 373</ref> Early films frequently mirrored racial tensions. While ''King Kong'' is often compared to the story of ''[[Beauty and the Beast]],'' many film scholars have argued that the film was a [[cautionary tale]] about [[Interracial relationships|interracial romance]], in which the film's "carrier of blackness is not a human being, but an ape."<ref name="GoffEberhardt20082">{{cite journal |last1=Goff |first1=Phillip Atiba |last2=Eberhardt |first2=Jennifer L. |last3=Williams |first3=Melissa J. |last4=Jackson |first4=Matthew Christian |year=2008 |title=Not yet human: Implicit knowledge, historical dehumanization, and contemporary consequences. |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology |volume=94 |issue=2 |page=293 |doi=10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.292 |issn=1939-1315 |pmid=18211178}}</ref><ref>Kuhn, Annette. (2007). King Kong. In: Cook, Pam. (ed.) The Cinema Book. London: British Film Institute. p. 41. and Robinson, D. (1983). King Kong. In: Lloyd, A. (ed.) Movies of the Thirties. Orbis Publishing Ltd. p. 58.</ref> Jordan Zakarin of ''Inverse'' quotes author and professor Christopher Michlig, who explains that even though many modern viewers see the film as racist, it exhibits 1930s perceptions of obscure locations and peoples.<ref name=":22">{{Cite web |last=Zakarin |first=Jordan |date=2017-03-09 |title=King Kong's Long Journey from Racist Monster to Woke Hero |url=https://www.inverse.com/article/28860-king-kong-skull-island-politics-racism |access-date=2025-02-25 |website=Inverse |language=en}}</ref>

The film has been criticized for racial stereotyping of the native people and Charlie the cook, the latter of whom exclaims, "Crazy black man been here!" when he discovers Ann has been kidnapped.<ref>{{cite web |date=29 June 2021 |title=''King Kong'': Special Edition  |url=https://www.starburstmagazine.com/reviews/dvd-review-king-kong-special-edition/ |access-date=4 June 2024 |website=www.starburstmagazine.com/}}</ref> Filmmaker Fatimah Rony argues that Charlie is feminized in his occupation and gesticulations.{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=175}} She also views the native people's "savagery" as being associated with their dark skin.{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=177}} In 2013 ''[[Atlanta Black Star]]'' described the people native to the island "as subhuman, or primate...[without] a distinct way of communicating".<ref name=":02">{{Cite web |date=2013-11-22 |title=11 of The Most Racist Movies Ever Made |url=https://atlantablackstar.com/2013/11/22/11-of-the-most-racist-movies-ever-made/3/ |access-date=2024-06-10 |website=Atlanta Black Star |language=en-US}}</ref> Rony points out that African Americans and a [[Yaqui]] man were cast to portray Indonesian people.{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=177}} In her view, racial undertones are present when Ann is preferred for the sacrifice rather than the girl who is native to Skull Island.{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=177}} [[Wayne State University]] film professor Cynthia Erb remarks that "Ann's prized whiteness" is "the most disturbing racial" component, rather than "Kong's blackness".{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=105}} Erb explains that in jungle films "the depiction of natives was often patronizing, stereotypical, racist." She adds, "I think it does happen with the Skull Islanders."<ref name=":12">{{Cite web |last=Malesky |first=Robert |date=June 29, 2008 |title='King Kong': The Eighth Wonder of the World |url=https://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/npr/92000622/www.thearcjslc.org |access-date=2025-02-25 |website=NCPR}}</ref>

Critics have also seen Kong himself as a perpetuation of racial tensions. ''Atlanta Black Star'' perceived a racial allegory between Kong and black men, remarking that Kong "meets his demise due to his insatiable desire for a white woman".<ref name=":02" /> Erb argues that the portrayal of Kong is one of a "[[noble savage]]" and a fighter rather than a "sexual aggressor".{{Sfn|Erb|2009|pp=89, 117}} In her analysis Rony relates Kong to the "noble savage"  because he fights off the dinosaurs due to his affection for Ann.{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=180}} She remarks that Kong is "not exclusively black", as he is connected to Asia due to his Eastern-inspired name as well as the Indonesian location of Skull Island.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=102}} She calls it "one of the most outrageous 'racial films' ever made",{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=154}} opining that it is one among several films of the time that portrays a person with African, Asian, or Pacific Islander ancestry "as an ape-monster".{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=15}} According to Rony, Cooper decided to make Ann blonde to emphasize the difference between her and Kong,{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=172}} and as a white woman she was established as "a kind of lure for the monster-like beast".{{Sfn|Rony|1996|pp=165, 181}} Her fair complexion contrasts with his dark complexion, which film analyst Rhona Berenstein argues is implicitly associated with his "monstrosity".{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|pp=163–164}}

Concerns surrounding biracial interactions in the film have also arisen. Rony claims the film "ultimately celebrates cinema's tendency to create monsters which mirror the anxieties of any given age".{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=189}} According to Rony, Kong symbolizes biracial sexual relationships, which were looked down upon at the time of the film's release.{{Sfn|Rony|1996|pp=165, 176}} Berenstein sees Kong and Ann's relationship as "a vehicle for racial crossing", arguing that the film both "confirms" and "destablizes" the idea of "[[white supremacy]]".{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|pp=195–196}} She explains that Ann serves as a warning against and as a summons for "the monstrous possibility of [[miscegenation]]".{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|pp=163-164}} Writer James A. Snead and German Studies professor [[Dagmar C. G. Lorenz|Dagmar Lorenz]] compare Denham to a colonialist and link Kong's capture to the slave trade.{{Sfn|Rony|1996|p=176}}{{Sfn|Lorenz|2007|p=159}} Erb takes the idea of Denham as colonialist to argue that, following the prologue, the film appears to "challenge" colonialism.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=106}} Zakarin claims that elements that may be seen as disturbing stemmed from what Cooper believed would make the film adventurous.<ref name=":22" />

=== Ann's relationships ===
The film has been called sexist in its portrayal of women. [[Jay Telotte|J. P. Telotte]] claims that the film "sets up a pattern of repression" in the largely male ship crew as well as with Denham's and Jack's "antiromantic remarks".{{Sfn|Telotte|1988|pp=389–390}} According to author Joseph Andriano, the film attempts to reduce the idea of sexism by creating a relationship between King Kong and Ann. He adds that this attempt does not work because Ann is portrayed as helpless. Because Kong's eventual downfall results from "feminine charm", Andriano suggests that the film implies a "helpless female" is more powerful than an able male.{{Sfn|Andriano|1999|p=50}} According to Rhona Berenstein, screaming women are "central to [the] jungle-horror" genre.{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|pp=186–187}} Denham coaches Ann's screaming when there is nothing to scream at. Berenstein remarks that this coached screaming may bleed into her reaction to Kong, rendering it a performance.{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|p=188}} She furthers the argument by stating that the practiced screaming indicates that Ann's and Kong's relationship "is not simply that between a victim and a monster",{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|p=188}}  adding that Ann's victimization via Kong comes only after she seeks independence.{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|pp=193–194}}

Berenstein parallels Ann's sacrifice to Kong with Denham's Kong exhibit in New York City, suggesting that this makes Ann and Kong "both doubles and adversaries".{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|p=189}} She views the film as creating a relatability between "people of color, a white woman, and a simian monster".{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|p=192}} Mark Rubinstein parallels Kong's New York rampage to his efforts to protect Ann on Skull Island, remarking that Kong both protects Ann and acts as if she belongs to him.{{Sfn|Rubinstein|1977|pp=5–6}} Rubinstein argues that the proverb appearing at the film's beginning warns about love, specifically that if a man is romantically attracted to a woman he will experience a "downfall".{{Sfn|Rubinstein|1977|p=8}} He argues that Ann does not return Kong's affection.{{Sfn|Rubinstein|1977|p=8}} Wray herself claimed that Ann had no romantic feelings for Kong but instead feared him.{{Sfn|Lloyd|Robinson|1985|p=57}}

It has also been suggested that Ann is under Denham's control. Erb remarks that while Kong seeks a romantic relationship with Ann, Denham seeks to earn money because of her.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=105}} She explains that Denham appears "control-oriented" to modern viewers, whereas to 1930s viewers he would have appeared "more as the enterprising showman".{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=104}} According to Rony and Berenstein, Ann is controlled by Denham,{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|p=187}} who uses her "as an object of trade and of spectacle", subjecting her to the male gaze while practicing her screams under Denham's direction.{{Sfn|Rony|1996|pp=172, 176}} Snead remarks that in the film women become "a sort of visual capital" rather than "people or potential partners".{{Sfn|Berenstein|1996|p=191}}

=== Nature and civilization ===
While Cooper and Schoedsack insisted in contemporary interviews that there was no hidden meaning to ''King Kong,'' a posthumously published interview with Cooper revealed that his inspiration for the film was rooted in the image of a giant ape falling from the tallest building, which would represent how primitive people are doomed by modern civilization.{{sfn|Smith|2020|pp=99–100}}<ref name="Haver19762">{{cite magazine |last=Haver |first=Ron |date=December 1976 |title=Merian C. Cooper: The First King of Kong |url=https://www.scribd.com/document/153812357/American-Film-Magazine-December-1976 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200802224054/https://www.scribd.com/document/153812357/American-Film-Magazine-December-1976 |archive-date=August 2, 2020 |access-date=June 7, 2019 |magazine=American Film Magazine |publisher=[[American Film Institute]] |location=New York |page=18}}</ref> This idea has been taken up in scholarly analysis of the film. In her analysis Erb focuses on the struggle between primitivism and civilization.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=89}} In her view, Kong invokes a sense of primitivism and symbolizes nature, while Denham symbolizes modern society.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|pp=89, 102}} The film, she argues, demonstrates "nature's revenge on culture" and nature's eventual defeat.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|pp=102–103}} While Erb explains that she does not disagree with views of the film involving sexism and racism, she argues that Kong's interactions with Ann reach beyond race and sex.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=88}} She argues that when Kong partially undresses Ann, it "initiate[s] her into the realm of the wild".{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=112}} Touching her and smelling her clothes are primitivist actions, Erb suggests, because it focuses on senses other than sight. Heavy reliance on sight is associated with modern society.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=112}} Erb explains that Kong's alternation of aggressiveness and gentleness "arguably embodies both the demonic and Edenic impulses of the jungle tradition" common in 1930s film.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=89}} According to Erb, through contrast Skull Island is set up as a counterpart to New York City.{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=103}}

Telotte takes a similar approach, pointing out that many of the island scenes reflect the events of the city scenes.{{Sfn|Telotte|1988|p=396}} According to Telotte, Kong is taken from an "Edenic world" to be exploited in the modern world.{{Sfn|Telotte|1988|p=390}} Kong's New York City rampage is an "effort to tear down the base of modern culture itself".{{Sfn|Erb|2009|p=117}} Dagmar Lorenz argues that the film establishes "Western civilization as the source of Kong's destruction"{{Sfn|Lorenz|2007|p=159}} and explains that portraying Skull Island's "wildness" seems to convey an idea of "barbarity".{{Sfn|Lorenz|2007|p=167}} Tom Shales of''[[The Washington Post]]'' takes a different approach, suggesting that the film is "an allegory about modern man, sort of, facing his own nature", rather than about beauty killing the beast.<ref name=":12" />