Chang: A Drama of the Wilderness

In the 1932 classic "King Kong," the protagonist is a filmmaker who has made a living traveling to remote locations with exotic backgrounds to film wildlife adventures. Hence he journeys to Skull Island where he's heard a gigantic ape is living. The Kong backstory closely resembles the team made up Merian C. Cooper, who produced the original "Kong" 1932 movie, and his cameraman Ernest Schoedsack, when they received funding from Paramount Pictures to film their adventures in northern Thailand. Part-owner Jesse Lasky of Paramount was so impressed by the pair's previous effort where they followed a Persian tribe's migration, 1925's "Grass," he had his studio pay them by sponsoring the trip to this Asian country.

His instincts were spot on since the April 1927 release of "Chang: A Drama of the Wilderness" was received with great acclaim and rousing rounds of applause from packed theater audiences nationwide. The feature film was constructed as a documentary. If the viewer didn't know better, the two Americans capture the reality of a remote tribe living off the land in the jungles of Thailand as true-to-life.

But like most documentaries produced during the time, "Chang," which means 'Elephant" in Thai, was manipulated by the two filmmakers to fit their intended framework drawn up before they even arrived on the scene. The documentary's main character, Kru, was the guide for them and arranged for his family (besides a stand-in for his wife) and his friends to play the parts of members of a society that had long abandoned the practices displayed in the movie. Kru's background included not only being a guide, fisherman, hunter and trapper, but he was a practicing preacher as well as a carpenter.

Nonetheless, it was dangerous work for Cooper and Schoedsack to film the breathtaking wild animal footage. Cooper was at the ready with a gun when needed if the tigers, lions and elephants being photographed up close decided to lunge at the pair. Such a scenario played out on one occasion when a tiger approached uncomfortably too close to them. Another particularly dangerous set-up was when, using director John Ford's technique, Schoedsack dug a hole and positioned his camera to capture the rampaging elephants literally trampling over the planks lined above him. The weight of the heavy animals nearly broke the wood situated precariously just inches from his head.

The 18-month shoot was an ordeal for Cooper, who battled a case of malaria throughout the shoot. The production crew was forced to prepare for daily early morning filming since the animals were mostly active during the coolness of the day. They became lethargic in the afternoon and sought shelter as the Thai heat overtook the jungle. The humidity was so common that it wrecked havoc on the film stock and equipment, which had to be maintained on an hourly basis.

The manipulations of the producers are clearly shown in several sequences. The cross-cutting edits between man-hungry animals who corner the natives up a tree and the medium shots of the natives hanging waiting for relief shows the two scenes were clearly filmed separately. In the climatic sequence where a herd of elephants are stampeding and crushing the village's houses, the producers built miniature flimsy buildings and rounded a bunch of baby and juvenile elephants to make the model huts appear bigger than they really were. In another sequence, the crew tied up a baby elephant underneath a rickety tall hut and waited for the mother to come storming onto the scene. Sure enough, the irate adult elephant in a rage destroyed the building like it was balsa wood to free her baby.

"Chang" is still as thrilling of a movie to see today as it had been when it first premiered. Once the documentary was ready for release, Paramount wanted to use the reactions of animals caged in zoos looking at the projected film for publicity purposes. But studio executives were disappointed that so few zoos took up the offer. The recently established Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, holding its first Academy Awards in 1929, nominated "Chang" as one of three pictures for 'Unique and Artistic Productions.' The category was the only time the Academy listed it. But at the time it was considered as prestigious as its other category, 'Outstanding Picture.' In retrospect, "Chang" is the only documentary to ever have been nominated as a Best Picture.

Previously Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack made Grass, a very great silent documentary inspired by the success of Nanook of the North (which they hadn't even seen when they were flying off to the Middle East to film the long migration of a group of nomads). Grass was a real documentary, with little staging. Nanook, however, had a lot of staging, and has suffered a ton of criticism since its first release because of it. No matter how clearly Nanook is staged, Cooper's and Schoedsack's Chang is a hundred times more staged.

I don't care. It's an amazing film. Call it a fictionalized documentary, or a fudged one. Whatever. Chang is an awesome movie. The story is gripping, the cinematography is great, and the filmmaking in general is wonderful. I'm sitting there wondering how the hell they got these shots of tigers and elephants and stuff. I'm thinking Carl Denham, the risk-taking filmmaker from their own later King Kong. This whole movie seems like a preparation for King Kong. A couple of the scenes are repeated there. This may be preparation, but it is as amazing in its own way. 10/10.

Chang (1927)

*** 1/2 (out of 4)

A rather remarkable and at times eye-opening documentary about a family living in the deep jungles of Northern Siam. The film follows their daily lives and shows us how they work, live, play and eventually hunt game. CHANG has been called a documentary but I do wonder how much "story" actually went on and it sure seems that a lot of the footage was probably shot and prepared in such a way that the filmmakers could tell a more dramatic story. That's certainly not a negative thing or a strike against the movie because there's no question this film is rather incredible considering when it was made and some of the footage that they gathered. I'm sure some people might be bothered by some of the animals that are killed but the way I look at it is that the people living in these villages were fighting for their lives so it's understandable that they'd kill the creatures that were trying to kill them. The filmmakers are quite respectful as we never see any of the actual deaths on screen so those sensitive to the material won't find anything graphic. I think the animal footage is some of the most amazing that I've seen. When you think of various animal footage from this era you think of poorly done stock footage but there were several times during the film that I was stumped as to how they got the shots that they did. The tiger hunt sequence is certainly one of the highlights of the film as it appears several times that the camera is right in the path of the beast. Another memorable moment comes at the end when the chang (elephants) stampede. There are countless animals on display from bears to snakes to anteaters to tigers and of course the elephants. Seeing these creatures in their natural homes was quite a bit of fun and it was also a reminder of how dangerous these things could be. The most interesting thing about this film is seeing how certain people lived during this time. Going into these jungles just makes one grateful that they weren't born there and at the same time you have to watch this and wonder if you could have done the things the people in these villages did.

Although crippled by a little too much comic relief from "cute" intertitle cards and an overacting monkey, this is a fascinating look at life in the jungles of Laos in the 1920s. You come away from this film with a respect for the cunning viciousness of wild tigers and leopards. Sure elephants are huge and can destroy a whole village when they stampede but the tigers and leopards seen here are just plain mean. Highly recommended is the audio commentary on the DVD which gives the listener a wealth of background information on the hell of making a film in the 115 degree jungle heat and constant danger of death from disease and animals.

A combination of a nature documentary and a staged drama about life in the jungles of Southeast Asia in the 1920s. Multiple and brutal dangers present challenges to a little family living apart from their village...life goes on despite hardship. How did they get some of the shots? The film will make you wonder about how life used to be before there were today's modern conveniences...it is very much kill or be killed. There is some comic relief...Bimbo steals the show. Easy to see the embryonic shots that evolve into King Kong a few years later. Worthy of the nomination received for best film of its class that year. Highly recommended.