It’s no secret that Oscar-winning directorPeter Jackson’s favorite movie of all time is 1933’sKing Kong. When he was a boy, long before he changed the filmmaking landscape forever withThe Lord of the Ringstrilogy, Jackson was obsessed with the classic monster film. The scope, the scale, the drama. He even tried to mount his own stop-motion remake as a kid, but only got so far as a few seconds of footage of the climactic Empire State Building finale before he realized he didn’t have the tools (or knowledge) to translate what was in his head to reality.
So when Jackson was first asked if he’d be interested in directing an actual remake ofKing Kong, he couldn’t quite believe it. Jackson was in the midst of making his first Hollywood movieThe Frightenersfor Universal Pictures when the studio that owned the rights toKing Kongbroached the notion of having Jackson tackle a new version. A script was written, models were made, but then one day a few months into prep, it all fell apart. Jackson would immediately move on toLord of the Ringsand get another crack atKing Kongin 2005, but this initial version of the monster classic wasverydifferent both in tone and story from the lengthy dramatic epic that Jackson would eventually make. This is the story of the Peter JacksonKing Kongmovie we never saw.
As a filmmaker, Jackson first made waves with his New Zealand creature feature films likeBad TasteandMeet the Feebles, but really gained notice in Hollywood with his 1994 dramaHeavenly Creatures— for which he and his partnerFran Walshwere nominated for a Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar. That led directly to Jackson being hired to make the supernatural horror filmThe Frightenersfor Universal. The film starredMichael J. Foxas an architect with the ability to see and converse with ghosts – an ability he uses for financial gain until a malevolent ghost begins killing innocent people.
The success ofThe Frightenersrelied on a blend of practical components and visual effects, and Jackson’s passion for this aspect of filmmaking shone through. During production, Universal was incredibly impressed with the dailies they were seeing, and approached Jackson about directing one of their classic properties they were hoping to revive. One wasCreature from the Black Lagoon, which Jackson says he wasn’t interested in, and the other wasKing Kong. Jackson explained thatKing Kongwas his favorite film of all time, and Universal began mounting a new adaptation under Jackson’s direction.
But given the heat onThe Frighteners, at the same time Jackson was also meeting with 20th Century Fox about another ape movie: aPlanet of the Apessequel. The filmmaker had pitched a film calledRenaissance of the Planet of the Apesthat would be a direct sequel to the otherApesmovies and would have seen the return of franchise starRoddy McDowell. As Jackson explains in the excellentIan NathanbookAnything You Can Imagine, the story would have focused on the apes in a particularly affluent period: “Like Florence or Venice, the Ape World has gained artistic beauty… I was going to have a big, fat orangutan with all the jowls as the Pope. It was a satirical look at religion.” The twist in this version would be that it was all a façade – the apes had plastered over art made by humans and pawned it off as their own.
ButApesoffered its own downsides, particularly a lack of creative freedom.James Cameronhad signed on to produce andArnold Schwarzeneggerwas set to star, and Jackson and Walsh worried about how much studio interference there’d be on such a big franchise.
At the same time, Jackson and Walsh were already deep in development on a two-film adaptation ofThe Lord of the RingsforHarvey Weinsteinand Miramax, after initially being hired to adaptThe Hobbit. So here Jackson was, in the middle of makingThe Frighteners, and he had offers on the table to directThe Lord of the Rings,King Kong, orPlanet of the Apesas his next film.
As it came time to make a decision on what was next, it was actuallyLord of the Ringsthat hit the backburner first. Even though Weinstein and Miramax hired Jackson and Walsh to adaptJ.R.R. Tolkein’s epic, they were actually still waiting on Weinstein to get the rights to the books. ProducerSaul Zaentzowned the rights toLord of the Rings, but he owed Weinstein a favor – the Miramax head had rescued Zaentz’sThe English Patientwhen the production was in trouble. But Weinstein insisted any part of a deal forLord of the Ringscontractually cut out Zaentz from taking a producer credit. This back and forth had no end in sight, so Jackson and Walsh told Weinstein that they wanted to makeKing Kongfirst, then after that they’d makeThe Lord of the Rings— at which point Weinstein would have hopefully hammered out a rights agreement.
The producer was, unsurprisingly, incensed, and Jackson felt guilty for bailing so he set up a deal for Miramax to partner with Universal onKong. Weinstein, ever unsatisfied, pushed for a sweetener – he wanted Universal to give Miramax a project that had been languishing, a script calledShakespeare in Love. And so, indirectly, Peter Jackson is responsible for Miramax makingShakespeare in Loveand dominating the 1998 Oscars.
So a decision was made: now the road was finally paved for Jackson to makeKing Kong. He and Walsh spent the second half of 1996 writing the script, which proved to be incredibly different in tone from the version audiences would eventually see in 2005.
“It was sort of flippant,” Jackson says in the making of documentary on theKing KongBlu-ray. “Very Hollywood. It had the same tone asThe Mummy, I guess.”
Indeed, Jackson’s frequent collaboratorChristian Riversnotes in the same documentary that the 1999 Universal Pictures releaseThe Mummybears a striking resemblance to Jackson’s original version ofKing Kong:
“When I sawThe MummyI was like, ‘Did they read theKingKong script?’ It was almost that classic Hollywood adventure-feeling film.”
In hindsight, Jackson saw the tone as too silly, as he explained inAnything you’re able to Imagine:
“We were desperately trying to write anIndiana Jonestype of film. It was lightweight, a silly kind of Hollywood script.”
In Jackson and Walsh’s original version, Jack Driscoll (eventually played byAdrien Brody) is an ex-fighter pilot and World War I veteran suffering from PTSD after the loss of a fellow pilot. But he’s also steadfast and charismatic, not unlikeBrendan Fraser’s character inThe Mummy. “I remember initially the first time we come across Jack he’s a World War I fighter pilot,” recallsKing Kongpre-production CG supervisorMatt Aitkenin the making-of doc. “And he and his buddy are up in their biplanes doing baseball practice, chucking a ball and hitting it back to whoever was flying along.”
The comparisons don’t end there, as the story of this version ofKing Kongrevolved around an archaeological dig in Sumatra, with the character of Ann Darrow (eventually played byNaomi Watts) now an archaeologist. “Ann was sort of an upper-class English kind of character,” Rivers explains. “She was the daughter of a lord who was a Bothany archeologist-type.” Ann, Jack, and the documentary filmmaker Carl Denham (eventually played byJack Black) are on a dig in Sumatra when they uncover an ancient civilization and the idea of this “ape god.”
The character of Carl Denham in this version was more overtly villainous, whereas the Ann Darrow character is more curious – she actively seeks out Kong due to her archaeological interests. Jack, meanwhile, is the swashbuckling hero who in the finale commandeers an old plane and flies around the Empire State Building, trying to protect Kong from other fighter pilots attempting to bring him down.
All of this would change when Jackson finally madeKing Kong, but most of whatdidcarry over into the 2005 version ofKing Kongwas the set pieces. The Kong vs. Three T. rex fight was in this original version, as was the brontosaurus stampede. But whereas Jackson intended to use CG effects in 1996, he also planned on homaging the other twoKing Kongmovies by bringing in a mechanical hand:
“We were gonna do the classic Kong’s mechanical hand like they had done in the previous versions. I know that Weta Workshop had gotten pretty far advanced with designing and building a mechanical hand rig. We also had a sequence with some crocodiles that attacked a sinking car at one stage, and we were gonna be building mechanical animatronic crocodiles that were gonna be busting in the windows of the slowly sinking vehicle.”
But in January 1997, six or seven months after Jackson and his production team at Weta Workshop began work onKing Kong, Universal pulled the plug. There are a few reasons why. First, Universal got too bullish onThe Frightenersand instead of sticking to the film’s planned October release date, made it a summer movie – where it subsequently bombed at the box office.
But more strikingly, it was announced that Disney would have the giant ape movieMighty Joe Youngin theaters by 1998, whileIndependence DayfilmmakerRoland Emmerichwas making a newGodzillamovie. As Jackson explained, Universal suddenly found itself in last place in a race it didn’t know it was running:
“So Universal were looking at being in third place out of three monster movies, and so at the beginning of 1997 it started to feel wrong. And within a few weeks it just spiraled downhill and it was sort of over.”
Jackson was gutted and had to break the news to his development team, who were hard at work on stop-motion animatics to map out the big set pieces. He knew he needed to find his next project fast to keep the team together, and when he called Weinstein to tell him the news aboutKong, the producer bellowed, “We are going to doRings.” And that they did. By the spring a deal was finally reached with Zaentz for Miramax to land the rights to Tolkein’s classic tome, and while many further battles would lie ahead (including Weinstein’s insistence that they shorten it toonemovie),The Lord of the Ringsbegan principal photography in October 1999.
Fast forward four years, a number of Oscar nominations, and billions of dollars in box office later and Universal re-approached Jackson and Walsh aboutKing Kong. They were deep in post-production onThe Return of the Kingat the time and were absolutely exhausted, but Jackson knew this was his chance. Not only to makeKing Kong, but to do it his way owing to the clout he now had from theLord of the Ringsfranchise. And so instead of taking a break, in 2003 he told his team they’d be rolling right intoKing Kongafter wrappingReturn of the King, barreling towards a set 2005 release date.
Jackson and Walsh revisited their original script and didn’t like what they saw. They brought in theirLord of the Ringsco-writerPhilippa Boyensto work on a new draft, and essentially reconceived all the characters. Jack went from WWI veteran to brilliant playwright; Ann transformed from an archaeologist into an aspiring actress; and Carl came further into focus as the plot more closely resembled the 1933 original – a film crew stumbles upon Skull Island. The tone, as well, shifted from a swashbuckling adventure movie into a more somber, serious tragedy – with dinosaur fights.
Love it or hate it, Peter Jackson’s final version ofKing Kongis incredibly reverential to the original film. And it benefitted tremendously from the advance in technology in the ensuing years, asAndy Serkiswas able to use what he pioneered with Gollum and double down in his performance as Kong. The film hit its 2005 release date, and while some bemoaned the three-hour runtime, it was a box office hit pulling in over $560 million worldwide. It wasn’t quite the runaway Oscar success of Jackson’sLord of the Ringsfilms, but for him remakingKing Kongwas never about accolades or glory. It was about fulfilling a childhood dream:
“Hindsight’s a wonderful thing. We just learned so much on theLord of the Ringsexperience that we were able to apply toKong… But for me it was always unfinished business. It was a dream that I’d wanted since a kid that had been unfulfilled in a way that wasn’t particularly pleasant back in 1996. I’d always feel a little pang of disappointment that that was the film that I wish I had made that I never did get made.”
For more on Jackson’s filmography, check out our deep-dives into theLord of the RingsandThe Hobbittrilogies.
