peter jackson's clearly isn't the best , its an ok film but its practically a shot for shot remake of the original and dosen't introduce anything new at all and cgi NEVER looks good when organic creatures are involved
John Guillermin did a great job on this movie, idk why people goes down hill on this one, it has a good director, cast, music, i love everything about this movie and the king kong was pretty cool back at the time, Peter Jackson's was also good, but i think this was the best one...and the guy can only say King Kong two times not every 5 seconds lol
On balance, I think this was far and away the best of the three KKs. There was too much CGI in Jackson's version; and he tried too hard to produce a new edition of the 1933 KK, which is an untouchable classic; his version was too long. This was just right; the changes were bold, but they were the right ones.
Petrox oil is the mythical evil multinational corp thats trying to exploit poor kong - watching it again in 2004 I couldnt help imagining petrox as the type of evil oil oligarch that the bush family might own with dick cheyney as CEO .
This is the best version of King Kong. It was panned because the 70's was about realism (the greatest decade for film IMO) Jackson's version is pretentious with too many close-ups and no heart. Lange was panned because of the attitude during that time; it was during the age when actresses could no longer play the femme fatale - they needed to play strong unsexualized female roles. But it the best version of the story.
I don't know why everyone hates on the 76 one, it's my favorite.
1. I don't know why people expect such "realism" from any of these movies man in suit or CGI. It's about a giant ape on an island with dinosaurs and giant insects IT'S ALL FICTION. 2. While I liked the 2005 one I personally felt it had too much CGI. It made Kong look very animated and child-friendly and didn't give him the impression of an aggressive beast. And everything was CGI, even the island landscapes looked synthetic.
This was the first movie I saw at the movie theatre..I still think its awesome..its my favorite of the three. The Kong effects aren't great, but the plot was very cleverly updated and still relevant, the soundtrack and location work excellent. The tv extended version adds to the awesomeness...and the deliberate camp dialogue from Lorenzo Semple jr. Screenwriter of the old Batman tv series and 1980's Flash Gordon make the film one hell of an entertainment. I just want the extended version on Blu.
You cant beat the original but i would prefer this over the 2005 one. The 2005 version took forever and kong wasn't that big. This one he is a total bad ass. Sure its a guy in an ape suit, the 1933 one was a model. This was the first kong movie i saw so it has an advantage over the other. Its not like they just made an exact replica of the old 1933 too, they decided to be creative. The 2005 one i felt was a total copy of the original. The fight with the t rex was almost exactly the same.
This movie would've been good, if it was just more like the original. I mean come on, how the hell is this crap the best of the three? It had awful acting, and it has no love or passion for the original. Instead of making him fight a dinosaur, they make him fight a giant snake. How lame. And I'm not making reference to 9 11, but even in 1976, making him climb the empire state building sounds cooler than the twin towers. So overall, I prefer the 2005 remake.
This remake has major problems, but it's better than the '05 version because at least it TRIED to be original by updating the story, and for offering some laughs. Jackson's remake leaves me yawning with all it's redundant overindulgence. Even the girl going for Kong bit isn't Jackson's idea but originated with the '76 version. Ironically, this much maligned movie offers more than the 3 hr. CGI laden, '05 opus.
This is just my opinon the 2005 verson is the better remake (Note I say Remake nothing will ever top the original) because there was real passon and respect for the orginal Kong in it. The 1976 Kong, there is no love or passon for the original and everything that made the 1933 film good, is gone, there are no Dinosaurs and Giant Bugs only a big snake, there is no sense of wonder and mystery to Skull Island overall this film is more an Irwin Allen style Environmental Disaster Film then King Kong
I feel like if in 1976 someone took a dump on film and called it inception everyone would say the 2010 remake was worse... I'm not knocking opinions on comparing remakes because they sometimes are perfectly valid, I'm just saying its kinda interesting that people consistently succumb to the nostalgia factor.
Don't know if it's the best. But it's the one I've seen more times. The best presentation to Kong himself too. I remember getting goosebumps as a kid when I saw the trees fall down and the gaze of Jessica Lange looking (with no music, just the sound of the wind) up was priceless. Too bad they don't have the complete version on DVD, that sucks!
This is there is the worst of the King Kong movies. The special effects are so bad, it even makes me wonder what were they thinking. The original is better than this. The 2005 movie isn't as better; its just average.
I wouldn't say it was my favorite version but it did have it's moments I love breaking
down of the wall by Kong it's probably one of the most powerful performances by a
man in a suit and it's the only version that shows Kong actually on board the venture. add to that one of Barry's best scores. love those helicopters in the finale
Odd memory watching this...King Kong was the first PG-rated movie I was allowed to see. I was 8 or 9, and I thought it was a big deal because, up to that point, I was only allowed to see G-rated movies - mostly, Disney movies.
It seems like this film has a lot of mixed opinions. I will always remember the original, as it was a huge inspiration for me to become a filmmaker. That image of Kong's face up close will always be stuck in my mind.
This was truly an act against nature...or at least the source material of King Kong. Merian C. Cooper and Willis O'Brien probably turned in their graves. Several times.
you guys are all wrong lol peter jacksons version was way better and closer to the source material, it wasnt set in modern times, it had all the original characters, still this movie is good but it pales in comparison to the 2005 one
I'm a little bit undecided on which remake i like, but I have to say the 2005 remake, since it was more closely made towards the original 1933 plot. But still, I like the '76 remake too.
This remake sucked!! Peter Jacksons version was 5 million times better. I think the reason his version was better was because he grew up with the 1933 classic, and wanted to make his own version. He even set the film in 33'. It's almost as good as the 1933 classic. ....Almost.
I think the 2005's one is the best, Kong got heart and feelng, he isn't more a guy in a suit or a toy that moves with Stop Motion. The acting was great and very trustble to the original...
Sinceramente, para mi la mejor de las 3 es la del 2005. Pero la del '33 es un clásico y nada la sustituye. Esta me parece muy sobre actuada en mi opinión, si no me creen fíjense en el 1:22 y diganme si no es sobre actuada
@jakethesnakerobertz1 Dawn BUT she switched 2 letters and preferred Dwan-her would-be agent(unseen in the film but mentioned)Told her it had more Marquee value
Love King Kong here.....but the stupid fake human beings that hurt and seperate Kong from his Beauty friend and his home island deserve to die. I hate the ending where those helicopters and flamethrowers hurt kong. Best part is when he crushes the helicopter and throws that tank of gas and explodes the stupid fucks that hurt him. hahah die humans Kong Forever
Kong made a come in cinemas in 1976, Godzilla came back in 1984 in Return Of Godzilla in cinemas not in the UK though but released on vhs english dub it would been great another battle between two monsters
The first time i saw the movie as a child it scared the fuck out of me. There is this dark scary atmosphere throughout the movie as many scenes take place at night. I remember the scene where Jeff Bridges tells the whole crew the story of Kong on board of the ship accompanied by John Barry's rather serious toned soundtrack.
they had high ambitions for this movie which unfortanately didn't come to fruition. they spent over 2 million dollars constructing a 50 foot hydraulically controlled robot which in 2010 would be about 10 million. the robot just wasn't able to perform as desired. there are a couple of brief shots of it when kong escapes from the cage. it's shown dropping two large pieces of the cage on the ground.so with the failure of the robot they had to go with a suit designed and worn by rick baker.
This version is bull shit. That's what I've got to say. The 2005 is the best. Any Tommy Guns and dinosaurs would make this shit version better, like come on a snake.. A FUCKIN SNAKE!!!!!!! Gaaaaayer than gay. And then he climbs the Twin Towers at the end. Wow. Remember 9 11? The individual who made this is a sick bastard. I am offended. Fuck you.
@Toby89195 Um you do know the towers were alive and well in 1976 right?! They used the towers because their Kong was a little bigger, and TWTC was bigger than TESB. How is that offensive?!
@broadsidexl74 I'm fuckin offended because some of my friends and 2 family members died in the fucked tower, and just seeing that in the movie, is harsh, can't deal with it. IT SADDENS ME. Okay bud? You see my meaning?
@Markus77x7 Peter Jackson is the BEST ! and King Kong 2005 was far the best of all three ! 2005 felt like a video game ? lol ? u sure ? would you please tell me at least ONE game that looks just half as realistic that the 2005 version ? "The 1976 version felt more real." well if you meant this for real you have SERIOUS issues !
@szasz85b i loved the 2005 remake but you really have to give more credit to the 1933 film, it was the original idea dreamed up and executed. but peter jacksons love story really added alot of great depth to the story
@szasz85b its not just special effects. The 2005 one was also the only one to really have any caracter development at all. Okay i dont know that since i havent seen the 76 version, but I doubt its better.
@Markus77x7 I personally didn't like this one, the Peter Jackson movie was much better in my opinion. However, out of all of them, the 1933 is by far the best in terms of entertainment factor and pure spectacle. Whilst everyone is entitled to their opinion, I found this movie to suffer from a lack of pacing, is pretty sluggish and slow in many places and the Kong looked like shit. So yes, I'd have to say this was the weakest of the Kong movies.
I respect people that says this is the best Kong version, but I can't understand it. First goes the original, it's obvious to me; then not too far, Jackson's version, that takes the best action from the original and (even if Peter doesn't admit it) Kong's human-like expressions from this one. 1976 version isn't bad, but c'mon, its dumb dialogues, awful acting, almost no action and love film cliches...
This is the best version of King Kong. I love it! I love the original, but this one is the real winner. Peter Jackson's version was a dud, plus he ripped off this one.
What was even funnier was the huge hype that even supposed film critics like Richard Schickel bought into just before it came out, about the super-advanced effects, the giant robot Kong that was supposed to be so much better - huge article in Time magazine - and then it came out and it was a GIANT PIECE OF POO.
I saw this version of King Kong when I was a young kid & I liked it. I loved Kong's ROAR in this one! Even as a young kid, Jessica Lange made me think DANG! Sexy!
The Peter Jackson version was good entertainment, but the 1933 Kong was the best because it was the first King Kong.
76 Kong was waaaay better than jakcson's version....the 76 version from the very beggining always kept me attatched to it, unlike the 05 version that took for ever to get me intrested with some cgi-abuse, meaningless, pointless, and long as hell chasing sequences...the music, cant even compare, the 76 version was absolutely awesome, it gives me chills just to remember it.
great film, awesome music score, loved Kong's entrance scene. and te actors in this film can act like there is a real life 50 ft kong there. jeff bridges was da shit. the 2005 version was ok, but too damn long intro. got bored and then there's jack black.. ugh. sat thru the whole film watching him annoy me just to the brink before another scene popped up.
this was my favorite of the remakes, Jeff Brigdes is so young and Jessica Lang is so hot in this film, they should have had more monsters and dinosaurs like the original and the recent remake, but still this one is my favorite
I have to agree the 1976 version was the best of the three. Can't really compare it to the original since it is a classic by itself but the 1976 version was superior to Jackson's version. The film score was superior hands done and what it lacked in special effects, it made up with feeling and heart. The 2005 version was shallow and boring in my opinion. All the CGI in the world failed to give the 2005 Kong a personality with feeling.
About the 76 version being the best of the three. The ONLY thing that movie had going for it was Jeff Bridges, and even his performance was nowhere near his best work. Jessica Lange looked pretty good in her part but didn't do much to prove she could be the actress she eventually became. (I don't think she even likes talking about the movie these days.)
The characters were not likable, the action was practically non-existent and the scene with the giant "robo-Kong" was laugh-inducing given all the pre-release hype it received at the time. Even John Barry's score was sadly lacking compared to his other work (although I did buy the soundtrack album for the "Sacrifice To Kong" music, which was far and away the best piece in the film).
Good Points some, but Barry's soundtrak gave the movie class and esp, buildup-a buildup starting from the island and leadingy to the inevitable climax on the WTC. Not his best work but worrth every penney he was paid!!
He set the theme and the entire movie profited from it and danced to it.
surperb job and Jessica lost the viewing audence but OWNED the critics
@MGR1900 Dude go away It goes 1933 2005 and then this one. Jacksons was amazing and an epic. And yeah its long but its called character development. This version is alright.
Yeah , thats certainly true. I believe it was definitley a mistake for Jackson too jump right from LOTR to Kong. Not a great move. The film lacked heart and inspiration. That a bit hypocritical of me too say , seeing I have a big poster of it at home. Which is what the 76 version has in ample supply.
Apart from that, I'd love to see the full Director's cut of this film on blu-ray with some slightly enhanced effects. Probally never gonna happen , but a 33 yr old guy can dream.
@MGR1900 you are stupid the 1933 version and the 2005 version are better than this 1976 crap no v-rex battles so how it is good maybe you don't know how to speak english
at least they made him like a real gorilla looks like and they got the thumping on the chest right, this is the way a real gorilla beats on his chest, and the yell they got from a real life african elephant which i only found that out a quite a few years ago by watching a documentary on the discovery channel on an african elephant, was wondering where hollywood had gotten the roar from.
My favorite King Kong movie. Jeff Bridges, Jessica Lange, Charles Grodin, John Randolph and Rene Auberjonois were brilliant. I love KK (2005) but that movie looked too unrealistic plus Jack Black was so irritating
Of course, but it's practically nothing like the original. So you could say that this movie is just another movie heavily inspired by the old one and with the same name.
those effects are good for 1933, but for the 70s they look just the same but in colour. They might as well just restored the colorized print for King Kong and re-released it theaterically or on TV. It would have saved them money and would have been better since it's the same film. I do prefer B/W BTW, but King Kong looks interesitng in colour.
It still is Epic.The 2005 was good but the fact i still watch this one and listen to its soundtrack(john barry) says something.Plus the haunting images of WTC actually makes this more relevant
the only kong movie i have seen is peter jackson's remake but i think it's really good untill the point wer kong escapes. it just gets boring after that i think
Every thing was good about this film the story line was fine it didnt need lots of Dinousaurs to jazz it up and Jeff Bridges was a good leading male. Plus the music score was brilliant. But two things spoilt this film 1King Kong been played by a man in an ape suit and 2 they could of done more work on the gaint rubber snake.
'76 is may favourite version of kong too. It had the budget which the 33 version lacked, and much more substance than the special-effects driven 05 movie.
I agree with you : the best of the four king kong movies ( 1933-king kong versus Godzilla-1976-2005).
King Kong look terrific and the story goes right to my emotion.
the plot is plausible ( expedition motivated by greed ) and the special effects are not overhelming ( like in the 2005 version) so characters have substance , dinosaurs are gone ( except the giant snake).
good performance on the part of Charles Grodin.
don 't know why this movie has been so criticized.
i was in a big music store last week (virgin i think), all three kong movies were avaliable on dvd 1933 version was £12.99, 1976 version was £10.99 & after some searching i found the jackson 2005 version in a bargain basket at £2.99.....i think that speaks volumes about which of the three kong films is least fondly remembered....
I saw this movie with my dad at age 7 (1977) and it really blew me away. That's why this version of King Kong is, to me, better than any other one, previous or later. Jessica Lange was so beautiful. It may be criticized by the 1933 original lovers or by the Peter Jackson's version defenders (the lamest one, I think). King Kong 1976 will always have a special place in my memory and in my heart.
i ACTUALLY watched this movie cause i had never seen a king kong movie, this was in november 2005 and i was sooooooo pissed that there was no dinosaurs just king kong and a giant snake they did a really shitty job with this film they had a fucking 24 million dollar budget
i love the 1976 version! first saw it when i was six and i was blown away by it. liked it better than the original. peter jackson's version was good to.
i absolutely love this movie! My favorite part is when jessica lange and jeff bridges stop off at a bar for a night cap as king kong reaks havic on new york. this is by far the best king kong. JESSICA LANGE FOREVERRRRRRR!!
@Linkmanno well the best king kong is the 1933 version. just because for it's creativity, and the 2nd best is the 2005 version, directed by Peter Jackson
i never seen most better handsome man than king kong.
infortunately im already married.
Sorry!
You should see the middle of the video when he tooks Jessica, the way he smiles, its so perfect.
GeminaMcVeigh 2 weeks ago
hey, I'm no hero. I'm the dude man!!
ronaldoavich 2 weeks ago
peter jackson's clearly isn't the best , its an ok film but its practically a shot for shot remake of the original and dosen't introduce anything new at all and cgi NEVER looks good when organic creatures are involved
Calburtonreid 2 weeks ago
John Guillermin did a great job on this movie, idk why people goes down hill on this one, it has a good director, cast, music, i love everything about this movie and the king kong was pretty cool back at the time, Peter Jackson's was also good, but i think this was the best one...and the guy can only say King Kong two times not every 5 seconds lol
Moviedirector94 1 month ago
On balance, I think this was far and away the best of the three KKs. There was too much CGI in Jackson's version; and he tried too hard to produce a new edition of the 1933 KK, which is an untouchable classic; his version was too long. This was just right; the changes were bold, but they were the right ones.
5355vbxjbj76rvn 1 month ago
Petrox oil is the mythical evil multinational corp thats trying to exploit poor kong - watching it again in 2004 I couldnt help imagining petrox as the type of evil oil oligarch that the bush family might own with dick cheyney as CEO .
" brought to you by Kong .... and Petrox "
man I love that line.
ThePanzerfist44 1 month ago
a soo young Jessica Lange is why its the best - EVER !
peterhugh12134 2 months ago in playlist peterhugh12134's favorites
This is the best version of King Kong. It was panned because the 70's was about realism (the greatest decade for film IMO) Jackson's version is pretentious with too many close-ups and no heart. Lange was panned because of the attitude during that time; it was during the age when actresses could no longer play the femme fatale - they needed to play strong unsexualized female roles. But it the best version of the story.
jpmacco 2 months ago
@jpmacco
"Jackson's version is pretentious with too many close-ups and no heart."
## That's *exactly* the problem with Jackson's version - I knew there was something about his version that seemed a bit "off"; and that is it.
5355vbxjbj76rvn 1 month ago
I don't know why everyone hates on the 76 one, it's my favorite.
1. I don't know why people expect such "realism" from any of these movies man in suit or CGI. It's about a giant ape on an island with dinosaurs and giant insects IT'S ALL FICTION. 2. While I liked the 2005 one I personally felt it had too much CGI. It made Kong look very animated and child-friendly and didn't give him the impression of an aggressive beast. And everything was CGI, even the island landscapes looked synthetic.
NikkoArai 4 months ago
This was the first movie I saw at the movie theatre..I still think its awesome..its my favorite of the three. The Kong effects aren't great, but the plot was very cleverly updated and still relevant, the soundtrack and location work excellent. The tv extended version adds to the awesomeness...and the deliberate camp dialogue from Lorenzo Semple jr. Screenwriter of the old Batman tv series and 1980's Flash Gordon make the film one hell of an entertainment. I just want the extended version on Blu.
CrassMufumbu 4 months ago
when king kong took the woman i n his hand, she screamed: HELP
because the robot hand almost killed her, not because of the movie
cedric199870 4 months ago
@LegendCorridor cgi rocks its way better than this piece of shit if u cant see wat good effects are then dont say cgi sucks
ajeemama 5 months ago
1933 tops all :)
htpnk120 5 months ago 2
You cant beat the original but i would prefer this over the 2005 one. The 2005 version took forever and kong wasn't that big. This one he is a total bad ass. Sure its a guy in an ape suit, the 1933 one was a model. This was the first kong movie i saw so it has an advantage over the other. Its not like they just made an exact replica of the old 1933 too, they decided to be creative. The 2005 one i felt was a total copy of the original. The fight with the t rex was almost exactly the same.
rhino2218 5 months ago
i havnt senn this 1 but it looks like a load of crap
1933 was good
2005 rocked!
and this, well, thank god i havnt see it
PAULSPOTSWOOD 5 months ago
I love how the narrator says original work, as if this was the first king kong ever created and there was never one before it
BlackMesaHawk 5 months ago
he says alot of ''king kong''
DanBallpromaster 5 months ago
"The most exciting ORIGINAL motion picture?"
cfronck 5 months ago
1933
2005
This.
BenGriffithsReviews 5 months ago
1933 rules!!!!!
leonorerochlitz 6 months ago
this movie suks like the new one i prefair the 1930s one
GodzillaFang7713 6 months ago
This movie would've been good, if it was just more like the original. I mean come on, how the hell is this crap the best of the three? It had awful acting, and it has no love or passion for the original. Instead of making him fight a dinosaur, they make him fight a giant snake. How lame. And I'm not making reference to 9 11, but even in 1976, making him climb the empire state building sounds cooler than the twin towers. So overall, I prefer the 2005 remake.
DFguy31 6 months ago
this version sucked.
tectonicandre 6 months ago
This is the best remake!
talon115 6 months ago
can you make king kong (1976) part 1 ?
henryadrain14 6 months ago
they repeated king kong like 10 times
Martin110497HD 7 months ago
This remake has major problems, but it's better than the '05 version because at least it TRIED to be original by updating the story, and for offering some laughs. Jackson's remake leaves me yawning with all it's redundant overindulgence. Even the girl going for Kong bit isn't Jackson's idea but originated with the '76 version. Ironically, this much maligned movie offers more than the 3 hr. CGI laden, '05 opus.
kovik62 7 months ago
This is just my opinon the 2005 verson is the better remake (Note I say Remake nothing will ever top the original) because there was real passon and respect for the orginal Kong in it. The 1976 Kong, there is no love or passon for the original and everything that made the 1933 film good, is gone, there are no Dinosaurs and Giant Bugs only a big snake, there is no sense of wonder and mystery to Skull Island overall this film is more an Irwin Allen style Environmental Disaster Film then King Kong
snakes3425 7 months ago
@snakes3425 totally!
legoman769 7 months ago
I feel like if in 1976 someone took a dump on film and called it inception everyone would say the 2010 remake was worse... I'm not knocking opinions on comparing remakes because they sometimes are perfectly valid, I'm just saying its kinda interesting that people consistently succumb to the nostalgia factor.
hudeni789 8 months ago
Hey trailer guy what's the name of this movie? I didn't catch that :)
chasetrussel 8 months ago
@chasetrussel king kong
legoman769 7 months ago
Stop at 32 . Lol 2 what they said
SuperDumoKun 8 months ago
Don't know if it's the best. But it's the one I've seen more times. The best presentation to Kong himself too. I remember getting goosebumps as a kid when I saw the trees fall down and the gaze of Jessica Lange looking (with no music, just the sound of the wind) up was priceless. Too bad they don't have the complete version on DVD, that sucks!
mofrakker 8 months ago
I love this trailer. . . My favorite part is when he states, as the music intesifies, "Dino De Laurentis presents"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Classic!!!!!!
am2boni 9 months ago
this is the BEST Kong ever!
Utubetrekk 9 months ago
Epic failure. That's just a man in a gorilla suit fro most of the movie.
MrKilroy138 10 months ago
This is there is the worst of the King Kong movies. The special effects are so bad, it even makes me wonder what were they thinking. The original is better than this. The 2005 movie isn't as better; its just average.
MrKilroy138 10 months ago
I wouldn't say it was my favorite version but it did have it's moments I love breaking
down of the wall by Kong it's probably one of the most powerful performances by a
man in a suit and it's the only version that shows Kong actually on board the venture. add to that one of Barry's best scores. love those helicopters in the finale
godzi11amovies 10 months ago
Cryptozoology novel about two boys who find something on the beach one night see video book trailer
dltanner99 11 months ago
I hated this version of King Kong! So lousy!
ScrubmanLowell 11 months ago
how can anyone hate movies which feature guys in gorilla suits?
somethinglacking1 11 months ago
Wow this kong looks like the one who fought Godzilla
POKEMONADVANCBATTLE2 1 year ago
Odd memory watching this...King Kong was the first PG-rated movie I was allowed to see. I was 8 or 9, and I thought it was a big deal because, up to that point, I was only allowed to see G-rated movies - mostly, Disney movies.
markcosborne 1 year ago
It seems like this film has a lot of mixed opinions. I will always remember the original, as it was a huge inspiration for me to become a filmmaker. That image of Kong's face up close will always be stuck in my mind.
Dgamer21 1 year ago
O melhor de todos *****
Shocollatha 1 year ago
i would like to say, both remakes of king kong are great, this one and the 2004 film also .different styles, but not one of them in bad quality.
btw, jeff bridges, the dude plays now john wayne, the duke :-)
The dude playes the duke's character rooster cogburn in "true grit".
DukeFanGermany 1 year ago
@DukeFanGermany and the dude.
Dgamer21 1 year ago
"KING KONG"
poeity 1 year ago
This was truly an act against nature...or at least the source material of King Kong. Merian C. Cooper and Willis O'Brien probably turned in their graves. Several times.
Blisterdude 1 year ago
beautiful quality
Sevival 1 year ago
damn... this version was terrible
johnnyboyz77 1 year ago
0:37
Look, it's the Dude!!
tuttt99 1 year ago
you guys are all wrong lol peter jacksons version was way better and closer to the source material, it wasnt set in modern times, it had all the original characters, still this movie is good but it pales in comparison to the 2005 one
Brandon16ization 1 year ago
I'm a little bit undecided on which remake i like, but I have to say the 2005 remake, since it was more closely made towards the original 1933 plot. But still, I like the '76 remake too.
rdsxluvrynkyhatr 1 year ago
me parece la oveja negra de las 3 peliculas
miguel31ism 1 year ago
This remake sucked!! Peter Jacksons version was 5 million times better. I think the reason his version was better was because he grew up with the 1933 classic, and wanted to make his own version. He even set the film in 33'. It's almost as good as the 1933 classic. ....Almost.
96gamerdude 1 year ago
1933 was the best
countyworker 1 year ago
Kong din't move like a Gorilla, he moved like a guy in a suit, i like this movie. But im sick of seeing people who can't stand at something new...
luismatheusv 1 year ago
I think the 2005's one is the best, Kong got heart and feelng, he isn't more a guy in a suit or a toy that moves with Stop Motion. The acting was great and very trustble to the original...
luismatheusv 1 year ago
how could kong gets so gigant in 2:15 ????
rexgd777 1 year ago
This King Kong is much bigger than that of 2005
THEBLUEHEDGEHOG01 1 year ago
R.I.P Dino Laurentiis.
jeserty6 1 year ago
Sinceramente, para mi la mejor de las 3 es la del 2005. Pero la del '33 es un clásico y nada la sustituye. Esta me parece muy sobre actuada en mi opinión, si no me creen fíjense en el 1:22 y diganme si no es sobre actuada
ladiosadelchat 1 year ago
man i remember watching this as a child for the first time at night when it was on tv.
i felt so bad for king kong lol poor ape didnt want to harm anything he wa just in love.
it had so much mood to it thus why there will never be another kong movie that will be better.
so much memories aaahhh
DORUKOZKAN 1 year ago
Dino Delaurentis RIP
acholl980 1 year ago
this movie would of been better if kong fought a few dinosaurs instead of that cheap rubber snake
hulkwillsmash48 1 year ago
@hulkwillsmash48 what was jessica Langes name in this movie?
jakethesnakerobertz1 1 year ago
@jakethesnakerobertz1 Dawn BUT she switched 2 letters and preferred Dwan-her would-be agent(unseen in the film but mentioned)Told her it had more Marquee value
deckard97 1 year ago
Love King Kong here.....but the stupid fake human beings that hurt and seperate Kong from his Beauty friend and his home island deserve to die. I hate the ending where those helicopters and flamethrowers hurt kong. Best part is when he crushes the helicopter and throws that tank of gas and explodes the stupid fucks that hurt him. hahah die humans Kong Forever
regulator271 1 year ago
Kong made a come in cinemas in 1976, Godzilla came back in 1984 in Return Of Godzilla in cinemas not in the UK though but released on vhs english dub it would been great another battle between two monsters
gallafey 1 year ago
this is the best
sportsdude18111 1 year ago
King Kong 2005 was a stinker. This one was way better!
Doublespazer 1 year ago
@Doublespazer King Kong 2005 was GREAT!!! what are you talking about???
moviedude1500 1 year ago
Comment removed
Live2SkateVideos 1 year ago
Comment removed
Live2SkateVideos 1 year ago
Comment removed
Live2SkateVideos 1 year ago
The first time i saw the movie as a child it scared the fuck out of me. There is this dark scary atmosphere throughout the movie as many scenes take place at night. I remember the scene where Jeff Bridges tells the whole crew the story of Kong on board of the ship accompanied by John Barry's rather serious toned soundtrack.
Metalltool 1 year ago
....and Jessica Lange was the HOTTEST beauty of the three King Kongs.
KiCreativeStudios 1 year ago
I think its funny how the trailer says its the most original thing ever, and like nothing you have ever seen... its a bloody remake!
mjdoomreviews 1 year ago
they had high ambitions for this movie which unfortanately didn't come to fruition. they spent over 2 million dollars constructing a 50 foot hydraulically controlled robot which in 2010 would be about 10 million. the robot just wasn't able to perform as desired. there are a couple of brief shots of it when kong escapes from the cage. it's shown dropping two large pieces of the cage on the ground.so with the failure of the robot they had to go with a suit designed and worn by rick baker.
coolrog0705 1 year ago
king kong, king kong, king kong, king kong, king kong...
why does he have to say it three times?
jorenbassant 1 year ago
1933 is best rather than this one.. but i really like 2005 movie...
fuerly 1 year ago
Why is there even an argument to which kong is better? The worst is this piece of crap hands down!!
reg83530 1 year ago
ai perfettamente ragione
1974atalantino 1 year ago
The Best of the 3 King Kongs is the Original Hands Down.
edgar81065 1 year ago
This version is bull shit. That's what I've got to say. The 2005 is the best. Any Tommy Guns and dinosaurs would make this shit version better, like come on a snake.. A FUCKIN SNAKE!!!!!!! Gaaaaayer than gay. And then he climbs the Twin Towers at the end. Wow. Remember 9 11? The individual who made this is a sick bastard. I am offended. Fuck you.
Toby89195 1 year ago
@Toby89195
What does 911 have to do with a film that was made in 1976?
eddiefuzz 1 year ago
@Toby89195 Um you do know the towers were alive and well in 1976 right?! They used the towers because their Kong was a little bigger, and TWTC was bigger than TESB. How is that offensive?!
broadsidexl74 1 year ago
@broadsidexl74 I'm fuckin offended because some of my friends and 2 family members died in the fucked tower, and just seeing that in the movie, is harsh, can't deal with it. IT SADDENS ME. Okay bud? You see my meaning?
Toby89195 1 year ago
to bad half the budget for this film went to jessica lange's makeup and the other half went into king kong
lordmerlin10 1 year ago
This one's better than the Peter Jackson version. The 2005 version felt like a video game. The 1976 version felt more real.
1976
Better cast.
Better score.
More tangible effects.
Markus77x7 1 year ago 5
@Markus77x7 Peter Jackson is the BEST ! and King Kong 2005 was far the best of all three ! 2005 felt like a video game ? lol ? u sure ? would you please tell me at least ONE game that looks just half as realistic that the 2005 version ? "The 1976 version felt more real." well if you meant this for real you have SERIOUS issues !
szasz85b 5 months ago 6
@szasz85b i loved the 2005 remake but you really have to give more credit to the 1933 film, it was the original idea dreamed up and executed. but peter jacksons love story really added alot of great depth to the story
UniteForgetLeftRight 3 months ago
@szasz85b its not just special effects. The 2005 one was also the only one to really have any caracter development at all. Okay i dont know that since i havent seen the 76 version, but I doubt its better.
supercoolbrian 2 months ago
@Markus77x7 I personally didn't like this one, the Peter Jackson movie was much better in my opinion. However, out of all of them, the 1933 is by far the best in terms of entertainment factor and pure spectacle. Whilst everyone is entitled to their opinion, I found this movie to suffer from a lack of pacing, is pretty sluggish and slow in many places and the Kong looked like shit. So yes, I'd have to say this was the weakest of the Kong movies.
Ejay1001 5 months ago
@Markus77x7 You're a terrible troll.
VriskaSerket 5 months ago
@Markus77x7 are u blind the 2005 remake was an epic one with beautiful graphics
ajeemama 5 months ago
i remember this one
lunatiksAlterEgo 1 year ago
I respect people that says this is the best Kong version, but I can't understand it. First goes the original, it's obvious to me; then not too far, Jackson's version, that takes the best action from the original and (even if Peter doesn't admit it) Kong's human-like expressions from this one. 1976 version isn't bad, but c'mon, its dumb dialogues, awful acting, almost no action and love film cliches...
vengadorpancho 1 year ago
KING KONG.
PlantTCG 1 year ago
i only saw the 2005 version
kkgirl300 1 year ago
This is the best version of King Kong. I love it! I love the original, but this one is the real winner. Peter Jackson's version was a dud, plus he ripped off this one.
jeny1129 1 year ago
this is way different den de other king kongs
myers2fan 1 year ago
I sing about King Kong and others in The Celebrity Song.
superdavid002 1 year ago
how many times does that guy narrating say the words King Kong!
livesey99 1 year ago
The worst version - simply awful. Even as a child I don't like it.
MinisterZdrowia 1 year ago
King Kong 2005 is Better
lowinhofragmmaker 1 year ago
@lowinhofragmmaker No it isn't it sucks. The 1976 version is better. The 2005 version is boring and sent me to sleep.
dreamonsunshine 1 year ago
@dreamonsunshine
this is booring -.- omg
lowinhofragmmaker 1 year ago
King Kong 2005 is better
TheMoviesfanner 1 year ago
What was even funnier was the huge hype that even supposed film critics like Richard Schickel bought into just before it came out, about the super-advanced effects, the giant robot Kong that was supposed to be so much better - huge article in Time magazine - and then it came out and it was a GIANT PIECE OF POO.
videolung 1 year ago
Cool Movie and COOL I'm the 100th Comment!
22rayj 1 year ago
Trailer guy needs to mention the title more often.
daweller 1 year ago 2
I saw this version of King Kong when I was a young kid & I liked it. I loved Kong's ROAR in this one! Even as a young kid, Jessica Lange made me think DANG! Sexy!
The Peter Jackson version was good entertainment, but the 1933 Kong was the best because it was the first King Kong.
GTO071 1 year ago
76 Kong was waaaay better than jakcson's version....the 76 version from the very beggining always kept me attatched to it, unlike the 05 version that took for ever to get me intrested with some cgi-abuse, meaningless, pointless, and long as hell chasing sequences...the music, cant even compare, the 76 version was absolutely awesome, it gives me chills just to remember it.
omisoka 2 years ago 2
KING KONG
KING KONG
KING KONG
KING KONG ( not like anything you've ever experienced before.)
ElectricEels 2 years ago 2
best movie.
mahender6969 2 years ago 2
The 1976 is the best King Kong film...
It looks so real.....
The 1933 one you could tell that Kong was a doll....
And the 2005 one Kong looked like a fucking 3D Cartoon ( sort of ) but still you could tell he is made up by Computer......
AchilleasRockerMan 2 years ago
great film, awesome music score, loved Kong's entrance scene. and te actors in this film can act like there is a real life 50 ft kong there. jeff bridges was da shit. the 2005 version was ok, but too damn long intro. got bored and then there's jack black.. ugh. sat thru the whole film watching him annoy me just to the brink before another scene popped up.
hordetrooper 2 years ago 2
..and Naomi Watts does not have the sensuality that Jessica Lange has.I Could totally get Kong going ape over her..but Naomi???/ lol
deckard97 2 years ago 3
this was my favorite of the remakes, Jeff Brigdes is so young and Jessica Lang is so hot in this film, they should have had more monsters and dinosaurs like the original and the recent remake, but still this one is my favorite
Trendkill213 2 years ago 11
@Trendkill213
I like it 'case it has The Dude in it!
tuttt99 1 year ago
... KING KONG
LeozinhowCM 2 years ago
This is the best King movie? No offense, but you people really need to get out more. ...
johnsmall1 2 years ago
I have to agree the 1976 version was the best of the three. Can't really compare it to the original since it is a classic by itself but the 1976 version was superior to Jackson's version. The film score was superior hands done and what it lacked in special effects, it made up with feeling and heart. The 2005 version was shallow and boring in my opinion. All the CGI in the world failed to give the 2005 Kong a personality with feeling.
MGR1900 2 years ago 15
You have GOT to be KIDDING...
Sheesh...
johnsmall1 2 years ago
About which part?
MGR1900 2 years ago
About the 76 version being the best of the three. The ONLY thing that movie had going for it was Jeff Bridges, and even his performance was nowhere near his best work. Jessica Lange looked pretty good in her part but didn't do much to prove she could be the actress she eventually became. (I don't think she even likes talking about the movie these days.)
johnsmall1 2 years ago
The characters were not likable, the action was practically non-existent and the scene with the giant "robo-Kong" was laugh-inducing given all the pre-release hype it received at the time. Even John Barry's score was sadly lacking compared to his other work (although I did buy the soundtrack album for the "Sacrifice To Kong" music, which was far and away the best piece in the film).
johnsmall1 2 years ago
Good Points some, but Barry's soundtrak gave the movie class and esp, buildup-a buildup starting from the island and leadingy to the inevitable climax on the WTC. Not his best work but worrth every penney he was paid!!
He set the theme and the entire movie profited from it and danced to it.
surperb job and Jessica lost the viewing audence but OWNED the critics
kronoscorvinus 1 year ago 2
@MGR1900 Dude go away It goes 1933 2005 and then this one. Jacksons was amazing and an epic. And yeah its long but its called character development. This version is alright.
FEARfilmz 1 year ago
@MGR1900 I agree with you. The 1976 version had the most heart.
The 76' version was the biggest tearjerker of the three I think.
KiCreativeStudios 1 year ago
@MGR1900
Yeah , thats certainly true. I believe it was definitley a mistake for Jackson too jump right from LOTR to Kong. Not a great move. The film lacked heart and inspiration. That a bit hypocritical of me too say , seeing I have a big poster of it at home. Which is what the 76 version has in ample supply.
Apart from that, I'd love to see the full Director's cut of this film on blu-ray with some slightly enhanced effects. Probally never gonna happen , but a 33 yr old guy can dream.
jayce79 1 year ago
@MGR1900 your wrong this is the worst remake ever
StigVaderWho 10 months ago
@MGR1900 you are stupid the 1933 version and the 2005 version are better than this 1976 crap no v-rex battles so how it is good maybe you don't know how to speak english
CHADE47lol 9 months ago
@CHADE47lol That was all one sentence and you accuse me of not being able to speak English?
MGR1900 9 months ago
this was the worst remake out of the 3
uiopytrre 2 years ago
how many times is there appearing king kong
dragon1994 2 years ago
at least they made him like a real gorilla looks like and they got the thumping on the chest right, this is the way a real gorilla beats on his chest, and the yell they got from a real life african elephant which i only found that out a quite a few years ago by watching a documentary on the discovery channel on an african elephant, was wondering where hollywood had gotten the roar from.
stretch4859 2 years ago
My favorite King Kong movie. Jeff Bridges, Jessica Lange, Charles Grodin, John Randolph and Rene Auberjonois were brilliant. I love KK (2005) but that movie looked too unrealistic plus Jack Black was so irritating
Magnolia296 2 years ago 4
I laughed when it said "Most original" considering it's a remake
OohcoolProductions 2 years ago 2
Of course, but it's practically nothing like the original. So you could say that this movie is just another movie heavily inspired by the old one and with the same name.
jmwestful 2 years ago
those effects are good for 1933, but for the 70s they look just the same but in colour. They might as well just restored the colorized print for King Kong and re-released it theaterically or on TV. It would have saved them money and would have been better since it's the same film. I do prefer B/W BTW, but King Kong looks interesitng in colour.
filmfanatic99 2 years ago
this trailer is cool the movie was OK to my opinon
JoshandAlexPics 2 years ago
when i was little i watched this movie....i actually started crying when kingkong died for some reason...
avpkid345 2 years ago
Prior to the introduction of CGI, people were prejudiced against giant monster movies.
I thought the '76 King Kong was epic. Just epic.
Loved it.
The cast, score and cinematography were all first rate.
The director did a masterful job of creating a feeling of foreboding. The dark atmosphere, the eerie mood, were all masterfully done.
Markus77x7 2 years ago 2
It still is Epic.The 2005 was good but the fact i still watch this one and listen to its soundtrack(john barry) says something.Plus the haunting images of WTC actually makes this more relevant
deckard97 2 years ago 2
finally i found it.. been looking for this version of king kong.Thanx for uploading.. & now how about the full movie? :-)
bullsworthtube 2 years ago
the only kong movie i have seen is peter jackson's remake but i think it's really good untill the point wer kong escapes. it just gets boring after that i think
mulac787 2 years ago
Every thing was good about this film the story line was fine it didnt need lots of Dinousaurs to jazz it up and Jeff Bridges was a good leading male. Plus the music score was brilliant. But two things spoilt this film 1King Kong been played by a man in an ape suit and 2 they could of done more work on the gaint rubber snake.
vaniacosta75 2 years ago
'76 is may favourite version of kong too. It had the budget which the 33 version lacked, and much more substance than the special-effects driven 05 movie.
bobwasgugliemo 2 years ago
not to forget the excellent music score of John Barry .
arnauda1971 2 years ago
I agree with you : the best of the four king kong movies ( 1933-king kong versus Godzilla-1976-2005).
King Kong look terrific and the story goes right to my emotion.
the plot is plausible ( expedition motivated by greed ) and the special effects are not overhelming ( like in the 2005 version) so characters have substance , dinosaurs are gone ( except the giant snake).
good performance on the part of Charles Grodin.
don 't know why this movie has been so criticized.
arnauda1971 2 years ago
sorry , of the five King Kong movies : I forgot the sequel " King kong lives " from 1986
arnauda1971 2 years ago
I was a kid when i saw this crappy movie and it still sucks to this day.
Trikkerman3 2 years ago
This movie was big. Some might consider it a failure but it made a huge profit.
soulcheck4all 2 years ago
i was in a big music store last week (virgin i think), all three kong movies were avaliable on dvd 1933 version was £12.99, 1976 version was £10.99 & after some searching i found the jackson 2005 version in a bargain basket at £2.99.....i think that speaks volumes about which of the three kong films is least fondly remembered....
40berryfield 2 years ago
I saw this movie with my dad at age 7 (1977) and it really blew me away. That's why this version of King Kong is, to me, better than any other one, previous or later. Jessica Lange was so beautiful. It may be criticized by the 1933 original lovers or by the Peter Jackson's version defenders (the lamest one, I think). King Kong 1976 will always have a special place in my memory and in my heart.
gabstanace 2 years ago 3
listen to that soundtrack!!
dickphair 2 years ago
i ACTUALLY watched this movie cause i had never seen a king kong movie, this was in november 2005 and i was sooooooo pissed that there was no dinosaurs just king kong and a giant snake they did a really shitty job with this film they had a fucking 24 million dollar budget
:O
they still couldnt feature some dinos in it? WTF
TyrannosaurusRex97 2 years ago
Oh no! No dinosaurs! Aaaah!
Go watch Jurassic Park, moron. Dinosaurs there.
Moseslawgiver 2 years ago 2
ive seen the entire trilogy ass hole
TyrannosaurusRex97 2 years ago
This movie was so so not the greatest but so so
krauser979 2 years ago
Comment removed
viverito 2 years ago
Comment removed
viverito 2 years ago
i love the 1976 version! first saw it when i was six and i was blown away by it. liked it better than the original. peter jackson's version was good to.
mattman747 2 years ago 3
King Kong - unlike anything you've ever seen before . . . at least since 1933!
beyondbedandbathisme 2 years ago 2
i absolutely love this movie! My favorite part is when jessica lange and jeff bridges stop off at a bar for a night cap as king kong reaks havic on new york. this is by far the best king kong. JESSICA LANGE FOREVERRRRRRR!!
beltingfordummies 2 years ago 4
yea, this one was good!
STARDORKS 2 years ago
this is by far the best king kong??????????
You must be one stupid M.F. if u think this is better than Peter Jackson's.
Trikkerman3 2 years ago
You must be one stupid M.F. if you think Peter Jackson's is better than the original.
TheRLStudios 2 years ago
this is not the best king kong dude, the one starring jack black owns all of them!
Linkmanno 3 years ago
@Linkmanno well the best king kong is the 1933 version. just because for it's creativity, and the 2nd best is the 2005 version, directed by Peter Jackson
moviedude1500 1 year ago
@moviedude1500 LMFAO NOO. 2005 with Jack Black is the best, 1933 is second. And third... wait... there is no third
Toby89195 1 year ago
@moviedude1500 lol! fuck no its not. i agree with tobi, 2005 is the best
Linkmanno 1 year ago
1:21 look at the rope lol
ssj4gogeta444 3 years ago