Peter Jackson's film was sentimental tripe, while the '70s Kong is an epic, thinking-man's adventure movie. Infinitely superior.
Samuel Jackson is out of place, as usual, but I'll still see this.
No. That's terrible the 70s film was rubbish that was trashed by the critics left and right. The 05 film was great and was commended and applauded by the critics as well.
shareWell i like both films. I think the 76 film is quite well done and underated. Jacksons film is good and I'm glad he set it in the 1930s but some of the scenes like the dinosaur stampede were unfinished and cartoonish.
Walking on water is like finding a non fake female profile on a dating site...a miracle!
Do you need the critics to wipe your butt as well?
shareMost agree that the 1970s film was trash. Use anything other than "because I liked it" to show that it was quality of any sort.
shareI don't know anyone who liked Jackson's Kong other than certain, generally fanboyish, critics. But you're half-right in that the 70s version is generally despised as well.
shareCan't we just admit that both movies are not perfect. The 70's film is pretty cheesy and the 2005 overly bloated and ridiculous at times. However both of the films nail showing Kong as both a fierce yet sentiment creature that we both feel sorry for when he dies at the end.
shareI really don't get the hate for the 70s Kong. i think it stands up quite well today also and this is in large part to Rick Bakers superb Kong suit. I also agree the soundtrack's great.
the only bad Kong films to me are the Toho ones and King Kong lives. that was terrible.
Walking on water is like finding a non fake female profile on a dating site...a miracle!
1976 Kong worked up until Kong showed up. Rick Baker's suit was great, but the the plot, unlike 1933, became very standard, offering very few surprises. Heck, the only surprise was the lack of dinosaurs in DeLaurentes' version!
shareAlso I would say that this new Kong looks more closer to 70's Kong then the 2005's since he appears to stand on two legs rather then standing on his feet and knuckles.
shareYou can't be serious? That slice of 70s camp cheese crap?
What's missing in movies is same as in society: a good sense of work ethic and living up to ideals.
There are a few recommendable points about the 76 version. It definitely has more bad things going against it than good but here's what I like about it:
1. A severely hot and young Jessica Lange.
2. Great soundtrack.
3. Some beautiful Hawaiian scenery.
4. Excellent ape makeup fx by Rick Baker.
5. Kong sounded gnarly!
6. First major appearance of the World Trade Center in a movie (at least for me).
7. It's a genuinely sad version of the tale.
8. One of Jeff Bridge's early roles.
9. The only versions of Kong that we had up to that time were the awesome(but
rarely shown) 1933 original and the laughably lame Toho films in which Kong
looked terribly fake and cheesy. At least there was a diligent effort on
behalf of Rick Baker's crew and the sound team to make this Kong look and
sound as real as the budget would allow. The lore that I've heard indicates
that the creative teams' hands were tied by DeLaurentis' insistence that
Kong be bipedal all the time and also that the budget was cut, so that's
where you can see the cheesiness of some of the fx and lack of more fx.
10. I was 12 years old when this came out and I was super-stoked to see it.
It's stuck with me all these years despite it's flaws.
"The psychologists call him a psychopath. They don't know what else to call him."
There are a few recommendable points about the 76 version. It definitely has more bad things going against it than good but here's what I like about it:
1. A severely hot and young Jessica Lange.
2. Great soundtrack.
3. Some beautiful Hawaiian scenery.
4. Excellent ape makeup fx by Rick Baker.
5. Kong sounded gnarly!
6. First major appearance of the World Trade Center in a movie (at least for me).
7. It's a genuinely sad version of the tale.
8. One of Jeff Bridge's early roles.
9. The only versions of Kong that we had up to that time were the awesome(but
rarely shown) 1933 original and the laughably lame Toho films in which Kong
looked terribly fake and cheesy. At least there was a diligent effort on
behalf of Rick Baker's crew and the sound team to make this Kong look and
sound as real as the budget would allow. The lore that I've heard indicates
that the creative teams' hands were tied by DeLaurentis' insistence that
Kong be bipedal all the time and also that the budget was cut, so that's
where you can see the cheesiness of some of the fx and lack of more fx.
10. I was 12 years old when this came out and I was super-stoked to see it.
It's stuck with me all these years despite it's flaws.
"The psychologists call him a psychopath. They don't know what else to call him."