I simply love this movie, it is perhaps the worst of the King Kong movies (yeah, I do like the special effects on the 2005 remake, and the 1933 original can't be challenged) yet it is by far one of the better movies I've ever seen! As someone else mentioned, the soundtrack of this movie is the best out of the three King Kong, it is chilling and "haunting" sometimes! Kong is also biggest in this movie! THere's something about this movie that terryfied me as a kid... love it! :D
i think both the 1933 version and the 2005 version are both great films loaded with imagination, the 1976 version does do things differently but I dont think that makes this one bad or uncreative, it just has a more simple tone to it which i think gives this one a sharp and classy modern feel to it which i actually loved, this one also has the best musical score of the 3 imopo, and the leading cast was fantastic, i'd say this one is arguably just as good as the other two.
Jessica Lange is the most beautiful woman I have ever seen. She is absolutely divine, and if there is a heaven then I want to meet her there and propose to her. Oh, and incidentally, this is a brilliant film with an ending so sad it made me cry the first time I watched it.
I love this remake king kong; iwent to the movies to see it ,he sure was a big and very strong,beautiy and the beast,Jessica Lange was hes weekness,lucky fella.
I remeber having horrific nightmares about this Kong peering into my window and then chasing me through my village, great childhood film, as much as the 1933 original, but for me, that film is the insperation for my love of film, this one, was a great adventure yarn :)
I have to agree, all the wonder, passion, and fantasy that made the orginal Kong great is gone. FYI I don't care how beautfiul Jessica Lang looks, I despise the human characters with a passion, and Dwan tops the list.
It's so hilarious how people love to rag on this movie. As if they've forgotten what an amazing benchmark it is in the history of movie making. Despite the obvious 'let down' of the 40 million dollar Kong robot which is only on screen for maybe 8 seconds, (which in itself is HILARIOUSLY bench-mark personifying what an amazing, EXCESSIVE era this was for filmmakers.) Anything went, and did! Even now people will sit through this, yet not necessarily through Peter Jackson's 3 hour long CGI fest.
I love the 1933 version as it is the classic one, and then I just freaked out in happiness when the 2005 remake came. None of these actually frightened me alot, but it was this 1976 version that litterally scared the living shit out of me! I don't know, I saw this version as an 8 year old kid (and had then allreadyt seen the 1933 version with dad when I was just about 3) and the music and the way they build up the whole beginning of the altar sacrifice scene is for me kinda scary. Kong is huge!
and for the first time this King Kong beat on his chest like a real gorilla did, the yell for King Kong in the movie was from a African Elephant, I saw a documentary and when I heard that African Elephant yell I said that was where they got that yell from, if I were in Africa and heard that sound that would be pretty frightening
@AKanyon I agree with you, i think the '76 version was the most enjoyableof the three. I really can't stand the cartoony cgi used in the new version.. However, i think the 1986 kklives was pretty silly, for so many reasons. That's my opinion, anyway. :)
@aigg yikes, i personaly really like the 2005 version, i really like how it took place in the same time period, the story stays extremely close to the original, and the acting... most are just good, some are great
@spiderlolo100 Fair enough. I guess the fact that this was the first version i saw had something to do with it. Still, i really have strong distaste for large amounts of semi-convincing CGI.
This is the best version by a country mile, the ending is truly heartbreaking. Both Jeff Bridges and the stunningly beautiful Jessica Lange are superb. The 2005 remake had lots of fancy CGI, but was as emotionally engaging as a pot of yoghurt.
actually the 2005 is only part cgi. there was still a guy in a suit doing the movements and facial expressions. so calling it souless cgi only proves your own ignorance. do your homework. this movie was good but the 05 was made with much more respect and love for the 1933 original (which was the best one either way)
@dextreme69 Please do not use the word ignorance, when it is clear you have no good reason for doing so. Yes, i am aware of Andy Serkis' work on both lotr and king kong. However, when dealing with the digital artistic impression, it really doesn't matter. The end result still looks digital as hell, and thats the problem. All though i must admit that there exist some pretty convincing digital effects that were used in a clever way; this was not the case in this movie. Digital has to be PERFECT.
@aigg My bad i jumped the gun. i do have a good reason for saying ignorance because 90% of the time thats what i deal with when it comes to people "knowing" their movies. but its clear you know your stuff. and your right it does have to be perfect. i just wouldnt quite say its souless. im not defending digital effects (ill take a guy in a rubber costume or stop motion any day) but the 2005 film usually doesnt get enough credit for the things it did do right.
ok not for anything but ppl trying to say the 2005 version was heartless and this kong looked better is just laughable im not saying i didn't like this movie because i actually love it but the 2005 version is very good and showes a lot of heart & creativity, but the way i see it the 1933 version is the original calssic but comparing 1976 to 2005 i would say 76 has great acting, the sexiest kong girl, & amazing musical scores bt 05 has the effects, adventure, heart & suspense, both good movies.
I dont usually mind the effects of a movie unless it was painfully obvious, and this movies effects were ok. Its the story and acting that win a movie, and this one did it well too. :)
This film is pretty bad, but next to Peter Jackson's overindulgent opus, it comes off as more original in concept, and that always works to a film's advantage. It shows an effort was made to do something other than tread on classic territory. If the '05 version can be said to have done anything of note, it's that it unintentionally put the previously bashed '76 version in a better light. More people are gradually realizing this.
@kovik62 I could not agree more. I hear alot of people complaining about how the '76 version is not true to the original film. But why would anyone want it to be? We already have the original; i don't see the point in trying to copy it. I find the '76 version to be a breath of fresh air, not like the overlong, poorly acted cgi nightmare of '05. The '76 clearly has it's flaws, but compared to the '05, it is certainly the better picture.
This film is pretty bad, but next to Peter Jackson's overindulgent version, it comes off as more original in concept, and that always works to a film's advantage. It shows an effort was made to do something other than tread on classic territory. If the '05 version can be said to have done anything of note, it's that it unintentionally put the heretofore bashed '76 version in a better light.
@snakes3425 Btw, the crown scene is the only scene where the full scale 40 foot "robot" is used, and only for a few seconds. It looks absolutely ridiculous, and completely different from the Baker suit. I have wondered many times why they included it at all. I guess the only reason would be so that no one could say there was no robot, as advertised. Alot of people back then believed they were watching a robot throughout the movie. Thats absurd!
that's probably because Kong in the 76 film walks upright, like a human, he doesn't stand or walk like a Gorillia. I still wonder why Dinosaurs weren't included in the 1976 film, Toho produced King Kong Escapes nearly a decade earlier, with an actor playing the dinosaur Gorosaurus in a rubber suit, so why they didn't make Dinosaur costumes or puppets still bothers me
Rediculous is an understament, it pretty much reduced Kong to a joke, like I said I hark on Kong 76 so much because the script is a complete disaster, of all the things I don't want to hear in a King Kong remake are lines about the SPCA setting up a Fund for Sending Kong back home or how taking Kong from the island robbed the natives of their mysticism
@GoRamonez Well, the 2005 version chose to go old slyle, the '76 version chose not to. I don't see why it's a problem that the '76 version is not identical to the original. I mean, if you want the original, the go watch the original! Neither '76 or '05 i gonna do the original better han the original anyway. I'm glad '76 went another way, otherwise we would have three identical stories. And yes, he is supposed to climb the esb, IN THE OLD MOVIE! Not in this one. Different story. Thats ok!
Dino felt that audiences in the 70s wouldn't accept a respectful remake of Kong despite many having seen the 33 verson on TV or in re-releases, the whole movie focuses too much on being environmentalist, had they not spent 90% of the budget on lawyers we might had gotten a more faithful remake. ironically the lawsuits over the making of Kong 76 allowed a small company to win a similar copyright lawsuit a few years later, that company: Nintendo
@snakes3425 Thats some really interesting trivia, thanks. To be honest, i think its likely that some of my facination for this film stems from the fact that i saw it as a kid. So there is an element of nostalgia, i guess. Regardless, i think this film is way better than it's reputation. It's certainly not a masterpiece, but it has it's qualities. Among those are a wonderful music score by John Barry, much better than the 2005 score imo. The visuals are not that bad, and better yet: it's not CGI!
Story goes RKO still owned the copyright on the orignal Kong and a miscommunitcation led to both Universal and Dino believing they had the rights to do a remake, Universal then found a loophole, while RKO still owned the movie's copyright they didn't own the rights to novel adaptation of the original screenplay and went ahead with a remake titled the Legend of King Kong which was aborted after a settlement, this case was the reason why Nintendo won the Universal Lawsuit over Donkey Kong
I've actually heard Rick Baker, who played Kong and helped design the suit wasn't happy with how the suit turned out irony is the 1976 Kong Suit and the 2005 CGI Kong both won the Oscar for best Visual Effects, although the 1976 verson had to share it with Logan's Run
CGI and Stop Motion only are effective if done by people who are talented artists and have the patients to do it right, the suit verson I hark on a lot because the script is a mess with too much focus on Environmentalism and has more to do with Jaws then King Kong, what ruined the film for me was the scene before Kong escapes, seeing King Kong in a cage with a goofy crown on his head was too much, that and the fact that the sequal King Kong Lives was a total disaster
@ManOfWealthnTaste no it isn't go watch king kong 2005 this doesn't show any love or affection to the first movie the director didn't care about the old movie style it's no supposed to be a modern king kong it's supposed to be in it's original style also the characters aren't even right. Jack Prescott? The movie is crappy and he is supposed to climb the Empire state building not the fucking word trade center! He gets shot down by choppers with fucking mini guns! They did not made it like the or
I'm probably going to get flammed for saying this but the 2005 Kong is the superior remake (note I say remake) Kong 05 was made with passion and resepect for the original. The 1976 film: the trailer alone shows there was no love or respect for the orignal Kong, and no Jessica Lange in skimpy outfits doesn't make up for the fact the director and producers had no love or respect for what made the orginal great, they wanted a Jaws esq environmental disaster movie with Kong attached for name value
@snakes3425 the 2005 version looks so damn cartoony with all that cgi going on at all times. Also, i think they did a horrible job casting for that one. Lots of bad performances, notably Black and Brody, pluss they're just wrong for their parts. And its WAY too long. I'll take the '76 version over the '05 version any day. CGI SUCKS. (when it looks like cgi)
The effects and length weren't what I was talking about, and they weren't what made Kong 33 great, it was the love and passion the filmakers and effects people had for the project, love and passion for Kong is, something Jackson's verson had that the 76 verson didn't. There is no sense of wonder or mystery, there are no Dinosaurs or other fantastic creatures, all that's there is the plot but there is no love or passion for the orginal King Kong present in the 1976 film
@snakes3425 I can see what you mean. I guess it's just a matter of preferences. It is much easier for me to get emotionally envolved in the 1976 version. I also think it has a music score far superior to the '05 score. Personally, i have no reason not to believe Jacksons heartfelt respect to the original, i just didn't feel that he delivered the goods. Also, for me, a guy in an apesuit worked better than cgi. It's just something with that videogame feel that rubs me the wrong way.
I think Jessica Lange looks absolutely breathtaking in this movie. I Just wanna protect her. Most beautiful kong girl, no doubt. Also, a man in an apesuit beats the crap out of the soulless cgi used in the 2005 remake. CGI needs to DIE, because even good CGI looks like just that, thus good cgi doesnt exist. Makes everything look cartoony no matter what.
@aigg Well, I agree with you about Jessica Lange but Willis O Brians stop-motion Kong and Peter Jacksons CGI one are both better than the near expressionless of this one....
@degree7 It certainly was better than Gollum, but the thing with Cgi is that when it's not 100% the illusion crumbles like a house of cards. Suddenly the feeling is that you might aswell be watching an advanced videogame unfold before your eyes. Well, almost. There are tons of bad special effects out there, of which king kong 2005 is not the worst example. But it looks digital. It looks cartoony. It looks fake.
@aigg I would have to disagree IMO i think they 2005 version had the best character development of the 3 and the most compelling story, although the original is still king the cgi version is 20 times better than a man in a suit in my opinion plus the acting in this one kind of sucked
t's so hilarious how people love to rag on this movie. As if they've forgotten what an amazing benchmark it is in the history of movie making. Despite the obvious 'let down' of the 40 million dollar Kong robot which is only on screen for maybe 8 seconds, (which in itself is HILARIOUSLY bench-mark personifying what an amazing, EXCESSIVE era this was for filmmakers.) Anything went, and did! Even now people will sit through this, yet not necessarily through Peter Jackson's 3 hour long CGI fest
The thing about the flamthrower scene: When I first saw it on TV (many years after its premiere), I half expected the three guys to be Bill Murray, Dan Akyroyd and Harold Ramis ... these names ringing something?
my dad took me to the cinema and this trailer came on, my dad said, 'this is good' many years later i still remembered it because the anouncer kept repeating the title, this trailer on here brought it all back to me as my dad is no longer alive now, so thanks to the one who posted it!
I'm Sorry Mr. Announcer, But I And Many Other Viewers May Forget What The Name Of The Movie Is, So Can You Keep Telling Us What The Name Of It Is So We Don't Forget??? Thank You :)
I was six years old when this movie came out and it was very frightening in the theatre. I love the story behind this film. Charles Grodin is full retired now. I wish he would be in the new Midnight Run movie with Robert Deniro I hear is in the making.
But getting back to King Kong, this 1976 film was fantastic.
I'm possibly overly sentimental about this film because I was ten when I first saw it and have always loved it, but I feel that it has so much more heart than Peter Jackson's visually stunning, but emotionally hollow, remake. The love story between Dwan and Jack was fully developed which made it much more believable when he risked his life to save her on Skull Island. Kong was false looking but seemed far more real and alive than Jackson's ape, and the music was absolutely wonderful.
@rees276 Kong was actually not that bad looking for that time period. You gotta remember that this is a film from 1976. I agree the music was awesome in this film. I liked this film and saw it numerous times when I was a kid.
How can it be an "original motion picture event" when it's a remake. And a pretty poor one at that. The 1930s version is a marvellous black and white engraving which was used as the basis for an incredible full colour painting by Peter Jackson in 2005.
RIP Dino! I agree with MGR1900, I too thought this film was unfairly panned. I saw it when I was 8 years old growing up in the sticks of South Carolina. It started a lifetime fascination with New York City for me, and I have been living in NYC now for several years and I've loved and enjoyed every aspect of it. Thanks Dino!!!!!! :)
@a12509 whoever agrees with you has shit for brains you think its better because more fighting and dinos boo this and the classic were great shit for brains oh and your brain literly is shit
@vastotensa If you are going to call someoen out for having " shit for brains oh and your brain literly is shit "...learn how to spell 'literally'...or it makes YOU look like the one that has shit for brains...literally..
Surprisingly, I enjoyed this movie as a whole more than I did the 05 remake. Sure, this version doesn't top the classic and did have some minor flaws, but Jeff Bridges was great, Rick Baker's effects were good, and everything served to build the story up. The 05 remake overdid many of the classic elements and added in lots of other things that were more distracting than exemplifying. Like the addition and extension of the spider pit sequence for instance.
There were a lot of elements to Jackson's Kong that I liked including the ape but comparatively the '76 film was about the story of Kong...Jackson's was about CGI graphics. It was hollow and WAY over the top.
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 ...yes...and Baker was absent from the original credits...it was almost as if DeLaurentis wanted the public to believe that it was entirely done with the robot...and the robot, with its wide shoulders, and blank stare, looks NOTHING like Baker in the suit...
..this movie is so much better than jacksons version....and kong is much more impressive BECAUSE its just a man in a suit....apes are like human...jacksons kong is just a CGI-Monster with less heart....this movie is very underrated...
Of course CGI is fake! I hate when I'm watching a movie and there's blood or something, they're like "oh that's so fake!" I'm like "BECAUSE IT IS FAKE". It's fake because there is no such thing as a 25 foot gorilla! So if you prefer no CGI, wonderful. Just stop going on about how it's fake, because we all know it is.
I wonder if that trailer voice over guy ever got tired of saying "King Kong!" lol...I think he says it like 8 times in the span of 2 and a half minutes. Seriously though, as lacking as this movie is in a lot of ways, I'll always love it if for no other reason than it and it's sequel King Kong Lives are what introduced me to the character.
@BobaFettRules321 Iwas expecting some bullets with mustaches to come fling threw the air,or a smuling boot to hop threw the king kong c.g versions.I could of swore toon town wasn't that far away from staw wars episodes 1-3.LOL i wonder if the pod races are in toon town.LOL
Kong, there's no way your getting your stick into her hole without ripping her to shreds. If you really love her Kong you could never do her; at least you can never do her without killing her.
And the original one... okey, I get it, it's made 33. But it still still looks do dumb watching it today. Mostly because of the retarded weird faces King Kong does.
An exceedingly successful new edition of the original of 1933 which director John Guillermin with wonderful Jessica Lange, vigourous Jeff Bridges and delightfully unprincipled Charles Grodin created in the leading roles. Today the ecological message is also not to be dismissed: the person becomes with pleasure the nature despising monster if the payment is right. For it every means are right to him, also animal cruelty. Lots of love and happy easter from Germany.
I love this version of King Kong. The 1933 version was really good and the 2005 one was very well done and included every bit of plot possible but I just love the style and simpleness of this one. My own opinion.
The '76 King Kong still sometimes scares the living shit out of me haha xD Don't really like the song that plays just before Kong comes out from the forest.. And he is way taller in this version, than he is in the '33 and '05 version. The director actually wanted it to be so. But Kong himself isn't very realistic at all in this movie, it is actually the make up designer Rick Baker in a costume. The '05 version is very well done, but sometimes maybe TOO much special effects. It is not scary..
This movie was terrible. The original is and always will be the best one. The 2005 version was also very well-done. But this 1976 one is a piece of crap! I mean, Jessica Lange is like drunk through the whole entire movie!
@Paulewog123 . My problem with the 2005 one is the fact that everybody got impressed by the ape. But nobody seems to care about the fact that are living dinosaurs running around that island!?
@junglemanlawyer1 If I recall correctly, Peter Jackson removed a scene identical to the certopian one from the original in which the rescue party first encounters a dino. It's only on the extended version of the movie, and kinda mucks up their reactions afterwards.
@FuckWorkdays Yes , so I've heard. I didn't have the chance to watch the original one yet. I like the 1976 one because the ape is scary not cuddly like the Jackson's one.
This has been flagged as spam show
imagine this in 3D
mostafapopular 2 weeks ago
I simply love this movie, it is perhaps the worst of the King Kong movies (yeah, I do like the special effects on the 2005 remake, and the 1933 original can't be challenged) yet it is by far one of the better movies I've ever seen! As someone else mentioned, the soundtrack of this movie is the best out of the three King Kong, it is chilling and "haunting" sometimes! Kong is also biggest in this movie! THere's something about this movie that terryfied me as a kid... love it! :D
Spyflugan91 2 weeks ago
My parents took my sister and I to see this movie when we were six years old. It simply terrified me.
ds41980 1 month ago
@ds41980 I was 8. Me & my brother talked about this for at least a year.
superclam66 1 month ago
I loved the original, this one was ok and the newest one is my all time favorite movie!
JACKO6622 1 month ago
i think both the 1933 version and the 2005 version are both great films loaded with imagination, the 1976 version does do things differently but I dont think that makes this one bad or uncreative, it just has a more simple tone to it which i think gives this one a sharp and classy modern feel to it which i actually loved, this one also has the best musical score of the 3 imopo, and the leading cast was fantastic, i'd say this one is arguably just as good as the other two.
Cropsy25 2 months ago 5
Jessica Lange is the most beautiful woman I have ever seen. She is absolutely divine, and if there is a heaven then I want to meet her there and propose to her. Oh, and incidentally, this is a brilliant film with an ending so sad it made me cry the first time I watched it.
beinndorainjames 2 months ago 2
@beinndorainjames Let's hope we're all young again in heaven then.
aigg 2 months ago
Comment removed
beinndorainjames 2 months ago
The greatest remake of all time !
laceypacey 2 months ago
I love this remake king kong; iwent to the movies to see it ,he sure was a big and very strong,beautiy and the beast,Jessica Lange was hes weekness,lucky fella.
memphisjohn59 2 months ago
I remeber having horrific nightmares about this Kong peering into my window and then chasing me through my village, great childhood film, as much as the 1933 original, but for me, that film is the insperation for my love of film, this one, was a great adventure yarn :)
Nchubbz 3 months ago
It makes the original movie look GREAT CLASSIC indeed !
Ahmedabdelreheem 3 months ago
This was a lousy remake.
TheBestComicKing 3 months ago
@TheBestComicKing
I have to agree, all the wonder, passion, and fantasy that made the orginal Kong great is gone. FYI I don't care how beautfiul Jessica Lang looks, I despise the human characters with a passion, and Dwan tops the list.
snakes3425 2 months ago
It's so hilarious how people love to rag on this movie. As if they've forgotten what an amazing benchmark it is in the history of movie making. Despite the obvious 'let down' of the 40 million dollar Kong robot which is only on screen for maybe 8 seconds, (which in itself is HILARIOUSLY bench-mark personifying what an amazing, EXCESSIVE era this was for filmmakers.) Anything went, and did! Even now people will sit through this, yet not necessarily through Peter Jackson's 3 hour long CGI fest.
CptQuestionMark 3 months ago
I love the 1933 version as it is the classic one, and then I just freaked out in happiness when the 2005 remake came. None of these actually frightened me alot, but it was this 1976 version that litterally scared the living shit out of me! I don't know, I saw this version as an 8 year old kid (and had then allreadyt seen the 1933 version with dad when I was just about 3) and the music and the way they build up the whole beginning of the altar sacrifice scene is for me kinda scary. Kong is huge!
Spyflugan91 3 months ago 2
and for the first time this King Kong beat on his chest like a real gorilla did, the yell for King Kong in the movie was from a African Elephant, I saw a documentary and when I heard that African Elephant yell I said that was where they got that yell from, if I were in Africa and heard that sound that would be pretty frightening
stretch4859 3 months ago
this and next movies was the greatest. First one was too old, latest one is too modern and too much dinosaurs. This and KKLives is classic to me
AKanyon 3 months ago
@AKanyon I agree with you, i think the '76 version was the most enjoyableof the three. I really can't stand the cartoony cgi used in the new version.. However, i think the 1986 kklives was pretty silly, for so many reasons. That's my opinion, anyway. :)
aigg 3 months ago
the story is a bit lame at times, and it is NOTHING compared to the original one, it is good, but not worthy
spiderlolo100 3 months ago
@spiderlolo100 It's certainly better than the 2005 version.
aigg 3 months ago
@aigg yikes, i personaly really like the 2005 version, i really like how it took place in the same time period, the story stays extremely close to the original, and the acting... most are just good, some are great
wich is much more than i can say for this film
spiderlolo100 3 months ago
@spiderlolo100 Fair enough. I guess the fact that this was the first version i saw had something to do with it. Still, i really have strong distaste for large amounts of semi-convincing CGI.
aigg 3 months ago
@aigg ok, you have a strong distaste for cgi, fine, we are all entitled to our opinions anyway
spiderlolo100 3 months ago
the be version are you jokeing beindorainjames our drunkk?
chism26 4 months ago
I kinde of liked it when I was a kid but Not mutch the first was the one I watched
chism26 4 months ago
The first and so far the only King Kong movie I have ever seen
Have fond memories of this, late summer night as a kid watching this ^^
How I look at the movie today might differ, but as a kid I really liked it
Now I need to see two more KK movies
The original and King Kong...
vs Godzilla :)
SolidMike84 4 months ago
This is the best version by a country mile, the ending is truly heartbreaking. Both Jeff Bridges and the stunningly beautiful Jessica Lange are superb. The 2005 remake had lots of fancy CGI, but was as emotionally engaging as a pot of yoghurt.
beinndorainjames 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
One of the best films of all time.
Showinbulge 4 months ago
king kong, king kong, king kong, KIIIING KOOOONG xD
blumdibum 4 months ago
actually the 2005 is only part cgi. there was still a guy in a suit doing the movements and facial expressions. so calling it souless cgi only proves your own ignorance. do your homework. this movie was good but the 05 was made with much more respect and love for the 1933 original (which was the best one either way)
dextreme69 4 months ago
@dextreme69 Please do not use the word ignorance, when it is clear you have no good reason for doing so. Yes, i am aware of Andy Serkis' work on both lotr and king kong. However, when dealing with the digital artistic impression, it really doesn't matter. The end result still looks digital as hell, and thats the problem. All though i must admit that there exist some pretty convincing digital effects that were used in a clever way; this was not the case in this movie. Digital has to be PERFECT.
aigg 4 months ago
@aigg My bad i jumped the gun. i do have a good reason for saying ignorance because 90% of the time thats what i deal with when it comes to people "knowing" their movies. but its clear you know your stuff. and your right it does have to be perfect. i just wouldnt quite say its souless. im not defending digital effects (ill take a guy in a rubber costume or stop motion any day) but the 2005 film usually doesnt get enough credit for the things it did do right.
dextreme69 4 months ago
I like the part where the guy says "King Kong"
slangshotstudios 4 months ago
ok not for anything but ppl trying to say the 2005 version was heartless and this kong looked better is just laughable im not saying i didn't like this movie because i actually love it but the 2005 version is very good and showes a lot of heart & creativity, but the way i see it the 1933 version is the original calssic but comparing 1976 to 2005 i would say 76 has great acting, the sexiest kong girl, & amazing musical scores bt 05 has the effects, adventure, heart & suspense, both good movies.
Cropsy25 5 months ago
Wow, 3 versions of King Kong. Wait 30 years and we will see the fourth!!
SolitaryShark 5 months ago
Here's my opinion.
The stop-motion Kong looks more real than CGi Kong, but CGI Kong's movements are more fluid and life-like than stop motion Kong.
But, a man in a Kong suit... looks like a man, in a Kong suit.
FlyingFocs 5 months ago
ape suit is better than cgi, original model stop motion is better than ape suit
tmattyman 5 months ago
I'm sorry. What's the name of this movie again?
Joelaroc7 5 months ago 19
@Joelaroc7 KING KONG
BOURBONJULIO 3 weeks ago
"The most exciting ORIGINAL motion picture?"
cfronck 5 months ago
@cfronck Dude, I was just about to say...
FlyingFocs 5 months ago
I dont usually mind the effects of a movie unless it was painfully obvious, and this movies effects were ok. Its the story and acting that win a movie, and this one did it well too. :)
alexbc7493 6 months ago
jaajaaaja no deja de decir KING KONG y se ve que es un man disfrazado pero si no hubiera pasado no estaríamos con los efectos de ahora
joeyh156 6 months ago
@MrCybersony i know i meant how on earth is this original as they call it?
EdgoIsGo 6 months ago
Jessica!! I mean Mrs. Lange....
hopperzone 6 months ago
original.
EdgoIsGo 6 months ago
@aigg: Touche~.
kovik62 7 months ago
This film is pretty bad, but next to Peter Jackson's overindulgent opus, it comes off as more original in concept, and that always works to a film's advantage. It shows an effort was made to do something other than tread on classic territory. If the '05 version can be said to have done anything of note, it's that it unintentionally put the previously bashed '76 version in a better light. More people are gradually realizing this.
kovik62 7 months ago
@kovik62 I could not agree more. I hear alot of people complaining about how the '76 version is not true to the original film. But why would anyone want it to be? We already have the original; i don't see the point in trying to copy it. I find the '76 version to be a breath of fresh air, not like the overlong, poorly acted cgi nightmare of '05. The '76 clearly has it's flaws, but compared to the '05, it is certainly the better picture.
aigg 7 months ago
This film is pretty bad, but next to Peter Jackson's overindulgent version, it comes off as more original in concept, and that always works to a film's advantage. It shows an effort was made to do something other than tread on classic territory. If the '05 version can be said to have done anything of note, it's that it unintentionally put the heretofore bashed '76 version in a better light.
kovik62 7 months ago
@snakes3425 Btw, the crown scene is the only scene where the full scale 40 foot "robot" is used, and only for a few seconds. It looks absolutely ridiculous, and completely different from the Baker suit. I have wondered many times why they included it at all. I guess the only reason would be so that no one could say there was no robot, as advertised. Alot of people back then believed they were watching a robot throughout the movie. Thats absurd!
aigg 7 months ago
@aigg
that's probably because Kong in the 76 film walks upright, like a human, he doesn't stand or walk like a Gorillia. I still wonder why Dinosaurs weren't included in the 1976 film, Toho produced King Kong Escapes nearly a decade earlier, with an actor playing the dinosaur Gorosaurus in a rubber suit, so why they didn't make Dinosaur costumes or puppets still bothers me
snakes3425 7 months ago
@aigg
Rediculous is an understament, it pretty much reduced Kong to a joke, like I said I hark on Kong 76 so much because the script is a complete disaster, of all the things I don't want to hear in a King Kong remake are lines about the SPCA setting up a Fund for Sending Kong back home or how taking Kong from the island robbed the natives of their mysticism
snakes3425 7 months ago
@GoRamonez Well, the 2005 version chose to go old slyle, the '76 version chose not to. I don't see why it's a problem that the '76 version is not identical to the original. I mean, if you want the original, the go watch the original! Neither '76 or '05 i gonna do the original better han the original anyway. I'm glad '76 went another way, otherwise we would have three identical stories. And yes, he is supposed to climb the esb, IN THE OLD MOVIE! Not in this one. Different story. Thats ok!
aigg 7 months ago
@aigg
Dino felt that audiences in the 70s wouldn't accept a respectful remake of Kong despite many having seen the 33 verson on TV or in re-releases, the whole movie focuses too much on being environmentalist, had they not spent 90% of the budget on lawyers we might had gotten a more faithful remake. ironically the lawsuits over the making of Kong 76 allowed a small company to win a similar copyright lawsuit a few years later, that company: Nintendo
snakes3425 7 months ago in playlist King Kong
@snakes3425 Thats some really interesting trivia, thanks. To be honest, i think its likely that some of my facination for this film stems from the fact that i saw it as a kid. So there is an element of nostalgia, i guess. Regardless, i think this film is way better than it's reputation. It's certainly not a masterpiece, but it has it's qualities. Among those are a wonderful music score by John Barry, much better than the 2005 score imo. The visuals are not that bad, and better yet: it's not CGI!
aigg 7 months ago
@aigg
Story goes RKO still owned the copyright on the orignal Kong and a miscommunitcation led to both Universal and Dino believing they had the rights to do a remake, Universal then found a loophole, while RKO still owned the movie's copyright they didn't own the rights to novel adaptation of the original screenplay and went ahead with a remake titled the Legend of King Kong which was aborted after a settlement, this case was the reason why Nintendo won the Universal Lawsuit over Donkey Kong
snakes3425 7 months ago
@aigg
I've actually heard Rick Baker, who played Kong and helped design the suit wasn't happy with how the suit turned out irony is the 1976 Kong Suit and the 2005 CGI Kong both won the Oscar for best Visual Effects, although the 1976 verson had to share it with Logan's Run
snakes3425 7 months ago
@aigg
CGI and Stop Motion only are effective if done by people who are talented artists and have the patients to do it right, the suit verson I hark on a lot because the script is a mess with too much focus on Environmentalism and has more to do with Jaws then King Kong, what ruined the film for me was the scene before Kong escapes, seeing King Kong in a cage with a goofy crown on his head was too much, that and the fact that the sequal King Kong Lives was a total disaster
snakes3425 7 months ago
Comment removed
aigg 7 months ago
Also it was a tribute to the original movie
GoRamonez 7 months ago
Comment removed
aigg 7 months ago
@ManOfWealthnTaste no it isn't go watch king kong 2005 this doesn't show any love or affection to the first movie the director didn't care about the old movie style it's no supposed to be a modern king kong it's supposed to be in it's original style also the characters aren't even right. Jack Prescott? The movie is crappy and he is supposed to climb the Empire state building not the fucking word trade center! He gets shot down by choppers with fucking mini guns! They did not made it like the or
GoRamonez 7 months ago
I'm probably going to get flammed for saying this but the 2005 Kong is the superior remake (note I say remake) Kong 05 was made with passion and resepect for the original. The 1976 film: the trailer alone shows there was no love or respect for the orignal Kong, and no Jessica Lange in skimpy outfits doesn't make up for the fact the director and producers had no love or respect for what made the orginal great, they wanted a Jaws esq environmental disaster movie with Kong attached for name value
snakes3425 7 months ago
@snakes3425 the 2005 version looks so damn cartoony with all that cgi going on at all times. Also, i think they did a horrible job casting for that one. Lots of bad performances, notably Black and Brody, pluss they're just wrong for their parts. And its WAY too long. I'll take the '76 version over the '05 version any day. CGI SUCKS. (when it looks like cgi)
aigg 7 months ago
@aigg
The effects and length weren't what I was talking about, and they weren't what made Kong 33 great, it was the love and passion the filmakers and effects people had for the project, love and passion for Kong is, something Jackson's verson had that the 76 verson didn't. There is no sense of wonder or mystery, there are no Dinosaurs or other fantastic creatures, all that's there is the plot but there is no love or passion for the orginal King Kong present in the 1976 film
snakes3425 7 months ago
@snakes3425 I can see what you mean. I guess it's just a matter of preferences. It is much easier for me to get emotionally envolved in the 1976 version. I also think it has a music score far superior to the '05 score. Personally, i have no reason not to believe Jacksons heartfelt respect to the original, i just didn't feel that he delivered the goods. Also, for me, a guy in an apesuit worked better than cgi. It's just something with that videogame feel that rubs me the wrong way.
aigg 7 months ago
This is the best King Kong movie to date. Jeff Bridges is excellent in this movie.
ManOfWealthnTaste 7 months ago
I think Jessica Lange looks absolutely breathtaking in this movie. I Just wanna protect her. Most beautiful kong girl, no doubt. Also, a man in an apesuit beats the crap out of the soulless cgi used in the 2005 remake. CGI needs to DIE, because even good CGI looks like just that, thus good cgi doesnt exist. Makes everything look cartoony no matter what.
aigg 8 months ago 24
@aigg Well, I agree with you about Jessica Lange but Willis O Brians stop-motion Kong and Peter Jacksons CGI one are both better than the near expressionless of this one....
AungUnElric 7 months ago
@aigg
Wasn't soulless CGI. It was better than Gollum.
degree7 6 months ago
@degree7 It certainly was better than Gollum, but the thing with Cgi is that when it's not 100% the illusion crumbles like a house of cards. Suddenly the feeling is that you might aswell be watching an advanced videogame unfold before your eyes. Well, almost. There are tons of bad special effects out there, of which king kong 2005 is not the worst example. But it looks digital. It looks cartoony. It looks fake.
aigg 6 months ago
@aigg
You know what else looks fake?
Yoda. He's a puppet.
All I'm saying is, suspension of disbelief.
degree7 6 months ago
@aigg Thats the meaning of MOVIES. dont u get that !!! to look forward then reality wtf is ur problem
cows247 5 months ago
@aigg I would have to disagree IMO i think they 2005 version had the best character development of the 3 and the most compelling story, although the original is still king the cgi version is 20 times better than a man in a suit in my opinion plus the acting in this one kind of sucked
MrKabutoYakushi 4 months ago
@aigg Nothing beats the original Kong. Fay Wray and stop-motion, all the way!!! :D
MrMonkipuzzle 4 months ago
I prefer this to the 2008 remake!
teenybopperify 8 months ago
This is one of the first movies I can remember, and I can tell you, it scarred me.
matthewakian2 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
t's so hilarious how people love to rag on this movie. As if they've forgotten what an amazing benchmark it is in the history of movie making. Despite the obvious 'let down' of the 40 million dollar Kong robot which is only on screen for maybe 8 seconds, (which in itself is HILARIOUSLY bench-mark personifying what an amazing, EXCESSIVE era this was for filmmakers.) Anything went, and did! Even now people will sit through this, yet not necessarily through Peter Jackson's 3 hour long CGI fest
showho 8 months ago
wait.... what's the title again?
TheMotionMan112 8 months ago
The thing about the flamthrower scene: When I first saw it on TV (many years after its premiere), I half expected the three guys to be Bill Murray, Dan Akyroyd and Harold Ramis ... these names ringing something?
Daniel4646 8 months ago
"Mark Henry!"
bigroy38 8 months ago
wait.... whats the movie called again?
xAnnabellafulx 9 months ago
@xAnnabellafulx KINNGGGGG KONNNNGGGGG :P
SimonBenjaminLey 8 months ago
It said an 'original motion picture'...
I thought it was a remake?
emoturbin 9 months ago
This is a trailer for Mighty Joe Young, right?
jtreese5787 9 months ago
@jtreese5787 no king kong 1976 it had a squel king kong lives.
MOVIEmania709 9 months ago
my dad took me to the cinema and this trailer came on, my dad said, 'this is good' many years later i still remembered it because the anouncer kept repeating the title, this trailer on here brought it all back to me as my dad is no longer alive now, so thanks to the one who posted it!
Loverboy19691 9 months ago
I'm Sorry Mr. Announcer, But I And Many Other Viewers May Forget What The Name Of The Movie Is, So Can You Keep Telling Us What The Name Of It Is So We Don't Forget??? Thank You :)
DylanBStringer91 9 months ago
and dont forget KING KONG
felixplan 9 months ago 2
you know, this was the first King Kong movie I've ever seen .... and it has always been my favorite version.
tabs157 10 months ago
is the voiceover annoucer Jim Earl Jones?
masterdan13 10 months ago
hi im from surabaya just like the place where this film begin :)
doel4484 10 months ago
Cryptozoology novel see video book trailer
dltanner99 10 months ago
1933 > 2005 > 1976
Northisbest 10 months ago
".. the most original movie of all time..." yeah right.
EdgoIsGo 11 months ago 2
He certainly looks the part with that beard in this movie
sugreev2001 11 months ago
Jeff Bridges is the SON OF KING KONG !
sugreev2001 11 months ago
if forgot to mention King Kong
MrYevrah 11 months ago
I was six years old when this movie came out and it was very frightening in the theatre. I love the story behind this film. Charles Grodin is full retired now. I wish he would be in the new Midnight Run movie with Robert Deniro I hear is in the making.
But getting back to King Kong, this 1976 film was fantastic.
liondoghound 1 year ago 3
I'm possibly overly sentimental about this film because I was ten when I first saw it and have always loved it, but I feel that it has so much more heart than Peter Jackson's visually stunning, but emotionally hollow, remake. The love story between Dwan and Jack was fully developed which made it much more believable when he risked his life to save her on Skull Island. Kong was false looking but seemed far more real and alive than Jackson's ape, and the music was absolutely wonderful.
rees276 1 year ago
@rees276 Kong was actually not that bad looking for that time period. You gotta remember that this is a film from 1976. I agree the music was awesome in this film. I liked this film and saw it numerous times when I was a kid.
preo2 10 months ago
Did he say exciting ORIGINAL motion picture event? Original? lol unlike anything before :p
TotalComposure 1 year ago
Did he say exciting ORIGINAL motion picture event? Original?
TotalComposure 1 year ago
don't feed the ape
avalanche170 1 year ago
Special Effects artist Rick Baker made the Kong Suit and played Kong in the film.
GESSO217 1 year ago
How can it be an "original motion picture event" when it's a remake. And a pretty poor one at that. The 1930s version is a marvellous black and white engraving which was used as the basis for an incredible full colour painting by Peter Jackson in 2005.
Cool2BCeltic 1 year ago
i don't get why they say the title over and over and over and over AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER again.
xkruulx 1 year ago 17
@xkruulx Yes, had that same thought. It's not like none of us has ever heard of the title before.
jgrab1 1 year ago
@xkruulx mostly in all older movie trailers, they would say the title over and over again.
xproxmetalxheadx 9 months ago
RIP Dino! I agree with MGR1900, I too thought this film was unfairly panned. I saw it when I was 8 years old growing up in the sticks of South Carolina. It started a lifetime fascination with New York City for me, and I have been living in NYC now for several years and I've loved and enjoyed every aspect of it. Thanks Dino!!!!!! :)
dwood37 1 year ago
Dino Delaurentis RIP
acholl980 1 year ago
So *that's* what The Dude was doing in 1976.
axisoffeeble 1 year ago
When Kong first picks Anne up she sounds more like she's being tickled.
StarFoxAutobot 1 year ago
I prefer jacksons remake,
bigbadpoo 1 year ago
@bigbadpoo but if peter made it in 1976 it would be the same .
tarekyeerum2006 1 year ago
@bigbadpoo i i think its Tony or something...
IKTMan13 1 year ago
So, what's the ape's name again?
DulBeat 1 year ago 3
@DulBeat king kong
abc12319525 1 year ago
I have 3 years old when this movie came out....Its really scare to me in that time...i think that the version of 2005 was more adventure like...
romeonarcizo 1 year ago
Supposedly Dino DeLaurentiis wanted to make Kong a sympathetic character: "Nobody cry (sic) when Jaws die (sic)"
raccoonradio2 1 year ago
@a12509 whoever agrees with you has shit for brains you think its better because more fighting and dinos boo this and the classic were great shit for brains oh and your brain literly is shit
vastotensa 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@vastotensa If you are going to call someoen out for having " shit for brains oh and your brain literly is shit "...learn how to spell 'literally'...or it makes YOU look like the one that has shit for brains...literally..
joeyvader 1 year ago
All of you people who think this was better than Peter Jackson's King Kong have shit for brains.
a121509 1 year ago
Trailer voice said "King Kong!" for like 5 times!
Like we don't know the title...
timdedecker 1 year ago
Surprisingly, I enjoyed this movie as a whole more than I did the 05 remake. Sure, this version doesn't top the classic and did have some minor flaws, but Jeff Bridges was great, Rick Baker's effects were good, and everything served to build the story up. The 05 remake overdid many of the classic elements and added in lots of other things that were more distracting than exemplifying. Like the addition and extension of the spider pit sequence for instance.
PTSmash 1 year ago
There were a lot of elements to Jackson's Kong that I liked including the ape but comparatively the '76 film was about the story of Kong...Jackson's was about CGI graphics. It was hollow and WAY over the top.
thestromberg5 1 year ago
i saw the movie yesterday and that is one horny monkey
MrFalloutUniverse 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
@coolrog0705 ...yes...and Baker was absent from the original credits...it was almost as if DeLaurentis wanted the public to believe that it was entirely done with the robot...and the robot, with its wide shoulders, and blank stare, looks NOTHING like Baker in the suit...
joeyvader 1 year ago
..this movie is so much better than jacksons version....and kong is much more impressive BECAUSE its just a man in a suit....apes are like human...jacksons kong is just a CGI-Monster with less heart....this movie is very underrated...
brmoogma 1 year ago
mgr....i agree totally!!! this movie so much better than jacksons pile of shit c.g.i fiasco its not even funny......
rocketman6464 1 year ago
fuck everyboy, all king kong movies were GREAT, period
TheSlasherguy 1 year ago 21
@TheSlasherguy right !!! i like me too
queenmagic1982 8 months ago
@TheSlasherguy not this one
NYC99507 7 months ago
Only thing worthwhile about this version to me? JOHN BARRY!!!!
GeneralZodFDNY77 1 year ago
I liked this film as a kid, but it's painful to watch it now, laughable in fact.
lefty5128 1 year ago
Of course CGI is fake! I hate when I'm watching a movie and there's blood or something, they're like "oh that's so fake!" I'm like "BECAUSE IT IS FAKE". It's fake because there is no such thing as a 25 foot gorilla! So if you prefer no CGI, wonderful. Just stop going on about how it's fake, because we all know it is.
PassionPulp 1 year ago
@PassionPulp
As I giant Gorilla Knocks on your window with a butterlfy knife in his hand.....
RedEliteFilms 1 year ago
Comment removed
jtsales 1 year ago
I wonder if that trailer voice over guy ever got tired of saying "King Kong!" lol...I think he says it like 8 times in the span of 2 and a half minutes. Seriously though, as lacking as this movie is in a lot of ways, I'll always love it if for no other reason than it and it's sequel King Kong Lives are what introduced me to the character.
FC606 1 year ago
@FC606 5 times to exact
jmwestful 1 year ago
This is a million times better than that c.g.shit.
dad2ujunior 1 year ago
not it isn't! I don't care how much ur against CG it's still better than laughable guy in ape suit and obvious green screens!
BobaFettRules321 1 year ago
@BobaFettRules321 Iwas expecting some bullets with mustaches to come fling threw the air,or a smuling boot to hop threw the king kong c.g versions.I could of swore toon town wasn't that far away from staw wars episodes 1-3.LOL i wonder if the pod races are in toon town.LOL
dad2ujunior 1 year ago
Kong, there's no way your getting your stick into her hole without ripping her to shreds. If you really love her Kong you could never do her; at least you can never do her without killing her.
1970sFeel 1 year ago
2005 was the best one. 1976 sucked ass. 2005 is so much better
chuckycosgrove2 1 year ago
@chuckycosgrove2 you wish the 2005 was better that c.g is so fake its a disgrace to movies.
dad2ujunior 1 year ago
@chuckycosgrove2 yeah, i agree. king kong in 1976 and 1933 was so, so silly
ClubDominoEnglish 1 year ago
This wasn't as bad as people put it out to be. The 2005 version def was not the best of the three main ones. Still, the best is the 1933 one.
TheDirectorofFoo 1 year ago 4
at least the suit is better than the Japanese kong suit
oiramldx 1 year ago
god that looks like crap
ryananderson280195 1 year ago
I wanted to see some dinosaurs in this verison, but didn't have any and King Kong never fought with any monsters in this one (I think)
XYZsquad 1 year ago
2005 is the best, but this one looks cool.
EdwardNygma1 1 year ago 2
Worse than those Head-on commercials. "King Kong: apply directly to theaters near you."
Gojiralee 1 year ago
all i hear is KING KONG, KING KONG, KING KONG.... jeez how many times...
kodemasterx 1 year ago 4
Jessica Lange was hawt!
MorliHolect 1 year ago 4
Best version of King Kong in my opinion!
And the original one... okey, I get it, it's made 33. But it still still looks do dumb watching it today. Mostly because of the retarded weird faces King Kong does.
XGLDF 1 year ago
The 1976 King Kong was scary! The 2005 one was boring.
rubroxato88 1 year ago
They said king kong every damn 10 seconds on this thing... :(
ribenawrath 1 year ago
An exceedingly successful new edition of the original of 1933 which director John Guillermin with wonderful Jessica Lange, vigourous Jeff Bridges and delightfully unprincipled Charles Grodin created in the leading roles. Today the ecological message is also not to be dismissed: the person becomes with pleasure the nature despising monster if the payment is right. For it every means are right to him, also animal cruelty. Lots of love and happy easter from Germany.
musicfreak1967 1 year ago
I love this version of King Kong. The 1933 version was really good and the 2005 one was very well done and included every bit of plot possible but I just love the style and simpleness of this one. My own opinion.
greenfairy521 1 year ago
Im my mind this is a Big Lebowski prequel
ReverendSteveG 1 year ago 2
The '76 King Kong still sometimes scares the living shit out of me haha xD Don't really like the song that plays just before Kong comes out from the forest.. And he is way taller in this version, than he is in the '33 and '05 version. The director actually wanted it to be so. But Kong himself isn't very realistic at all in this movie, it is actually the make up designer Rick Baker in a costume. The '05 version is very well done, but sometimes maybe TOO much special effects. It is not scary..
Spyflugan91 1 year ago
This movie was terrible. The original is and always will be the best one. The 2005 version was also very well-done. But this 1976 one is a piece of crap! I mean, Jessica Lange is like drunk through the whole entire movie!
Paulewog123 1 year ago
@Paulewog123 . My problem with the 2005 one is the fact that everybody got impressed by the ape. But nobody seems to care about the fact that are living dinosaurs running around that island!?
junglemanlawyer1 1 year ago 37
@junglemanlawyer1 If I recall correctly, Peter Jackson removed a scene identical to the certopian one from the original in which the rescue party first encounters a dino. It's only on the extended version of the movie, and kinda mucks up their reactions afterwards.
Catalyst455931 1 year ago
@junglemanlawyer1 i know. that's the most fascinating thing about the island
jmwestful 1 year ago
@jmwestful Yep! Isn't that something?
junglemanlawyer1 1 year ago
@junglemanlawyer1 there were dinosaurs in the original 1933 version too
FuckWorkdays 1 year ago
@FuckWorkdays Yes , so I've heard. I didn't have the chance to watch the original one yet. I like the 1976 one because the ape is scary not cuddly like the Jackson's one.
junglemanlawyer1 1 year ago
@junglemanlawyer1 - The original ape is well scary.
missbabyice 1 year ago
@junglemanlawyer1 yeah lol
abc12319525 1 year ago
@junglemanlawyer1 in a story about a fifty foot gorilla what is the problem with creatures that resemble dinosaurs.
dumbledizzle 11 months ago