Okay, who would YOU put your money on--a mutant monkey or a fire-breathing prehistoric reptile?

After careful consideration, I decided that King Kong would whup Godzilla's scaly butt. The spousal unit felt that it was only a matter of time before Godzilla would be making ape-kebob of my hero.

Can you believe that?

Really, it's a miracle the two of us have managed to stay married this long, considering how very differently we see the world.

It was past midnight at that point, but when it comes to deeply metaphysical questions such as Kong vs. 'Zilla, in THIS household we say to heck with the bedtime.

So in that wildly reckless spirit, we sat down to watch the 1963 classic King Kong vs. Godzilla.

I'm sure you share my anguish over the movie's ambivalent ending, which leaves it somewhat unclear as to WHO won.

Now as I see it, there is really only One True Way to look at this because pretty much the whole of evolution is on my side. In every continent but one, the mammals smacked down everything else and won the evolutionary race.

It was only in Australia that the reptiles won, and since Australia is the place where Australian Rules Football, Vegemite and Chikka Rolls also evolved, I think we can all agree that Australia Is The Place Where Things Go Freakishly Wrong and so the experience there doesn't count.

King Kong is a mammal. Gozilla is a reptile. DO I HAVE TO SPELL IT OUT FOR YOU?

AND, to further cement my argument, I want to point out that the movie was NOT set in Australia.

Thus--and really, don't you feel the word thus is grossly underused on the internet today?--as far as I'm concerned The Monkey Won.