@mayankeagle Vrex was a kind of evolution of the T Rex after spending to much time on skull island. The V rex only appears in the 2005 remake the one he fight in the 1933 version i think it was either a T rex or an allosaurus. The V rex is a created creature by peter jackson's team is not a real dinosaur.
@themaster666able It depends on who you ask as to what the theropod (i.e. 2 legged carnivorous) dinosaur that Kong fights in the '33 version is. The script from what I hear, just called it a "meat-eater". Merian C. Cooper said in an interview it was an allosaur, and it does have 3 fingers. However I think he, like a lot of people in the era, got the 2 mixed up sometimes (Ray Harryhausen did as well). And the number of fingers in T-rex was uncertain at the time.
@themaster666able Also, I'm pretty sure, like most of the creatures in the movie, except for Kong himself, the model was probably built originally for Willis O'Brien's movie that was never made, "Creations". In that case, according to that script, it was (originally at least) intended to be a T-rex.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm sure Skull Island was filled to the brim with Dinosaurs, Giant Insects and other pre-historic creatures in the original Kong. So where are the Dinosaurs in the 1976 verson? I have to consider the 2005 verson the superior remake, not because of Flashy CGI but because the same passion that made the 1933 Kong was present in the 2005 Kong, with the 76 verson there is no passon or love for the original King Kong, it's just another 70s Irwin Allen style disaster movie
@BigDaddyFoot there was no giant snake in king kong vs godzilla or a v rex only godzilla kong and a giant octopus. and that was a sea serpent in king kong escapes or it a giant snake all well thats the same thing. but godzilla isn't a dinosaur he's an awsome nuculear beast who used to be a dinosaur.
i lol at them both, even though 1933s one was good in its day and is a classic, you would be taking the piss to say its a good film compared to todays standards.
itsw funny when kk is on top of v hes like trying to open his mouth then punches him in the face like "bitch let me break your god dam jaw and this will all be over with"
Yeah, that giant snake was a pretty weak follow up from a t-rex. Even a stop-motion clay one at that. Call me jaded, but i'm not a traditionalist--thusly, enjoyed the heck out of Jackson's waaay more. Though that beginning was a slow ass start. An hour into the movie till they reach the boat to leave to Skull Island. Not an exaggeration. That's too frickin' long.
@BlueMaxx86 well one hour seems quite long but it was necessary to introduce the main characters properly. so later, during the adventure on Skull Island, and back in NY, you can feel more with them. introducing characters is an art of its own but some scriptwriters / directors don´t do it very well.
and if characters are not properly introduced, nobody cares about what happens to them, e.g. whether they live or die: the whole movie, the drama, the message, everything is getting boring.
I like all versions of King Kong, because each one had brilliant vfx - considering the techniques they used.
Kong '76 may sound silly on paper(dude in a gorilla suit), but it combined the talents of Rick Baker and Carlo Rambaldi. They tried everything to make Kong "real" without resorting to stop motion.
King Kong 1933 was the Jurassic Park of it's day. While we sit here 77 odd years later it's easy to wonder how viewers were mezmorized by such primitive FX. Back then this was all new. No one (with rare exception) had ever seen anything like King Kong.
Jurassic Park had the same effect as KK33. Audiences had never seen such realistic dinosaurs. We were spell bound in awe.
@skribbbble Not to mention in 1967 - King Kong Escapes - YES I KNOW this King Kong is the Toho Rights King Kong but he also sucker snapped and bashed the jaw of a Gorosaurus (not exactly a T-rex but a similar creature to the Rexy you see in '33 and 05) and also in 1962 when Kong (he didn't sucker Gojira in but still) shoved a burning tree into Godzilla's mouth haha - that doesn't exactly count as you know but its funny...
@heresthadude1080 i agree but i think its just trade mark is just like godzilla why does he finish off enemies with his atomic breath (most of the times)....u know stuff like that it just need to happen u know
Why the fuck are people comparing the fight scenes from a movie and it's remake that are roughly 70 years apart from each other. Obviously the fuckin 2005 version is going to be better, hell, if it wasn't than Peter Jackson and the rest of the production team wasted a fuck load of time making it.
in 1933, the v rex sounds like a whining baby. lol. i like 2005 version the best. it gives a better relaytionship between king kong and ann. also, they give u more of skull island. the fight scenes were fucking amazing. 1976 version kinda sucked and was a bad remake.
1933 King Kong movie it's first monster movie. It's black and white but their is colour movie of 1933 King Kong movie. Three prehistoric creatures King Kong have a fight with. Fist on is T. Rex secon one is Elasmosarus and third one is Pteronodon. Elasmosaurus has fins like whales and has very long neck like snakes. It's trying to surficate King Kong by sorounding throut around King Kongs throut. The Pterenodon dont have teeths like birds but has a beak like stork beak and bites King Kongs arms.
I quite like the old Vastatosaurus better. At least it wasn't pretending to be a real animal. But seeing a Tyrannosaurid that's just as fantastical in 2005 walking with a normal, horizontal theropod stance is a little off-putting to me.
It's like a dog walking upright, it just isn't a healthy thing to look at.
@thegenie144 purannahdon became a deleted scene in 2005 you know the bit in the lake were they build rafts if you watch the deleted scenes it is in there
@thegenie144 The monster from 33 I assume your reffering to was a plesiosaurid with almost vestigal paddles which basically acted like a snake. I think it's called the "Cave Serpent," which is also a name used to describe enemies in the 2005 video game that look alot like Piranhadons.
Piranhadon's scene was cut from the theatrical run because Jackson was determined not to let the spider pit scene get axed, but he had to loose something else. It's on the DVD.
the 1976 version was a B movie but the 1933 and the 2005 versions were awesome - reason being is that in the 1933 & 2005 version they had the stance of an ape as in the 1976 version had the stance of a human which is really stupid - thus the 1976 version was a total rip and knock off from the original and current King Kong
dude use ur brain - i wasnt refering this as if i was in 1976 - i was refering to the CURRENT TIME LINE for which all 3 movies have already been made - and the 1976 King Kong was certainly a rip off from the 1933 and 2005 version - i thought the 2005 version was good but i would rank it 5 stars same as the 1933 version and no friken duh that the 2005 version didnt exist during 2005 - when u make ur comments bro think b4 u speak ok
i admit that i saw the 1976 version before the original. i did'nt know about the dinosaurs, but i felt that they should have been there even so. it just didn't feel natural not to have any in any version of kong.
same here. technically, one could consider the '33 film's effects on par with the '05 remake's because, though very cheap by today's standards, the '33 effects were years ahead of their time and the most realistic thing out there at the time. tbph, the effects in the new one are really nothing special for the time period, but its still a very well executed film imo
OK, my favorite is still King Kong (1976) but I loved this version too - great movie!!! Only one mistake - they exaggerated with visual effects (It looked too unrealistic).
Anyway Peter Jackson, Naomi Watts, Adrien Brody, Thomas Kretschmann, Colin Hanks did a great job!
ok this is my review. the 2005 king kong was a great movie, i gave that 5/5 stars. it was dramatic, epic, the graphics & effects were outstanding, and it was the most realistic. the best one ws the 1933ORIGINAL MOVIE. but the 1976 movie was abstolutely horrible. king kong was obviously a guy in a suit, they thought that of kongs upper lip was pulled back, it would make him soo scary. kong to me sounded like a fat black guy pooping. wat a disgrace to king kong.and a giant snake v kong... really?
wow i never knew that the 2005 film took so much from the oldest film, especially with the vrex battle. i mean they're the same movies but i thought that they would of added some other twists. the way that kong finishes the vrex is almost the same but with better effects.
you like lame old totally out-dated unrealstic movies... LIKE YOU'VE BEEN LIVING UNDER A ROCK AND LITTERLY DONT KNOW BETTER!.... good going neanderthaler.....
no but modern movies bring modern facts. ofcourse movies will never be all facts. cause that takes away the fun and imagination in movies. but old movies lack on modern facts. which is too bad actually... its like the T-rex who walks straight up back in the days, and today we know they didnt walk straight up... but rather horizontal. aslong as we keep learning new facts. movies will always slowly grow out-dated.
elves are myths.... not just movie myths... REAL MYTHS.. just like medusa,lessie,big foot, you know.. even dragons and myths have their own story.. you cant change that... myths dont really need their realism as their actually just some old well-known stories...
it would be like turning skull island into madagascar. and turning the V-rex into a robot. these are king kong moviefacts that cannot be changed. however just refreshing up the V-rex to todays know how and such. refreshes allot.
hey guys, you cant argue about wich king kong is better. you can't compare them at all. you cant compare a movie from 2005 with one from 1933. and they were both unrealistic in the same and in different ways. 1933 version was unrealistic judging by the way kong and the dinosaurs behaved. but the 05 version had like 34 people being caught in a stampede of brontosaurus along a cliffside with raptors chasing them, and only 4 of them died. but they both have a 50 foot high gorilla wreking havoc inNY
Wow, when Kong takes on that last V-Rex in the 2005 movie, it's almost exactly like the last few seconds of the 1933 fight. I never noticed. :O
blackbriar246 1 month ago
Awesome single leg by Kong, just goes to show you the elite level of wrestling kong has can override the striking of t-rex. Just Amazing footage.
dragoonism 2 months ago
the girl is topless
821107085349 3 months ago
@821107085349
What no
Junior11111111111 3 weeks ago
tyrannosaurus like a lizard... funny...
MrFoxez 3 months ago
The old King Kong's fight scenes just drag on and on and on lol
Spiritfox06 3 months ago
Das ist echt eine Faszination, sowas zu machen ich find es toolll
Google, ubersetzter German
xXHartbeatzzXx 3 months ago
WHAT THE CRAP!
abraham123spell 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
when the trex jumps at 00:38 i laughed my as off^^
Punkster113 4 months ago
Comment removed
Punkster113 4 months ago
King Kong very good takedowns and ground£.
bloodwynn 5 months ago
that kingkong face is so hilarious XD
HawxTeamDelta 5 months ago
its not t-rex ...its allosaurus
djason4 6 months ago
the 1976 version has to e one of the shittest movies ever made
roloug95 6 months ago
lol the 33 version looks like toys
spidermangreatestfan 6 months ago
Pardon my ignorance but what is a V Rex? I thought it was a T Rex
mayankeagle 6 months ago
@mayankeagle Vrex was a kind of evolution of the T Rex after spending to much time on skull island. The V rex only appears in the 2005 remake the one he fight in the 1933 version i think it was either a T rex or an allosaurus. The V rex is a created creature by peter jackson's team is not a real dinosaur.
themaster666able 6 months ago
@themaster666able Thanks. I wonder why he called it a V Rex? Is it like a mixture of the Velociraptor and the Rex?
mayankeagle 6 months ago
@mayankeagle V-Rex stands for Vastatosaurus Rex (Ravager lizard King), it's a fictional dinosaurs created by Jackosn as a descendant of the T-Rex.
Creaturelover18 5 months ago
@themaster666able The 30s version is a T-Rex, since in the 30s it was thought to have 3 fingers
Creaturelover18 5 months ago
@themaster666able It depends on who you ask as to what the theropod (i.e. 2 legged carnivorous) dinosaur that Kong fights in the '33 version is. The script from what I hear, just called it a "meat-eater". Merian C. Cooper said in an interview it was an allosaur, and it does have 3 fingers. However I think he, like a lot of people in the era, got the 2 mixed up sometimes (Ray Harryhausen did as well). And the number of fingers in T-rex was uncertain at the time.
rockerroller00 5 months ago
@themaster666able Also, I'm pretty sure, like most of the creatures in the movie, except for Kong himself, the model was probably built originally for Willis O'Brien's movie that was never made, "Creations". In that case, according to that script, it was (originally at least) intended to be a T-rex.
rockerroller00 5 months ago
thumbs up if you think that King Kong VS Godzilla would be a good fight! :]
fallenprice 7 months ago
@fallenprice
go see the movie
blotsafun 5 months ago
Donkey Kong Vs. King K. Rool
SmashingGreen 7 months ago 14
Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm sure Skull Island was filled to the brim with Dinosaurs, Giant Insects and other pre-historic creatures in the original Kong. So where are the Dinosaurs in the 1976 verson? I have to consider the 2005 verson the superior remake, not because of Flashy CGI but because the same passion that made the 1933 Kong was present in the 2005 Kong, with the 76 verson there is no passon or love for the original King Kong, it's just another 70s Irwin Allen style disaster movie
snakes3425 7 months ago 11
2:27 Finish Him!
Madness216 8 months ago
its funny
blackbird984 9 months ago
in a few decades, king kong will be remade again to fit the new animation technologies and new information about these weird creatures
IncrediblyStupidName 10 months ago
Cryptozoology horror novel see video book trailer
dltanner99 10 months ago
damn the graphics n quality realy sucked back then make me appretiate the new millenium
smooth7414 10 months ago
i still like t rex better....
and in the 1933 one after the tree fell i thought king kong's ass was ripped open
XD
RedSquadala5 10 months ago
check out my LOST SPIDER PIT SCENE and I`ve uploaded the complete original Soundtrack of KK33 (22 videos) ! :D I hope you like it :)
AleXX1995XX 11 months ago
you miss 1962 and 1967
BigDaddyFoot 1 year ago
@BigDaddyFoot there was no giant snake in king kong vs godzilla or a v rex only godzilla kong and a giant octopus. and that was a sea serpent in king kong escapes or it a giant snake all well thats the same thing. but godzilla isn't a dinosaur he's an awsome nuculear beast who used to be a dinosaur.
MOVIEmania709 9 months ago
i lol at them both, even though 1933s one was good in its day and is a classic, you would be taking the piss to say its a good film compared to todays standards.
TorqueBows 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1976 kong was the worst piece of shit ever made
roloug95 1 year ago
3 one is the best
baseball186 1 year ago
this vidioe sucks monckey nuts
baseball186 1 year ago
this vidioe sucks so much
baseball186 1 year ago
this vidioe sucks so much
baseball186 1 year ago
itsw funny when kk is on top of v hes like trying to open his mouth then punches him in the face like "bitch let me break your god dam jaw and this will all be over with"
warmonster86 1 year ago
the second one isnt a snake its a giant leechy thing is what it looks more like
evolutionman717 1 year ago
O_o!!!!.... WTH
Ganon40000 1 year ago
Yeah, that giant snake was a pretty weak follow up from a t-rex. Even a stop-motion clay one at that. Call me jaded, but i'm not a traditionalist--thusly, enjoyed the heck out of Jackson's waaay more. Though that beginning was a slow ass start. An hour into the movie till they reach the boat to leave to Skull Island. Not an exaggeration. That's too frickin' long.
BlueMaxx86 1 year ago
@BlueMaxx86 well one hour seems quite long but it was necessary to introduce the main characters properly. so later, during the adventure on Skull Island, and back in NY, you can feel more with them. introducing characters is an art of its own but some scriptwriters / directors don´t do it very well.
and if characters are not properly introduced, nobody cares about what happens to them, e.g. whether they live or die: the whole movie, the drama, the message, everything is getting boring.
harpiyon 10 months ago
2:45 xD
WalleWildberrie 1 year ago
lol that king kong always use same way to finish the enemy :)
clarencechng 1 year ago
I like all versions of King Kong, because each one had brilliant vfx - considering the techniques they used.
Kong '76 may sound silly on paper(dude in a gorilla suit), but it combined the talents of Rick Baker and Carlo Rambaldi. They tried everything to make Kong "real" without resorting to stop motion.
SamusDrake 1 year ago
A cena em que ele quebra a mandibola do V-Rex, é exatamente igual ao de 2005 xD
marcelopyramidhead 1 year ago
2:05 OM NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM
me700gnomes 1 year ago
tHIS is Psychologically more realistic. ^_^
TheVampireGoku 1 year ago
1933 looks better than i thought its good for a movie before WW2
crackerHero 1 year ago
@crackerHero
King Kong 1933 was the Jurassic Park of it's day. While we sit here 77 odd years later it's easy to wonder how viewers were mezmorized by such primitive FX. Back then this was all new. No one (with rare exception) had ever seen anything like King Kong.
Jurassic Park had the same effect as KK33. Audiences had never seen such realistic dinosaurs. We were spell bound in awe.
knightflyte 1 year ago
he brokes t-rex jaw exactly like in the 2005 movie
callahaine100 1 year ago
Kong sucker punced that foo in 1933 and again in 05!
skribbbble 1 year ago
@skribbbble Not to mention in 1967 - King Kong Escapes - YES I KNOW this King Kong is the Toho Rights King Kong but he also sucker snapped and bashed the jaw of a Gorosaurus (not exactly a T-rex but a similar creature to the Rexy you see in '33 and 05) and also in 1962 when Kong (he didn't sucker Gojira in but still) shoved a burning tree into Godzilla's mouth haha - that doesn't exactly count as you know but its funny...
HeirofGojira91 1 year ago
the newest king kong was in 2006 thank you very much
aminals96 1 year ago
@aminals96 no it wasn't, it was 2005 . . . thank you very much
MrJOOOOSH 1 year ago
Comment removed
aminals96 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the movie came out in 05 but the dvd came out in 06, u couldn't do this until the 06 dvd their for this is an 06 scene clip
aminals96 1 year ago
@aminals96 Released December 14th 2005 smart guy.
bandit7498 1 year ago
@bandit7498 not the dvd :)
aminals96 1 year ago
@aminals96 lol. Of course not. Don't try and pick at straws here. You said the movie didn't come out till '06. Didn't say anything about the DVD.
bandit7498 1 year ago
@bandit7498 yes he did
CharlieBoneOurSeries 1 year ago
Why does he always kill enemies by breaking their jaws? I mean, really?
heresthadude1080 1 year ago
@heresthadude1080 i agree but i think its just trade mark is just like godzilla why does he finish off enemies with his atomic breath (most of the times)....u know stuff like that it just need to happen u know
juventinorocks 1 year ago
You can tell Kong is thinking, "Now how the hell am I gonna cook this thing?"
MonacoBlast 1 year ago
The only thing that could deafeat Kong was beauty.
starwarsROXmy 1 year ago
1933
98Lubo 1 year ago
wtf
maaznida 1 year ago
Why the fuck are people comparing the fight scenes from a movie and it's remake that are roughly 70 years apart from each other. Obviously the fuckin 2005 version is going to be better, hell, if it wasn't than Peter Jackson and the rest of the production team wasted a fuck load of time making it.
TheAzzuriBlue 1 year ago
omg shows how the times have changed they should remake it again in another 20 years and see what its like
mrbirdonastick 1 year ago
in 1933, the v rex sounds like a whining baby. lol. i like 2005 version the best. it gives a better relaytionship between king kong and ann. also, they give u more of skull island. the fight scenes were fucking amazing. 1976 version kinda sucked and was a bad remake.
chuckycosgrove2 1 year ago
1933 King Kong movie it's first monster movie. It's black and white but their is colour movie of 1933 King Kong movie. Three prehistoric creatures King Kong have a fight with. Fist on is T. Rex secon one is Elasmosarus and third one is Pteronodon. Elasmosaurus has fins like whales and has very long neck like snakes. It's trying to surficate King Kong by sorounding throut around King Kongs throut. The Pterenodon dont have teeths like birds but has a beak like stork beak and bites King Kongs arms.
Kenany9 1 year ago
there's a chicken sounds whaha fuckin vide0..
dem0nnyt 1 year ago
NICE GRAPHICS!~ 10 star! wahaha!~ past and present
d7ffoavon 1 year ago
epic
CrimsonNightsoul 1 year ago
1 SOOOOOO STUPID KING KONG DOSNT EVEN TOUCHTHE THING WHEN IN PUNCHES
2 better
3 AWSOME
fawfulhasFURY1111 1 year ago
WOW dude this is Awesome !!!
kakaloekia 1 year ago
I quite like the old Vastatosaurus better. At least it wasn't pretending to be a real animal. But seeing a Tyrannosaurid that's just as fantastical in 2005 walking with a normal, horizontal theropod stance is a little off-putting to me.
It's like a dog walking upright, it just isn't a healthy thing to look at.
egdeltur666 1 year ago
The 70's Kong had some woeful special effects. Even for the 70's, they would have looked cheap.
thegreeninferno 1 year ago
Thye 1933 V Rex Looked Cute so did Kong in 2005 Kong looked Cool so did V Rex But what the hell happend to the Pirannahdon cause they had it in 1933.
thegenie144 1 year ago
@thegenie144 purannahdon became a deleted scene in 2005 you know the bit in the lake were they build rafts if you watch the deleted scenes it is in there
garsole2 1 year ago
@thegenie144 The monster from 33 I assume your reffering to was a plesiosaurid with almost vestigal paddles which basically acted like a snake. I think it's called the "Cave Serpent," which is also a name used to describe enemies in the 2005 video game that look alot like Piranhadons.
Piranhadon's scene was cut from the theatrical run because Jackson was determined not to let the spider pit scene get axed, but he had to loose something else. It's on the DVD.
egdeltur666 1 year ago
Omg @ 3.32, SIDE BOOBS!
YupperSirMaz 1 year ago
Years ago I watched the 76 version and thought "Man this shit sucks, no dinosaurs, just a hokey snake" and seeing this now, I'd say I still agree.
Marioag20 1 year ago
1933 version claymation trick photography
1976 version mechanics and a good monkey suit
2005 computers
lem1968a1 1 year ago
@lem1968a1 Mechanical Kong was in it for about 15 seconds in total. Mostly Rick Baker in a monkey suit for the whole 2 hours!
thegreeninferno 1 year ago
the 1976 versoin sucks!
randomdude7272 1 year ago
1933 version and 2005 version fight scenes exactly the same just getter graphics
wolfman8125 1 year ago
Wtf
Crox300 1 year ago
gotta love the classics :)
askewdaniel 2 years ago
oops I meant the 1933 version but 1976 looks pretty shitty too. 2005 still wins!
triforcegamer64 2 years ago
Comment removed
triforcegamer64 2 years ago
1976 = Man in a swuit (not a gorilla)
1933-2005 = animation (SM/CG) acted as a gorilla.
stonelenny 1 year ago
@stonelenny lol
triforcegamer64 1 year ago
@ Stonelenny In 2005 Andy Serkis (Smeagol) (Lord or the Rings) played King Kong.
thegenie144 1 year ago
the song???
arcanalex 2 years ago 2
the 1976 version was a B movie but the 1933 and the 2005 versions were awesome - reason being is that in the 1933 & 2005 version they had the stance of an ape as in the 1976 version had the stance of a human which is really stupid - thus the 1976 version was a total rip and knock off from the original and current King Kong
EliteGunzz 2 years ago
The 1976 version could not be a rip-off of the 2005 version, since in 1976 the 2005 version didn't even exist.
catchersmitt0 2 years ago 38
dude use ur brain - i wasnt refering this as if i was in 1976 - i was refering to the CURRENT TIME LINE for which all 3 movies have already been made - and the 1976 King Kong was certainly a rip off from the 1933 and 2005 version - i thought the 2005 version was good but i would rank it 5 stars same as the 1933 version and no friken duh that the 2005 version didnt exist during 2005 - when u make ur comments bro think b4 u speak ok
EliteGunzz 2 years ago
1:53
Haha, dinosaur cameltoe.
HyaenusDominae 2 years ago 6
I liked the animal roars for Kong. Didn't they like, use a Tiger or Lion or something?
MKAS33 2 years ago
ths is awsome but SHITY sound quality
THEMASSACREY 2 years ago
When I uploading this video almost 3 years ago, I didn't have access to a DVD-ROM drive, hence the sub-par quality.
TheThingKing 2 years ago 10
@TheThingKing besides tha sound its awsome!
THEMASSACREY 2 years ago
@THEMASSACREY FK the sound, this could be viewed as a silent movie and its still astounding. Thanks for the upload. -turn the volume off!
supermandisco 1 year ago
@THEMASSACREY the start really sucks with that dumb rock and drug music
bobszvetics1 1 year ago
LOL 1976 version is so fake!
taracah 2 years ago
i totally agree with u taracah it was a total B movie
EliteGunzz 2 years ago
i admit that i saw the 1976 version before the original. i did'nt know about the dinosaurs, but i felt that they should have been there even so. it just didn't feel natural not to have any in any version of kong.
spiderlime 2 years ago 2
u see the 2005 version?
sayaingoku101 2 years ago
1976 was lame
Telefonillo 2 years ago 28
@Telefonillo So this was 1976 animations
RFT15ify 7 months ago
wat a move at 0:54 , now i c where people got it from
bobik624 2 years ago 4
God i love this one 1933 the original movie. now that is a classic!!!
TheNoelvega 2 years ago
cool
dhockeyplayer83 2 years ago
lol 4:39
Snap! uh oh, i think i broke it
MrGamedude21 2 years ago 3
Lol destruction of jaw 4:00 4:33 4:35
supergoku50001 2 years ago 2
Older versions were perfect and classic, and i respect them, but in my opinion, 2005 version was the best
OrAeForeverAmazing 2 years ago 5
same here. technically, one could consider the '33 film's effects on par with the '05 remake's because, though very cheap by today's standards, the '33 effects were years ahead of their time and the most realistic thing out there at the time. tbph, the effects in the new one are really nothing special for the time period, but its still a very well executed film imo
oshronosaurus 2 years ago 2
I have more respect for Peter Jackson after seeing that he recreated the 1933 fight ending with the v rex. good job!
Bshelton18 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Angiant anaconda can kill kong. one giant anacondas fights up to 3 T-rex at the same time.
bbpigtoy 2 years ago
kong seems to disagree with you
oshronosaurus 2 years ago 3
in the 1976 version, did Arnold Swarztsnegger do the voice of Kong?
smellynails0 2 years ago
i love how the effects in the fight evolved in the different movies!!! =)
funnymunky46 2 years ago
The "Jaw Breaker", Kong's best move.
masterdesigner610 2 years ago 2
2:42
was one of the mpst GORY AND DISTURBING THINGS I HAVE EVER SEEN (AND I'VE PLAYED ALL THE HALOS, MERCENARY TWO, AND SEVERAL GTAS!)
incinerator327 2 years ago
1:15 was the most realistic part of the 1933 version
incinerator327 2 years ago
no he isnt
tawinteamo 2 years ago
yes really
tawinteamo 2 years ago
Is it only me but i find that last scene where Kingkong cracks the shit out of that T-rex pretty disturbing.
Maybe its just well done i guess :)
Reckoning888 2 years ago 2
fien i admit i was bashing it to much but dude its got one fight in and that one sucks
pukemaster666 2 years ago
what are u on about the 1933 one was one of the greatish films of all times the 1976 one was shit and the 2005 was awesome
pukemaster666 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
OK, my favorite is still King Kong (1976) but I loved this version too - great movie!!! Only one mistake - they exaggerated with visual effects (It looked too unrealistic).
Anyway Peter Jackson, Naomi Watts, Adrien Brody, Thomas Kretschmann, Colin Hanks did a great job!
Magnolia296 2 years ago
lol the 1976 version featuring a man in a suit looked really shitty compared to the 1933 and 2005 ones haha
suuperstylin 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
T-Rex's didn't exist until 2005. I saw it on National Geographic/
artemis7114 2 years ago
that doesn't even make sense
tyrannoraptorx119 2 years ago
wait... what?
bboythekidstudios 2 years ago
@artemis7114 Damn that's some weed you have been smoking!
CHADE47lol 1 week ago
wasn't that flip a wwf hulk hogan move kong is copying?
artemis7114 2 years ago
in the 1933 film its not a rex kong is fighting its an Allosaurus if you look at its arms its got 3 claws while rex's only have 2 claws .
wellforth 2 years ago
good catch, but actually its a unique species. the monsters on the island are all descendants of the dinosaurs.
hom907sar 2 years ago
Dude its fucking t-rex everyone knows that, so what if they got that wrong its a movie. Don't be such a know-it-all.
Joebobzilla 2 years ago
Just cuz i pointed out its an Allosaurus im a know it all. Yeah like u said its a movie so why the FUCK is that a problem wiv u? u MUPPET!
wellforth 2 years ago
S'not, just its a t-rex. It was the thirties, they didn't care if they gave it more fingers than was right, everyone recognizes it as a t-rex.
Joebobzilla 2 years ago
They just had bad science back then. If you notice, it's also standing upright. But a T-Rex actually stood parrallel to the ground.
Tuckerscreator 2 years ago
yup even in teh 70s and 80s they still had the T rex stand up right
amartinez97 2 years ago
A lot of people still thinks so. There are so many modern pictures which show the T-Rex, Allo-, Spinosaurus or whatever standing upright.
I was confused too when i saw Jurassic Park in cinema 16 years ago. But i liked it so much because it looks much more realistic and threatening.
TheBigTittyTwister 2 years ago
l think your right it is an Allosaurus.
vaniacosta75 2 years ago
that's because it wasn't a t-rex or an allosaurus but a vastatosaurus-rex, the evolved t-rex!
Geeaeyh 2 years ago 2
More like a devolution - jaws were so weak compared to T.Rex's it's not even funny. :(
DarthZillasaurus 2 years ago
ok this is my review. the 2005 king kong was a great movie, i gave that 5/5 stars. it was dramatic, epic, the graphics & effects were outstanding, and it was the most realistic. the best one ws the 1933ORIGINAL MOVIE. but the 1976 movie was abstolutely horrible. king kong was obviously a guy in a suit, they thought that of kongs upper lip was pulled back, it would make him soo scary. kong to me sounded like a fat black guy pooping. wat a disgrace to king kong.and a giant snake v kong... really?
GeorgieZillaFan 2 years ago
You silly racist fart
wellforth 2 years ago
i toataly agree, the first kong i saw was the 1976 one, and when i saw the others, looking back to that one made me sick
kyloco 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
King kong sucks.
ReptileOwns 2 years ago
That was the worst looking snake in movie history!
7DARKHELLS 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
to be honest a v-rex would own king kong1!!!
smashbrosfan100 2 years ago
i beg you, do one without the music, it would be so much better
AmericanMan44 2 years ago
1933 whoa.
bigman671 2 years ago
4:03 - Eeeew! What was that??
Kotlettbengt 2 years ago
wow i never knew that the 2005 film took so much from the oldest film, especially with the vrex battle. i mean they're the same movies but i thought that they would of added some other twists. the way that kong finishes the vrex is almost the same but with better effects.
5324er 2 years ago 2
hahaha.. the 2005 copied the 1933 one, but see how graphic had improved since.. haha
stephenlsk7 2 years ago 2
Stephen, graphics have not improved much.
Ann's hair has all green in between them in '05 a lot. Bad FX work.
Moseslawgiver 2 years ago
but i am ignorant...
DNME87 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
omg cheapest shit ever!
DNME87 2 years ago
Way to be culturally ignorant.
Nanaman12345 2 years ago 2
DNME87, you can't even write a sentence properly, let alone know good filmmaking.
I am one of few members of today's youth who be ashamed to be called a young person.
You are an embarrassment to the human race.
I bet your mother wishes she aborted you.
Moseslawgiver 2 years ago
dude if you are ashamed to be called young..
you're a embarrassment yourself!
you like lame old totally out-dated unrealstic movies... LIKE YOU'VE BEEN LIVING UNDER A ROCK AND LITTERLY DONT KNOW BETTER!.... good going neanderthaler.....
DNME87 2 years ago
You know, old movies do not equal lame.
Old does not equal out-dated.
Out-dated does not equal unrealistic.
Funny how the dinosaur parts in the original Kong play out like actual encounters with rhinos or hippos and the like.
In '05, you have the people running in between Brontosaurus legs and living which is like running across a busy highway and not getting hit.
So don't talk to me about unrealistic. Modern movies are the unrealistic ones, not the old ones.
Moseslawgiver 2 years ago
no but modern movies bring modern facts. ofcourse movies will never be all facts. cause that takes away the fun and imagination in movies. but old movies lack on modern facts. which is too bad actually... its like the T-rex who walks straight up back in the days, and today we know they didnt walk straight up... but rather horizontal. aslong as we keep learning new facts. movies will always slowly grow out-dated.
DNME87 2 years ago
It doesn't make them bad, though.
Facts don't belong in an escapist movie like King Kong.
Maybe next time say Lord of the Rings is horrible because they found Elves never existed.
Moseslawgiver 2 years ago
elves are myths.... not just movie myths... REAL MYTHS.. just like medusa,lessie,big foot, you know.. even dragons and myths have their own story.. you cant change that... myths dont really need their realism as their actually just some old well-known stories...
it would be like turning skull island into madagascar. and turning the V-rex into a robot. these are king kong moviefacts that cannot be changed. however just refreshing up the V-rex to todays know how and such. refreshes allot.
DNME87 2 years ago
hey guys, you cant argue about wich king kong is better. you can't compare them at all. you cant compare a movie from 2005 with one from 1933. and they were both unrealistic in the same and in different ways. 1933 version was unrealistic judging by the way kong and the dinosaurs behaved. but the 05 version had like 34 people being caught in a stampede of brontosaurus along a cliffside with raptors chasing them, and only 4 of them died. but they both have a 50 foot high gorilla wreking havoc inNY
GeorgieZillaFan 2 years ago
and without even going into all that detail, the fact that it is about a huge gorilla isnt realistic? just if that gorilla is in new york?
strathpol 2 years ago
FallOut Boy - This ain't a scene, its an arm race.
TheThingKing 2 years ago
wats the name of the song in the beginning
niley4eva2007 2 years ago
it's gay. who cares
SleepingLeon 2 years ago 6