Cool News
RAY HARRYHAUSEN... the 1933 KING KONG IN 35MM... ALAMO DRAFTHOUSE... MARCH!!! YESSSS!!!!
Hey folks, Harry here... I'm so proud to join in the Alamo Drafthouse in Welcoming RAY HARRYHAUSEN to Austin, Texas later next month. Ray wanted to screen and introduce the original KING KONG - so we'll be screening one of the finest most beautiful film prints of KONG in the world - and I couldn't be more delighted, I've seen THE LOST WORLD with Harryhausen in Dallas over a decade ago, but never KING KONG. I hope to see y'all there! To see this great film on the big screen is reason enough to show. To see, hear and meet Ray Harryhausen... who, in my opinion, is the most magical human being I have ever had the honor to know.... well that's a rare chance in a lifetime. Finally, he's here in Austin!
RAY HARRYHAUSEN PRESENTS KING KONG AND SIGNS COPIES OF "THE ART OF RAY
HARRYHAUSEN" AT THE ALAMO SOUTH LAMAR MARCH 28
We can hardly believe we're announcing that the great Ray Harryhausen will
be gracing our stage to present KING KONG. The word legend doesn't even
come close to describing Ray Harryhausen. He is indisputably the most
revered living special effects technician and has either created or
perfected almost all of the techniques moviemakers have used over the years
to create movie magic. From THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS through CLASH OF
THE TITANS Ray Harryhausen's creations have been the stuff of dreams.
Mr. Harryhausen will present a rare screening of the original 1933 KING
KONG, the movie that set the then 13-year old Harryhausen on his singular
path and ultimately led him to enlarge upon and perfect the techniques of
his mentor Willis O'Brien, the man who animated the great ape.
This screening is a Big Deal to everyone who cares about fantastic films and
we are honored to host it.
WHEN: Tuesday March 28 at 7pm
WHERE: The Alamo Drafthouse South Lamar, 1120 South Lamar Blvd., Austin TX
78704
HOW MUCH: Tickets are $15 apiece and are available at OriginalAlamo.Com
Needless to say, this event will sell out in advance.
-
+ Expand All
-
Another Bad News fan! Fuckin' A!!!
-
"Warriors of Ghengis Khan is actually a political record."
Just for you Tubbs!
-
... continues to piss me off and make me feel like crap for living in the NY Area. MAN! I wish I could be in Austin for this. RH is the man. Much love.
-
I hate everyone that gets to go to this! It's just not fair dammit! I swear... i'm going to cry in the shower now. =( Someone please get me a signed dvd!! I'll give anything... except head or butt sex. you fags.
-
Anyhoo, this is awesome
-
Normally, I'm only 1200 miles away from Austin up here in Minneapolis, but that's when I'm going to be on vacation in Toronto, 2650 miles away, seeing the world premiere of LORD OF THE RINGS: THE MUSICAL. And yes, I'm a sad fuck.
-
Feb 10, 2006 10:55:30 PM CST
Again,did it matter that Ray's effects didn't look real
by orionsangels
No, his stop motion special effects have this dream like quality to them. Where you know it's not real and doesn't look realistic, but that's ok. Part of the allure is the jerky movement. The way the model comes to life. I still think the Medussa scene in Titans is one of the spookiest, most captvating and effetive F/X scenes in a movie. It's down right scary and the lighting work is amazing considering it's stop motion. His characters had personality and you felt cool watching his effects. I'd love to meet him someday.
-
your right. when i was a kid.. that scene always stuck with me and the expressions in her face,creepy as hell.
-
When I saw Harryhausen's name at the top of a headline I was afraid he had passed on...
-
Sweeeeeeeeeet! I just bought my tickets! Watching one of my heros watch the work of one of his heros... I'm in!
-
it's amazing. Wish I could see it w/ Harryhausen in the house...lucky!!!
-
I think, "Aw, man! he died?" then i read further and realize he's doing something.
-
and he was a class dude. Wish i was going to be there.
-
I've been a fan of the site for many a year, and a fan of Ray's since I was a kid. My wife and I just moved to Austin, partly due to the music scene, partly due to all the great things I hear about going on through AICN - and partially because no mere mortal can afford to live in California anymore.
This will be my first screening at The Alamo Drafthouse, and my anticipation is as high for this as it has been for any film in recent years. To think I'll not only be seing one of my favorite films of all time onthe big screen, but to get a chance to meet Ray Harryhausen - THE master! Amazing.
Thank you Harry! Thank you Alamo Drafthouse! And for all those people who just sign on the AICN to post nasty remarks about other poeple's love of movies - get your own damn site!
See you there! -
...not going to be many more opportunities to have them together.
-
Why does Texas get all the cool movie events? I never read about anything cool happening in the new york area
-
And it was everything I ever thought it could be.
-
the original kong was good (8/10) but titans was far better.
my opinion of course -
please send me a signed copy of the book! I'll gladly pay you for it. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE! Austin is a looong way from Memphis and my boss (pig vomit) is a bastard and will not let me off for this! I beg you!
it was worth a shot anyways. -
I could be wrong but I think a friend of mine who met Bradbury said he was losing it a bit and the experience was sort of surreal. I'm definitely not bagging on Bradbury but it's harsh reality that not all of us make it to the end with our wits intact.
-
I'd never actually noticed just how good the special effects were. Sure I knew it was all stop motion mixed with Real shot footage... but the integration sometimes has me scratching my head over just how they got it so good. It also showed me just how flawed and over done the remake was. Actually wouldn't mind seeing a pristine 35mm print.
-
Watching the original Kong a mere 3 hours ago, I found it to be really 'Evil Dead' looking. It must have scared the piss out of audiances back in the 30's. that's what the problem is with Jacksons remake. The only thing that scared me was the running time.
-
Feb 12, 2006 6:23:58 AM CST
Actually, in my opinion Jackson made several mistakes
by undead neverhood
He cut out the infamous raft building/swamp crossing scene. He didn't really build on the Kong mythology with those sailors but treated it as a sort of after thought. Kinda like how Lucas treated Annakins turning to the the darkside ( oh by the way. Annakin has turned and is now a dark influeneced mass murderer, even though yesterday he was on the Jedi councils cool list). The brontosaurus stampede was hideaus at best and very unnessary. If Peter Jackson would have stuck to the formula he would have had a box office smash. Instead we got a movie that made its money back but didn't really earn a place in the Fanboys Hall of Fame.
-
That's what I was worried about. He was going strong during the Fahrenheit blowout, but I haven't seen him since.
-
So, this master of Hollywood is indeed coming to a small backwater town in some god awful stain on the map of the USA? Fine..if you live there. But Harry seems to forget that 99% of his readers live nowhere near Austin, so news of this 'second' coming means virtually nothing to most of us. Ok, he's going to present a classic film in a superduper print at some local cinema..that only Harry and a few dozen can see. Surely this news is nothing more than a mention ina local newspaper or what's on guide. I live in England, am I supposed to jack-off at the thought that some dateless geeks in Austin will be fawning over some old fella whose not made a film in my life time? I'm not bitter, before you all jump on me, I'm just disapointed in a man like Harry for being so self indulgent..again. Excuse the spelling, the blood in my eyes is making everything a bit fuzzy. And no doubt you'll remove this post cos it's critical of Harry and his elitist chums.
-
How in the hell did this BankyEdwards dude find a way to post something nagative about THIS? What a cool event...wish I could be there! Ray is a personal hero of mine...
-
...make that "negative" not nagative. Sunday mornings....
-
Nagative is quite ok. I knew I'd get slayed for this, you normally do when you find fault with something Harry says or does. Free speech and self motivated opinions are not very popular on this site..ho hum. Hey Ho Let's Go!
-
Damn you to hell, Harry! If I weren't in Rome until April, I would be hitchhiking if necessary to see that.
Oh, and Ramones quote aside, you're a dick, Banky. I lived in Austin for two years, and it's far from "backwater". Best to actually know a smidgen about a place before you characterize it, ass. Austin is a cool-as-fuck town (a place the Ramones would certainly dig).
You really don't know shit about this site, clearly, so you should be forgiven for your ignorance. But ignorance in service of assholishness is not forgiven, so best you crawl back to your pub and bitch about the backwater Americans with your chums. Dick. -
Ahhhh my master plan worked ,yet again. To put a bug up the butt of some of you gullible Americans. I only plant these seeds so I may sit back and watch some tourettes inflicted morons fly off the handle. As for Ocean Frog, your abuse of the English language is beyond comprehension, and insulting to all - and that my friend is ignorance.Ho hum. So I suppose it's back to the basement in your mothers house Mr Frog. Gabba Gabba Hey.
-
It ain't a troll if you end up writing more than the trolled, so you lose, Dim. And Dim, it's "Tourette Syndrome", not "tourettes". Oh, and speaking of English language abuse, it's "mother's," not "mothers", you simpleton Eurotrash bumfucker. Now go to bed, child, it's past your bedtime.
-
will you be my valentine Ocean ? xx
-
You're absolutely right about Peter Jackson's remake of King Kong. He forgot that Kong is a monster, who is terrifying to anyone who gets within about 100 feet of him. Ann Darrow did NOT want to be anywhere near Kong in the original. Audiences were happy when Kong gets shot off the Empire State Building in the original because he was a menace. Merion C. Cooper understood this fact by putting himself and Ernest B. Schoedsack in cameos as bi-plane pilots and famously saying that they were going to shoot the son of a bitch of the building themselves. The fact that Kong was taken from his home and killed in a foreign land was a subtext in the film. In Jackson's remake it is the main theme. I like the 2005 version, but the reason it didn't do as well as it should have is because Peter Jackson had a lifetime of love for Kong himself, and he forgot that it's a monster movie. One scene in both films illustrates this perfectly, when Kong is brought down on the shores of Skull Island. In the original you have a raging King Kong stomping and chewing natives and sailors as he tries to get to Ann, and when Carl throws the bomb it saves the lives of all the people on the beach. They are lucky to be alive, and the whole scene is played out with a sense of adventure and more importantly, doom for the human characters. The remakes version is played out like a National Geographic special with a poor animal being trapped. The scene is very sad, and played for maximum sadness by Jackson. With a sense of doom for Kong, not the humans. Peter Jackson's King Kong is still a great movie, but it isn't the box office smash that it could have been because he changed so much of what makes the original a classic. And do I ever wish I was going to be in Austin to see a pristine print of the 1933 King Kong on the big screen.
-
"Audiences were happy when Kong gets shot off the Empire State Building in the original because he was a menace."
Um... I've never talked to anyone who said they were happy Kong was killed in the 1933 version. Are you sure you didn't see the horrendous 1976 version? That's a Kong death I can get behind - though it's more of a mercy killing. -
You wrote "Are you sure you didn't see the horrendous 1976 version?" Maybe you should ask yourself that question. Jessica Lange pleading with Kong to pick her up so they won't shoot, Jeff Bridges trying to thwart the death of Kong, and the heartbeat of Kong at the end going slower and slower until he dies. All story elements that don't exist in the 1933 version. Peter Jackson remade the 1976 version as much, or more, than he remade did the 1933 version. Watch the original again, and tell me which scenes would make the audience sympathetic to Kong. It is only very subtle subtext in the original film.
-
I mean really, haven't we gotten "excited" about Kong enough over the past few months?
-
"Jessica Lange pleading with Kong to pick her up so they won't shoot, Jeff Bridges trying to thwart the death of Kong, and the heartbeat of Kong at the end going slower and slower until he dies. All story elements that don't exist in the 1933 version."
Well, only two of those are story elements - but those are the best examples you can think of as to Peter remaking the 1976 version over 1933? If you're arguing story elements, can you inform me as to where the whole petroleum expedition went? I must have gone to the bathroom during that portion of PJ's film. Or the Jack Driscoll (oh, excuse me, "Prescott") environmentalist angle? Oh, right, those aren't in the 1933 nor 2005 versions. I agree that the Ann-Kong relationship is more 76, but Driscoll is more concerned for Ann in all three versions than he is about Kong. And while there are no specific scenes that cry out "I'm Kong, love me!" in 1933, he is an animal stolen from his environment and forced into a life of servitude. You'd do the same if you escaped. -
Explain this... The BIGGEST movie geek site online and you guys hardly ever give anything away. Usually when you do, the contests are pretty lame anyway. I can understand having EVERYTHING in Austin since it's close to you, but like someone said earlier... how many of your daily readers can just up and go to these kick ass events? Not very many i'm sure. All the cool schwag you guys get, and we know you do, is never offered here. I visit many,many movie sites every single day.. and quite a few have just random drawings for stuff all the time. Hell, even a poster would be nice once in awhile. All i'm saying is, give a little back once in awhile. Without making people take goofy ass pictures of themselves or spend a month building something. Just an idea man.
-
Again, my point is that the sympathy for Kong is just not there in the 1933 version. It flat out isn't there. You can bring up all sorts of irrelevent points, but it doesn't change that fact.
-
"get all excited and go to a yawning festival."
-
maybe you are a rare exception -but the wonderful thing with Kong 33 is that you feel sooo sorry for the ape when he finds his demise on the ESB. I always have tears in my eyes when he touches Ann a last time before he is shot down... (funny, isn't it? He brutally kills people, and is just a stop motion puppet, but still...
The trick the 1933 film does so effectively and Jackson's movie sadly lacks is that the audience are the only people who fully understand Kong and have sympathy for him. I liked Kong 2005 quite a lot - but in terms of playing with the audience's emotions the 1933 version rules so much.
I'd like to see the Austin screening (and Harryhausen in person) so much - but I am more than 5000 miles away... -
Yes, Cavaliere I also feel bad for Kong at the end of the 1933 original. But the film itself isn't geared toward giving you that feeling. Willis O'Brien brought Kong to life in such a spectacular way that you feel for him, but the narrative itself isn't trying to get that out of the audience. I think that the two directors themselves were astonished at how sympathetic Kong became purely because of O'Brien's groundbreaking and awe-inspiring effects work.
-
`33 version didn`t try to sway emotions to Kong`s side by adding tons and tons of schmaltz in order to extract tears for Kong (like `05 version). They were making a monster movie and Kong was the big bad. However, feeling for him was a by product of the puppet performance and the story in general. That was realistic. Everyone`s scared of him, everyone on the screen is relieved when he bites the big one, but we off the screen, the audience, feel for him cause we understand his plight. 05 version went with "Kong is so sweet and cute and cudddly and sympathetic" right of the bat and every sceen with him in it had its share of schmaltz. Sorry but I just don`t like this new version. And it was too long, man.
-
My only issues were with your statement "Audiences were happy when Kong gets shot off the Empire State Building in the original because he was a menace." -- that is just blatantly untrue. I never said anything about how the filmmakers intended you to feel towards the big guy... only how the audience DOES feel, regardless of intention. I saw the 1933 version in a theater a couple of months back - and saw numerous children crying when Kong fell from the building... so tell me, do you think tears make for a happy audience?
-
The best Harryhausen scene is when the metallic Thalos turns his head to look at the Argonauts in "Jason and the Argonauts."
-
The original was not created to get sympathy for King Kong. That subtext only occurred because of Willis O'Brien. The audiences in 1933 were genuinely AFRAID of him. I know it sounds kind of absurd, but it is a true fact. Nobody had any idea what stop-motion animation was, because filmmakers didn't tell filmgoers how they did their special effects. Kind of like how a magician keeps his secrets. There was a little sympathy for Kong, and a whole lot of fear. You keep thinking of the film in 21st century terms. Things were different then. A LOT different. And again, the original has absolutely nothing in the concept or carry out that generates sympathy for Kong. Only what Willis O'Brien could create, which altered our feelings for Kong, but didn't completely alter the intent of the filmmakers.
-
But I truly think your view of King Kong himself has been created partly by the public's fascination with him since 1933, and subsequently the 1976 and 2005 versions which play the sympathy to the maximum.
-
...I saw the film as a kid, and was afraid of Kong when he dumped guys off the log and stormed through the village, but as soon as I saw him in chains I started to feel sorry for him. I had never seen the 1976 version, and this was twenty-five years before the 2005 remake. I was also unaware of the Kong mythos since I was five when I saw it. But, in any case, I can't really speak for 1933 audiences - I just find it hard to believe that people saw it solely as a monster picture and were delighted when Kong was killed...
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 419 total posts 209 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 131 total posts 129 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 123 total posts 122 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 124 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 191 total posts 47 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 43 total posts 43 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 42 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 27 total posts 27 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 506 total posts 26 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 77 total posts 24 posts