This was meant as a "campy" remake of the '33 classic, and when viewed in that spirit it works better than the overcooked '05 version. Sure that robot looked like it was gonna fall over, the snake was cheesy as cheese, but it at least updated the story and didn't rip off dialog and music from the original and try to pass it off as some phony "homage" to it. It's also noteworthy for it's somewhat prophetic depiction of the lost World Trade Center.
what make this movie the best? is unic is just no ater manster that can comper kong is a finction but also code be real cose the world after all was made from giant creature
Well you don't have to explain or convince me. I understand. There's just a certain charm and magic and intrigue to this version and to a lota cinema in the 70's in general. Kong is meant to be fun , silly and give a message about greed and this version certanly gives that.
I totally agree. This is not a perfect film for sure. But it does have a mystique and a sense of adventure to it that still enthralls me. Much has to be given to John Barry and his VERY evocative score that gives the film a large grand feel. I get the feeling Peter Jackson made his just to shoot the last 15 min portion. Which honestly was well done. The rest i thought was utterly forgettable. Regardless of the technological advances. There has to be a reason you remember this?
I certainly agree with a lot of that. I think Jackson's does have merit and tech. And for me , I love just about anything Kong. But the fun , adventure , style and sexiness would have to go to this Dino De Laurentiis' version. It's just so enjoyable and hammy and unforgetable. Goes to show ya we can have the tech in the world and not reach the level they did 30 yrs ago.
I mean i STILL remember this film today. Sure it has shortcomings. But i think the reason i enjoy it still is because it has good build up to the major sequences and a real sense of adventure. I liked Bridges too. Thought he had a commanding presence in this and was VERY believable. I found Jackson's incredibly silly in spost. Laughably silly (the dino stampede was a 100% joke). I absolutely hated Jack Black in the role totally wrong for the part. Jackson's left hardly any impact on me.
Well , it's not always about if a film has shortcomings or is perfect. All it needs is that little bit of magic. Bridges did a wonderful job and was very strong in this early role. One thing that certainly trumps Jackson's version is the setup and buildup too the Island and Kong himself.
Wonderful mood by John Barry's score the film has a real identity through this. Good themes and markers. Jackson's i couldn't remember any of it. For me the build up to Kong appearing in the 76 version is FABULOUS and then Jessica L slow look up to see what is in front of her then the wide reveal to Kong. It still gives me a shiver today. Jackson's happens too fast. Also Jackson's just has a kind overdone CG look to it the 76 one is much more organic and real.
You know actually the first incounter with Kong and Dawn was much more like the original in terms of scale , camera work and buildup then Jackson's 2005 version. And too be perfectly honest , I thought that there was some spots were the special effects were obvious and hammy and thought that the Oscar should have gone too Star Wars III.
If i recall. The special effects artists of the time were appalled that Kong got an oscar for visual effects. It is indeed very shoddy work. The blue screen elements are horribly aligned and bleed very badly behind Kong. In the Helicopter attack at the end you can see BG plates that are obviously shot with panning cameras put up behind a static Kong on the WTC. They look abysmal. Be that as it may i STILL enjoy this film over Peter Jackson's utter junk. Technology does not always win
Well I was actually refering to Jackson's Kong. Although , Andy Setis as Kong was amazing animation and performance , I didn't think that most of the film was that impressive. Many of the Island shots and action scenes looks obvious and even a little hookey.I'm not saying that it could'nt be epic or very good work , but I thought that the Oscar should have gone to Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith that year , instead of Kong.
My favorite King Kong movie. Jeff Bridges, Jessica Lange, Charles Grodin, John Randolph and Rene Auberjonois were brilliant. I love KK (2005) but that movie looked too unrealistic plus Jack Black was so irritating
Nothing beats the original for that is a true timeless classic, this one was just pointless to modernize it for the 70's. Peter Jackson did a better remake.
I like this one better! Obviously is a personal choice. First reason is that this one made me scared. The soundtrack helped. the second reason is that the special effects where real good! My father brought me to watch this one when I was 8, and later on I saw it on cable, and liked the same way. In the new version the ape doesn't scare anyone. And why no one in the movie got impressed by living dinosaurs?
Well, yes! As I said, the Jackson's ape wasn't scary, and it was actually cuddly. And all the characters where so impressed by the giant ape, but not impressed by the living dinosaurs? Nevertheless Jessica Lunge was HOT HOT HOT! The scene when she shows half of her butt was like soft porn for me! I was 8 when I watched the first time.
The problem with remakes set in present time is that nobody in the film is allowed to talk about the original version. The characters in this film live in a world in which the 1933 version of King Kong doesn't exist. Now that's a sad thought!
The story in this version is set in the 1970s. So the characters in this movie should know about the original version made in 1933, but I don't believe they talk about it. A bit strange after discovering a giant ape on a tropical island.
There are some movies that are not terrifically great but that fall into a kind of classic "bad movie" category. This is one of them. I actually have allot of fondness for this film. Despite its many elements of hokeyness. It has a good heart.
DIOTD2008 can you post some of the deleted sceens from this movie? I remember Kong Lifting up a car and slamming it into a building and exploded! There is also a longer snake fight sceen and a longer sceen where kong is trying to break down the wooden barracade. I know they are out there. many more sceens. thanx
The "longer" snake fight I do have and I will try to get that rendered and uploaded soon.
It's a slippery slope uploading deleted scenes on YT. If it stayed low profile with views I wouldn't worry but once it gets the hits somebody flags it for copyright infringement and poof! it goes. I will see what I can do. Thanks for the comment.
funny---i remember when he said that! My journalism feature article report was on king kong. i got an A+. can't say the same for the movie--even though i still enjoyed it.
This was meant as a "campy" remake of the '33 classic, and when viewed in that spirit it works better than the overcooked '05 version. Sure that robot looked like it was gonna fall over, the snake was cheesy as cheese, but it at least updated the story and didn't rip off dialog and music from the original and try to pass it off as some phony "homage" to it. It's also noteworthy for it's somewhat prophetic depiction of the lost World Trade Center.
kovik62 8 months ago
jessica lange could give a dog a bone
TheMashwatcher585 10 months ago
I loved this movie. I know I'm in the minority.
sianfennton 1 year ago
what make this movie the best? is unic is just no ater manster that can comper kong is a finction but also code be real cose the world after all was made from giant creature
metalheaddommyduk 1 year ago
@metalheaddommyduk I have no damned idea what you said, but I agree...
joeyvader 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this was i think of of the best movies ever made.
TheMashwatcher585 1 year ago
just goes to show how different things look and sound. Peter Jackson's K K has made it for me really hard to watch any of these.
Drstoo1 1 year ago
I'm sorry but this is THE BEST KING KONG EVER!!!
greenfairy521 1 year ago 2
will you stop saying KING KONG.
coninoandnonino 2 years ago 4
KING KONG
hsbrasil 2 years ago 2
Wrong.. This was MUCH better than Peter Jackson's....WAY better.
John22133 2 years ago 2
You know although Jackson's Kong may be techniqe-ly better I always find myself watching and enjoying this one more often.
jayce79 2 years ago
I was kinda disappoointed in Jackson's somewhat. Ii was "okay". This was superior.
John22133 2 years ago
Well you don't have to explain or convince me. I understand. There's just a certain charm and magic and intrigue to this version and to a lota cinema in the 70's in general. Kong is meant to be fun , silly and give a message about greed and this version certanly gives that.
jayce79 2 years ago
I totally agree. This is not a perfect film for sure. But it does have a mystique and a sense of adventure to it that still enthralls me. Much has to be given to John Barry and his VERY evocative score that gives the film a large grand feel. I get the feeling Peter Jackson made his just to shoot the last 15 min portion. Which honestly was well done. The rest i thought was utterly forgettable. Regardless of the technological advances. There has to be a reason you remember this?
roquefortfiles 2 years ago
I certainly agree with a lot of that. I think Jackson's does have merit and tech. And for me , I love just about anything Kong. But the fun , adventure , style and sexiness would have to go to this Dino De Laurentiis' version. It's just so enjoyable and hammy and unforgetable. Goes to show ya we can have the tech in the world and not reach the level they did 30 yrs ago.
jayce79 2 years ago
I mean i STILL remember this film today. Sure it has shortcomings. But i think the reason i enjoy it still is because it has good build up to the major sequences and a real sense of adventure. I liked Bridges too. Thought he had a commanding presence in this and was VERY believable. I found Jackson's incredibly silly in spost. Laughably silly (the dino stampede was a 100% joke). I absolutely hated Jack Black in the role totally wrong for the part. Jackson's left hardly any impact on me.
roquefortfiles 2 years ago
Well , it's not always about if a film has shortcomings or is perfect. All it needs is that little bit of magic. Bridges did a wonderful job and was very strong in this early role. One thing that certainly trumps Jackson's version is the setup and buildup too the Island and Kong himself.
jayce79 2 years ago
What i like about it:
Wonderful mood by John Barry's score the film has a real identity through this. Good themes and markers. Jackson's i couldn't remember any of it. For me the build up to Kong appearing in the 76 version is FABULOUS and then Jessica L slow look up to see what is in front of her then the wide reveal to Kong. It still gives me a shiver today. Jackson's happens too fast. Also Jackson's just has a kind overdone CG look to it the 76 one is much more organic and real.
roquefortfiles 2 years ago
Comment removed
jayce79 2 years ago
You know actually the first incounter with Kong and Dawn was much more like the original in terms of scale , camera work and buildup then Jackson's 2005 version. And too be perfectly honest , I thought that there was some spots were the special effects were obvious and hammy and thought that the Oscar should have gone too Star Wars III.
jayce79 2 years ago
If i recall. The special effects artists of the time were appalled that Kong got an oscar for visual effects. It is indeed very shoddy work. The blue screen elements are horribly aligned and bleed very badly behind Kong. In the Helicopter attack at the end you can see BG plates that are obviously shot with panning cameras put up behind a static Kong on the WTC. They look abysmal. Be that as it may i STILL enjoy this film over Peter Jackson's utter junk. Technology does not always win
roquefortfiles 2 years ago
Well I was actually refering to Jackson's Kong. Although , Andy Setis as Kong was amazing animation and performance , I didn't think that most of the film was that impressive. Many of the Island shots and action scenes looks obvious and even a little hookey.I'm not saying that it could'nt be epic or very good work , but I thought that the Oscar should have gone to Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith that year , instead of Kong.
jayce79 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
My favorite King Kong movie. Jeff Bridges, Jessica Lange, Charles Grodin, John Randolph and Rene Auberjonois were brilliant. I love KK (2005) but that movie looked too unrealistic plus Jack Black was so irritating
Magnolia296 2 years ago
There will always be something magical about 70's cinema.
jayce79 2 years ago
Nothing beats the original for that is a true timeless classic, this one was just pointless to modernize it for the 70's. Peter Jackson did a better remake.
Johnlindsey289 2 years ago
I like this one better! Obviously is a personal choice. First reason is that this one made me scared. The soundtrack helped. the second reason is that the special effects where real good! My father brought me to watch this one when I was 8, and later on I saw it on cable, and liked the same way. In the new version the ape doesn't scare anyone. And why no one in the movie got impressed by living dinosaurs?
rubroxato88 2 years ago
You think this one is better then Peter Jackson's 2005 remake? at least that was true to the original one.
Johnlindsey289 2 years ago
Well, yes! As I said, the Jackson's ape wasn't scary, and it was actually cuddly. And all the characters where so impressed by the giant ape, but not impressed by the living dinosaurs? Nevertheless Jessica Lunge was HOT HOT HOT! The scene when she shows half of her butt was like soft porn for me! I was 8 when I watched the first time.
rubroxato88 2 years ago
King Kong!
Valtinmuhis 2 years ago
The problem with remakes set in present time is that nobody in the film is allowed to talk about the original version. The characters in this film live in a world in which the 1933 version of King Kong doesn't exist. Now that's a sad thought!
videoclog 3 years ago
What?
jayce79 2 years ago
The story in this version is set in the 1970s. So the characters in this movie should know about the original version made in 1933, but I don't believe they talk about it. A bit strange after discovering a giant ape on a tropical island.
videoclog 2 years ago
Why would a remake talk about the original film onscreen? I've never heard of that.
jayce79 2 years ago
There are some movies that are not terrifically great but that fall into a kind of classic "bad movie" category. This is one of them. I actually have allot of fondness for this film. Despite its many elements of hokeyness. It has a good heart.
roquefortfiles 3 years ago
this was made after he fought godzilla
megaman2160 3 years ago
DIOTD2008 can you post some of the deleted sceens from this movie? I remember Kong Lifting up a car and slamming it into a building and exploded! There is also a longer snake fight sceen and a longer sceen where kong is trying to break down the wooden barracade. I know they are out there. many more sceens. thanx
gkmaster25 4 years ago
The "longer" snake fight I do have and I will try to get that rendered and uploaded soon.
It's a slippery slope uploading deleted scenes on YT. If it stayed low profile with views I wouldn't worry but once it gets the hits somebody flags it for copyright infringement and poof! it goes. I will see what I can do. Thanks for the comment.
DIOTD2008 4 years ago 2
Thanks dude. I will Videofet it as soon as I see It.
gkmaster25 4 years ago
@DIOTD2008 rar
fgh
panget5555 1 year ago
"When monkey die, everybody cry"-Dino De Laurentis.
Welcome back! :-D
ShiksaWithChutzpah1 4 years ago 2
Thank You. It's good to be back.
DIOTD2008 4 years ago
funny---i remember when he said that! My journalism feature article report was on king kong. i got an A+. can't say the same for the movie--even though i still enjoyed it.
tapthat2012 3 years ago