--- In sonsofkong@yahoogroups.com, jfglade <no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> --- In sonsofkong@yahoogroups.com, "agentkjj005" <agentkjj005@>
> wrote:
> >
> ... it always seemed grossly unfair to
> > me that they enslave Kong for profit and no one really suffers
for
> > it except the "big ape" and a few pilots...
>
> Am I the only one who remembers the scene in the original film
where
> Kong climbs a building, reaches in through a window, grabs a woman
> who bears a slight resemblence to Ann, discovers it isn't her, and
> lets her fall to the pavement below? He also wrecks an elevated
train
> and had to have killed scores of innocent people. How do you
> figure "no one really suffers... except the 'big ape' and a few
> pilots?" His rampage in the city wouldn't had happened had he not
> been imported, and the additional deaths I mention wouldn't have
> happened.
>
> I maintain that King Kong is a monster, both by the definition of
> monster as it appears in any dictionary, and also because of his
> rampages against humanity. He kills natives on Skull Island,
before
> he is gassed, and I would assume it wasn't the first time he had
gone
> on such rampages. The enormous wall and gate weren't there just
for
> show, they were there to contain a dangerous beast. Kong is
naturally
> inclined to kill, being a primordal beast, and it is rather
> remarkable that we tend to forget, or at least minimize that fact,
> because of the film's ending.
>
Point well made and taken. Kong is not "cuddly", but I still
feel sympathy for "him", as opposed to viewing Kong as an "it". We
all bring our own life experience and views to films, so we probably
won't agree, but that's okay.

Agent 005