Even thirty five years ago, at its launch, King Kong was regarded as "unusual", in the sense of out of the ordinary, strange and intriguing; in a word: with character. At those times unusual creations were not only allowed but even welcomed, and companies tried their best to permeate all their products (fragrances, too) with their values and aesthetics. Kenzo's couture was unusual, characteristic, intriguing, and his first scent, named King Kong had to be the same, of course. Today, designers license their brand's perfumes to other companies, thus losing control over what is offered with their name on. In this way, scented creations are not ambassadors of the designer's style anymore, they only have to sell as expected by the licensee.
With this view in mind, a perfume like King Kong today would be regarded as an irresponsible choice, because it's as unusual and out of ordinary as it gets: bitter, rough, intensely green, absolutely not a crowd pleaser.
The mint note in the opening binds a bunch of cold spices (ginger and I'd say coriander) and aldehydes with a dry, metallic facet. The salty note of oakmoss comes up front from the base, linking cloves and adding a slightly leathery, rough undertone. I guess the banana note, with its tropical sweetness would have balanced all this cold/rough/bitter stuff, but I do not detect it at all.
Although KK doesn't show the typical chypre structure, rose, patchouli and oakmoss take it to a chypre mood; shady and slightly disturbing.
The dry down is all oak moss, birch tar and mint (strangely, because mint is a top note: I think maybe it's due to a little IBQ).
It's a very long lasting edp, with little projection.