Old vs New - King Kong

One of the greatest ways to illustrate the worth of using the green screen would be to compare an old film with a more modern remake. In this case I will use an example of King Kong.

Firstly I looked into the making of King Kong originally released in 2005. At first, Universal and Peter Jackson projected a budget of $150 million. Over the course of filming, with additional special effects needed, and Jackson extending the film’s running time by thirty minutes, the budget increased to $207 million.

Due to Jackson not wanting King Kong to behave like a human, it took hours and hours of study as well as time to travel to see and understand the behaviour of the real gorillas in the wild. “Jackson saw King Kong as opportunity for technical innovations in motion capture.” Andy Serkis, who played the part of King Kong had to go through two hours of motion capture makeup every day. The process during which artists attach 135 small markers to different spots on his face. It is a long and tedious process but in order for the job to be done right, it is essential for skill motion capture actors to go through it. It seems like the modern practice is time consuming, however when looking at the old ways, one might change their mind.

The original King Kong, which was released in 1933, relied on stop motion animation. In order to make that happen the artists had to build models and make sure they are able to move them around easily. They constructed a total of four models. A variety of materials were used for different parts of the body. It was mostly aluminium, foam, rubber, latex, and rabbit fur. All four models were made for different shots to make it easier when filming. King Kong’s face was constructed of rubber and the eyes were made from glass. The artists were able to control Kong’s facial expressions by thin bendable wires threaded through holes drilled in his aluminium skull. As always, some problems occurred during filming. One of the main problems encountered during the production was the use of the wrong material for Kong’s skin, as the rubber used dried very fast under the studio lights. This made it necessary to replace the said skin often and completely redo model’s facial features, which was very time consuming and obviously costly. The production team could not even made the King Kong whole, as it would stand thirty to forty feet tall, so they have created only the parts needed for specific shoots. These parts were huge, they had to be moved around either by a crane or they had to be made with wheels attached to them for the ease of movement.

The estimated budget for the movie was $670 000, which adjusted for inflation (up to 2005) increases to over $10 650 000. When looking at earnings however, the 1933 version of King Kong grossed $89 931 in the first four days after release. This calculates to $1 301 040 when adjusted for inflation up to 2005. This can now be compared to $9 755 745, which the new King Kong grossed only in the first day of release or to $66 100 000, which it grossed in a total of five days. All of this clearly shows that investing a little more into a movie is worth it.

Jen Sauer - Creative Director/Universal Creative: “Now we can tell that story in a way that we were never been able to tell it before. Kong can move fast, he can move around us, he can move in a quick and natural way that surpasses anything we can do with sets and robotics, even today.”