I love this movie and it is the only Kong, even over Kong Skull Island, where Kong was a BEAST. His roar is what a giant beast should be and his anger is what it should be. This is the best Kong of all time and i've seen Skull Island ten times too.
I personally didn't find the 1976 remake that bad, I thought it was decent. But I do agree with a lot of people complaining about the lack of dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures. Especially with the ending. Despite the movie's flaws, If I feel like this is a misunderstood remake.
I think the big mistake of of the 2005 version of KONG was they threw in so many creatures at the beginning that when kong finally shows up its anti-climatic. pass on the dinosaurs. Kind of like complaining that they didn't use Kong in the Jurassic Park movies.
LewisDavies2007 I complain more about the dialogue in 1976 where Jack comes off as an arrogant asshole especially with the natives that bordered on racist and Dwan‘s line “chauvinist pig ape”
@@thegodzillaatomicblastprod1702 Your obviously a feminist liberal Democrat whose offended by anything and everything. Don't ever leave your house you might get offended by the sun hitting your face thinking it was assaulting you.
This is definitely my all-time favorite movie! My parents took me to the drive in to see it and it's stuck with me my entire life. 2 weeks ago I finally found and bought the gold Cadillac that blew up after kong threw it into a building, the one that was actually used in the film. Even though it was in a deleted scene only shown in the extended television version, it's still a dream come true for me, to actually finally own something that was part of this film.
King Kong 1976 was my first movie in theater. I was 8. I believed what I saw on the big silver screen. It was an unforgettable experience. Even 40 years after, I still loved it : Acting, soundtrack, cheesy special effects...
I personally really don't think it was that bad save Kong's rape face moments in the movie The Kong design here is one of my all time favorites (before Kong 2017 came around) I loved the part were Kong Fights the snake but to be fair with just the Snake Kong really doesn't have any competition to be call "King" I would've had a large Allosaurus/Tyrannosaurus/Raptor like monster stalk Kong and killed the sailors through out the film and when Kong is alone with Dwan in his lair the beast shows up and challenges Kong and attacks Dwan only for Kong to kill him but thats just me I still love this movie though
@@rovertlladnarnosmoht3845 King Kong killed all the dinosaurs on the island and eliminated his competition. That's why you didn't see any in this film. Also if the 1933 version didn't have dinosaurs on it you wouldn't be saying jack shit about this movie and you'd be praising it. Get over your fetish with dinosaurs.
And maybe Kong eliminated all his competition on the island and he's the last remnant of a prehistoric time... so no other beasts left, except for the snake.
Kong is just admiring Dwan's feminine beauty, that's all - or that's all it looks like to me. What's "perverted" about that? By the way, I saw this movie on tv on that very night that it aired in 78. I remember that the debut episode of the tv series Battlestar Galactica was also aired SIMULTANEOUSLY on another channel (ABC. You can even look that up and verify it) and so was Dumbo (on The Wonderful World of Disney showcase) and I kept flipping between them, trying to catch portions of all three (this was still before we had a VCR in our household after all).
Maybe because all the characters keep referring to Kong as a “turned on ape” in this movie. Jack especially being the “expert” here, everyone is taking his word for it, so us as the viewers are made to think that, too... maybe. Plus, Kong’s eyebrows and groaning sounds he maxes when he watches her coupled with the score gives off an unintended creepy vibe, so maybe that’s what it is.
Don't worry dude. I love this film too. I agree, they need to bring out a 2 disc Blu Ray version with the theatrical and extended cut. That would be awesome and a perfect addition to any King Kong collection 👍
1976 was a good film. It had awesome practical effects, but it and the original still don't even come near 2005's King Kong. It was done beautifully, actually featured the love story of both Kong and Ann much more prominently and effectively and clearer, all while having such badass dinosaurs. It had very interesting characters, some of the best CGI to date, a beautiful soundtrack, and very heartfelt emotional scenes. That is how Kong should have been done, not have Ann screaming constantly like in the original, or Kong making those eyes at her like he wants her (if you know what I'm saying), but that he thinks of her as a friend and family that fills the void that all his other kind left behind as they met their dooms mysteriously. He protects her and cares for her and she does him, that's why that movie was so beautiful and effective. Way better then the original and 76 remake IMO.
The ape-girl relationship wasn't even to be taken seriously in past films. It was either her screaming or Kong making that stupid rape face. It isn't until 2005 that the relationship is taken seriously and it actually makes sense. Being too long is not an issue, they could have made the theatrical cut shorter but I'd be fine with a 4 hour or 6 hour Kong film. King Kong 2005 fleshed everything out, it had you grow attached to the characters as well as feel the time it took to get to Skull Island. And the amount of action that goes on Skull Island makes up for that boat trip. The cast is great too, Naomi Watts filling the role of Ann perfectly. Like the only miscast person is Jack Black, and to me he isn't miscast, just different then the Denham from 33. Jack Black's Carl is a bit more greedy, but that doesn't mean he's miscast at all. The dialogue is excellent too, better then "Say I guess I love you". It isn't in any way a bad film, excellent visuals, music, acting, characters, stories, and heart put into the film. It has the best march possibly put out for any film, too. The production diaries and whatnot show that. It's made for people to grow into Kong and be introduced to it and expand upon the mythos of Kong. King Kong 2005 is truly the best Kong film.
The dinosaur stampede scene in the 2005 version was totally unbelievable, with everyone running in between the huge dino-feet and not getting smashed... and I agree it was miscast, Adrian Brody should've never got the lead role and Jack Black just didn't fit in...
The reason the "twas Beauty killed the Beast" line is not uttered in the 1976 re-imagining, is probably because Beauty was never really responsible for Kong's death, it just sounds catchy and poetic to say so. We all know it was greed (in this case, the Petrox oil company, spear-headed in this version by the character played by actor Charles Grodin) that killed Kong. If the Company didn't trap Kong, and transport it to New York, Kong never would have been shot, and fallen to his death from a tall city building. When Petrox realized there was no fossil fuel to be found on Skull Island, they settled for trapping a giant marvel ape and making it a mascot for their Company.
King Kong (1976) in my opinion is a mix bag, and here are my thoughts. 1) As a re-imagining it does well, hell its pretty much the only Kong movie to not use the Empire State Building and use the now gone World Trade Center. 2) The scenery of the island and New York works well, and the miniture sets work and on par with the Japanese kaiju franchise. 3) Given there are no dinosaurs like Tyrannosaurus or even Stegosaurus, Kong doesn't have any competition apart from giant pythons. 4) I know its unintentional by the film makers part, they could had thought twice more making that creepy smile. 5) Dino kind of ruined the ending with King Kong Lives, so...... but still good despite people picking at it too much
I totally did not mind that line, "was beauty killed the beast" was not in this version because I never did believe that, in the previous version, it was her fault that Kong was killed. I always blamed the man who took Kong from his home. The only way I would have wanted that line in this movie would be to have either Jessica Lange or someone else say that beauty did not kill the beast, the man who took Kong from his home did that. I think a better thing would have been for Charles Grodin's character to have lived, said that line and Dwan starts hitting him and screaming that he killed Kong. The reason Jeff Bridges character looks disgusted at Dwan and doesn't go to her is he sees that she, once again, is choosing to play to the cameras. Now I'm not saying she was then not sorry at Kong's death. It is just that she was still to eager to become a star. Also, the discussion they had might have also been on his mind at that time. I think the sequel that was made should had both Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange appear in that film. Totally agree that there was too much seemingly sexual stuff in the film. I'm glad the makers did not intend that. But they could still easily fix it by reediting the scenes. Also, even now why not just add other monsters? I liked this version, cried at Kong's death. After it was over, I went outside and saw the full moon and cried all over again, remembering the scenes where he had looked at the moon.
Hi Big Jack and thank you for the review! This is, and has ALWAYS been my favorite film. I remember being 5 years old and seeing the HUGE build up and mass merchandising campaign for this. I have a question: I have had a copy of a broadcast of the 3 hour tv cut but it was basically unwatchable. How is the cut made from the 16mm? And the sound? And where can I get a copy? I have hoped for years that this would finally get a Blu-ray or proper hd release with both versions, special features, etc. With this cast and popularity of Kong, it's hard to believe it hasn't received it. (I'm sick of the lies that it was a disaster. It was actually the second highest grossing film the year it was released, with multiple rooms showing it in theaters and lines around the block!) Again, thank you for this. It was really great to hear your thoughts. I am subscribed.
My favorite Extended TV Cut scenes, would have to be Kong pounding the shit out of the Skull Island Wall (which was heavily extended) and Kong throwing a car at a building. (Which is a Deleted Scene) :D
Hardcore Toyz I'm sorry, this is one of my least favourite Kong movies. The only things that are good about the movie are the effects and that "Are you in there" song. Kong is a pervert and it's not an animalistic thing, he growls when he dosen't see Dwan's boobs (the original did it better), after Fred finds out that the oil is not in use until the next 10,000 years... he decides to kidnap a giant gorilla. The original it made sense, The people that are going to the island were moviemakers... therefore they will still have something to wow and amaze the world, it doesn't make sense because Fred is an oil maker... so basically he should've gotten fired before he even reached Manhattan... because his company is still out of oil, Dwan is stupid, Jack does nothing except be stupid, the movie has a weird tone, Fred is a weak villain, The ending is still crap even with the extended cut (it's only a little similar to the original), Jessica Lange (in her first role) is a horrible actress in this movie... thank god she learn how to be a good actress, no creatures except for that retarded snake, and that sexualised dancer which doctor. The sets, The filming locations, Kong's design, The robotic hands and feet (not that full crappy robot, just the hands and feet), and the "Are You In There" song The only good things about the movie in my opinion, The original is still better.
Patrick Johnson You are so bias. This movie is the best Kong film to date. The original is a great movie, but could improve in some areas. Peter Jackson's version is to identical to the original. Kong '76 is personally my favourite movie. The acting is fantastic. The special effects are better than today's CGI. My favourite film, and my favourite giant monster movie. I wish people will stop criticising the film someday...
Ross V first, the 76 movie had some dated dialogue, unfunny jokes, uncomfortable 9/11 predictions, bad special effects (except for the suit), and it butchered everything that was good about the original (which was everything). The original was fun and interesting, the 76 version was slow and cringey. It fails at being a remake and it fails at being it's own movie. I can only say 3 good things about this movie 1. The Kong suit 2. The soundtrack 3. It inspired some good rides. That's all! The original had nothing to be fixed (except for maybe Ann screaming, but Dwan couldn't even make up her mind about Kong), the 76 version needs to be exciting, fun, and INTERESTING!
@@ixlewerx Jessica Lange didn't learn how to act after this movie... she already could act. Her character was supposed to be a ditzy, naive woman and Lange was such a great actress that she made you believe it! As for the rest of your review, you're way off base and can barely articulate your points so your credibility is very low with your review.
I regret not going to the WTC those nights they were filming. Still have my NY POST news paper clipping with a great photo spread of Kong. Laying in the rubble. Got an A in my journalism class for a story I wrote about the making of the movie. That paper I can't find. 😡 Great reviews.
The big reveal in 76 absolutely WASTES Peter Jackson's which had zero build up or drama. Kong just bounds out.. boom here I am. The 76 version has an ENORMOUS build up and reveal. John Barry's music is screaming with intrigue and island mystery. Then the big crane up to show how big Kong is and the chest thump. I still love that scene today. You can keep Peter Jackson's Kong. I thought it was awful. Horribly cast. Totally the wrong people in the roles. Jack Black?? With his perpetually crossed eyes and screwed up face??? Just WRONG.
Both Kong movies are really good for when they were made.......no CGI......real effects, were other movies of this type any better in 1976.....were any other movies of this type even made in 1976.
king kong '76 was actually pretty good. And No, some of it doesn't hold up today because it was 70's convention - but a lot of effects still hold up (thanks Rick Baker) and it was a nice romp, a campy and fun adventure not to be taken too seriously. As a kid, I loved it, and it was my fav. Kong until Peter Jackson's Kong came along.
Rene auberjonois’ role as Roy was pretty funny, but I usually prefer his voice acting roles, such as Ebony Maw in Avengers Assemble, Chef Louis from The Little Mermaid (1989), and Pepe Le Pew in The Looney Tunes Show(2011).
Now he along with Jeff Bridges, and the late Ed Lauter were the only good actors in the film. And I'm a huge fan of The Little Mermaid, that was-- and is my favorite Disney film. It's cool of you to bring that up. :)
Thank you sincerely for putting this film back into its gigantic cult place , For me too it is the best King Kong, I love a lot of Jackson but his approach is much more "poetic" while this one is bestial and his ultra-sexualized side goes precisely in this direction, not to mention the death of Kong who highlights his suffering and the savagery of the human being as well as the sacrifice he makes for "the beautiful" . Peter Jackson’s movie is more emotional and this one is more visceral. Thank you so so much.
@@BigJackFilms can you review on the white buffalo 1977 and the land that time forgot 1974 film and the lord of the rings extended edition trilogy in the next video please by the king kong 2005 is way better than king kong 1976 because the 2005 one has dinosaurs
@@BigJackFilms can you do a comparison video on king kong 1976 vs mighty joe young 1998 with suit actor who played kong anc joe at the same time Rick baker please
Its cool dude. If you don't like the movie, that's totally fine. Showing your comment was not intent on negativity, but to show that I was listening to what allot of people have to say. I read comments all the time. Hell I like comments more than I do views and its great to hear what others have to say.
BigJackFilms Bonus Thank you, and as a thanks I will say a positive thing about the 76 film, the atmosphere, the atmosphere in thus movie is excellent, probably the best atmosphere in the kong films because it looks so cool. Also I read your description, it amazes me that King Kong has fanfiction.
@@BigJackFilms Hey dude. Have you heard the announcement that Scream Factory is going to release the blu ray version of this movie in May 11 2021, which will include both the theatrical, and extended cut?
Rick Baker in the Kong suit looked good, but they also built a 40 foot tall Kong that only ended up being used for a few seconds in the film because it looked so wooden and fake. And Charles Grodin's character was really irritating. But this film introduced the world to the ultra fine Jessica Lange, so it scores major points for that.
Your commentary is spot on! I love this movie simply because it is King Kong. I thought the best parts of the movie were Rick Baker's expressions and John Barry's amazing music. I just thought the blood at the end was too much for me to handle. I cried like a baby because I thought it was so over the top. We know how things end up but it was just too much for this fan to handle. I was 10 yrs old when this movie came out and it really upset me. Though people have often complained about Kong's facial expressions, I think they are what made him so realistic. Baker did an amazing job and yes, some parts of the movie are overly sexualized, but come on, this is the most amazing Kong of them all as far as facial expressions go.
I was 6 in 76. There was definitely alot of blood. Pretty accurate considering they put 1,000 rounds in Kong. Peter Jackson's Kong was shot equally and I don't recall seeing a drop of blood. I suppose he thought there was too much blood as well. 🙂
the original 1933 king kong changed my life as a kid of around 7 seen it on tv and fell in love with monster movies , i seen the 1976 film as an 8 year old and really enjoyed it sure rewatching now its a bit dated but still is enjoyable LOVED the movie poster and still do and i will take the practical special effects anyday over alot of the boring cgi crap being dished out now ( excluding the marvel films there AWESOME )
I am one of those kong fans that actually really do enjoy this movie. Every time i watch it, while i do agree that more monsters than just ONE giant snake or dinosaurs should've been in this movie, I love the movie or how it is. The special effects in this movie are seriously good reminding me a ton of the toho Godzilla films from the OG 15 film franchise. Overall, the 1976 remake of Kong is an overall great monster movie and should get some more love. So BigJackFilms...I'm in the same Petrox Explorer with you man on how awesome this movie is.
I didn't really like it because it didn't have Dinosaurs in it, not even the T-Rex. But I'd give the film a pass and some credit for having a cool Kong design, and it had some cool effects, and it taking place in the present is pretty cool. 5/10
You have to consider when it was made. The stop motion animation of 1933 wouldn't fly anymore in 1976, and it would be about another 15-20 years before the technology could deliver convincing dinos. The only thing they could have pulled off in 1976 would have been the Toho-style man-in-rubber suit technique. The result would have been a lot campier than they wanted it to be. One man in a suit is enough. Given the choice between shitty looking dinos or no dinos at all, I'll go with the latter.
What’s very interesting is that Roger Ebert actually gave this film a positive review. In fact a lot of well known critics did. It’s a good movie but still lacks in comparison to the 1933 King Kong and 2005 King Kong.
I saw this in the theater when I was a kid, and I have always thought it was great. Honestly, I still think it is better than Peter Jackson's remake. Just my opinion.....
Cheer up, friend. Don't let anyone else force their opinion on you. To be honest, I find the '76 version to be more enjoyable than the Peter Jackson one.
Connor Brennan Well said! That's truly a philosophy I live by! But personally (and this is just me talking), as far as remakes of the 1933 "King Kong" go (not counting "Kong: Skull Island" since that's a reboot as opposed to a true remake), the 1976 and 2005 versions are EQUALLY well done in their own ways to me.
The suitmation is great plus rare to see western suitmation. Also rare to see suitmation with that size.. normally the monsters are either towering over the buildings or human sized. And the effects in the finale are great, even if a bit overdone.
Good points all around. Movie could have been better, especially in the dialogue area (e.g.- "let Kong climb to the top of the World Trade Center.."). Why does he need to climb it? He could have just said something like, "let Kong make his way to the WTC, it reminds him of a place in his home, etc.) Then, when Kong gets there and sees he's surrounded, THAT'S when he decides to climb, surprising the soldiers and the audience. Just a pretentious choice, I thought. But overall it was quite entertaining AND suspenseful. For my money, the sacrifice scene is still one of the best scenes in movie history.
Well , I remember back in 1977 when the movie was on cinemas here in Brazil ... TV showed the 1933 version on a Saturday night ... and I went to see the new movie the very next day ... I was 9 years old ... I was so impressed about the new movie ... color , Kong was so huge on screen , and we immediately feel sympathetic to the 3 main characters... as I was so young I couldn’t see the sexualizing issues.. I was amazed about the whole history and the film ... and , just like you , remains being my favorite movie of all time ... I am so keen on this movie that I couldn’t help loving the sequel 10 years after ... which I watched on First session , on very first day ... seeing Kong live again was a personal delightful moment ... I loved your review , and kind of agree on the “ sucking “ points ... If I were wealthy enough , I would make a third movie on 76 Kong Universe , bringing a reunion of Prescott and Dwan ... and you know , by this time , Lady Kong is dead , and Baby Kong has grown up ... so ... a lot could happen ... thank you for keeping Kong 76 on the web !!!
I never got the “Sexualizing” of this movie in regards to King Kong’s behavior toward Dwan. I saw this movie in the theater and in a drive-in movie theater when I was a 7 year old kid, and I have seen it countless times as an adult. The first time I ever heard of the concept of Kong being creepy was watching a RUclips commentary on the movie. Up until that point I had never even considered that. Call me naive but I always just took it for what it looked like to me which was Kong being protective and sweet, taking care of Dwan. I mean he’s a wild ape for crying out loud. It’s not like he has an ulterior motive to look up her dress. When I think of creepy (albeit in a funny way) I think of the character Ralph FurIey masterfully played by the great Don Knotts on Three’s Company. With his ridiculous leisure suits and smarmy come-on’s with women he was the walking definition of “creepy”...funny, but still creepy. Now King on the other hand is this wild animal who is oversized and as wild animals are...naturally curious. There is nothing icky about the way Kong treats Dwan. Of the times that I’ve ever seen this movie I always thought that his behavior towards her shows Kongs good and gentle nature not him being seedy or perverted. I personally think believing Kong is creepy says more about the person claiming that than it does about the movie itself. Anyway, people need to lighten up and just enjoy this severely underrated and under-appreciated movie.
I dunno about Kong's expression, but whosoever calls Jessica Lang, as Dwan, "oversexualized" is either a homosexual or a feminist or a religious puritan.
Oh yeah...100%. Jessica Lang’s “Dwan” was/is super sexy. Along with Farrah Fawcett she was definitely a childhood crush. I was just referring to people calling Kong a perv. I just think that is preposterous. I think it’s creepy that people would think that. It’s just people looking for something to criticize and complain about. Stupid!
This is a much better film than the 2005 version. In ascending order of watchableness; 2005 1933 1976 King Kong Skull Island 2005 was too long for its own good, Jack Black was perhaps not the best choice for Denham, and the running dinos sequence, which was hard to believe in any case, made matters worse by being far too long. And the scene where Kong is tranquillised was not nearly as effective as in the 1976 version. The running dinos scene would have much less weak if it had been half as long. 2005 has some of the flaws that damage The Hobbit - it has too much flab. 1976 had humour, it had the bridge scene, it started in Indonesia instead of wasting time in the US doing very little, it had the fight with the giant snake, it had Kong blowing Dwan’s hair dry, it had Charles Grodin’s character, it had Kong in the ship’s hold, it was free of sappy sentiment. It doesn’t linger too long over any one scene, as parts of 2005 do. And it is both vivid and memorable. The close-ups of parts of Kong, like his paws, are especially memorable. As for the lack of dinos in 1976, I never missed them. There are plenty of dinos in other films; this version of King Kong is not about them, and that is no bad thing. It’s about how King Kong gets on when he is faced by men. They prove to be more monstrous than any dino.
Although my favorite King Kong movie is the 1933 version, I do enjoy watching Kong 1976 when it comes up on tv and it the one I enjoy watching the most when I'm with friends. I wouldn't call it a masterpiece but i would say it has some very memorable moments. When compared with other Kong films, i don't think is as good as the others, but on its OWN it pretty good. Also when I think of KING KONG (as a character) the 1976 is the one i like to think of the most.
Not only did this one have the best sacrifice scene (perfect visuals, music and Kong entrance) but it also had the best Kong breaking through the wall scene... AND it had a young, hot Jessica Lange!! Doesn't get any better when you add it all up with the rest of this film. Although Naomi Watts is damn hot too!
I've actually liked this version more than I thought I would. When I first saw it on VHS, all I heard were mostly bad things about it - largely due to the film failing to live up both to the quality and time-honored power of the original and its typically blatant over-promotion by Dino De Laurentiis (actually nicknamed De Horrendous due to his interference over filmmakers' original visions, especially David Lynch's DUNE). Seeing it, I was taken aback by how actually good it was. Yeah it was campy and over-the-top at times, and a number of the practical FX haven't aged as well, but Jeff Bridges, the colorful settings, the scope, John Barry score filled with romantic adventure and tragic longing, and Kong himself both in design and character (my favorite of the three versions) are definitely awesome. And its own story updated to match the true tone of the 1970's actually resonates now more than ever (I noticed even that KONG: SKULL ISLAND borrowed the setting and themes.) But what really makes this version stand out for me even more is three factors. One, like Kong here, I actually was on top of the World Trade Center in the summer of 1998, visiting it with my old man and kid bro, three years before 9-11! Two, I actually rode the Kong ride at Universal Studios with my family months later, years before it got shut down. Three and finally, I actually visited Hawaii with my family and saw on a helicopter tour some of the locations that had been used for the '76 version. I never really thought that movie was that close to me in more ways than one, but there you go.
I really wish they had one of the swamp scenes but with a shark and Kong battles a triceratops or a brontosaurus or a t.rex cuz it's just a giant snake
King Kong is going to shove his fist so far up Godzilla's asshole when they meet. King Kong is going to make Godzilla his very own personal sock puppet.
Stop saying that Kong: Skull Island is inspired by King Kong 1976. Just because it takes place in the 70s and some scenes are similar that doesn't mean it's automatically inspired by King Kong 1976, it's inspirations were King Kong 1933 and the Toho King Kong films. Jordon Vogt. Roberts mentioned nothing about King Kong 1976. Now before everybody starts saying that I'm forcing jack to hate King Kong 1976 I'm actually not, I'm ok if he likes King Kong 1976 so much, it's his opinion on the film, I just don't like that he still thinks Kong: Skull Island was inspired by King Kong 1976. If you don't know what part of the video I'm talking about go to 5:57.
Because Jordan Vogt Roberts mentioned nothing about Kong 76 being an inspiration to Kong: Skull Island. The similar scenes in both movies are more likely just a coincidence. Anything that Jordan Vogt Roberts does not mention in interviews or movie commentary doesn’t count as “inspiration”. And if you ask “ Then Why does Kong:Skull Island take place in the 70s?” That was because so much technology had improved at this time, and the fear of war took place in this decade, he wanted us to see and feel what the characters were seeing and feeling. You can’t just say that kong 76 inspired Kong:Skull Island and have no evidence to back it up with. And saying that Kong fighting helicopters, the meeting scene, and Kong picking the main actress out of the water is not evidence.
John Cornell but what does legal ramifications have to do with the inspiration to the film, that’s like saying that Jordan Vogt Roberts had to pay rights to the makers of the 33 film and the Toho films for having similar scenes, dialogue, and actions.
I love Kong 76! I was ok with no dinosaurs because I saw the island as just having over grown animals. The giant snake was extremely cool to! Kong 76 is probably the coolest looking kong!
You know Jack, when I saw this movie for the first time, I actually thoroughly enjoyed it despite some of its minor flaws. I will agree with you that its an underrated take on the beauty and beast story and that its really big in scope. And I actually found it interesting to see Kong's unveiling in New York take place outside instead of inside an auditorium. And I did actually love the casting of Jessica Lange as the beauty who charmed the beast. However, I am not too much of a fan of the change in our leading lady's name from Ann Darrow to Dwan. But that's just my opinion.
One of my favourate films, I love the music, and my dad took me to see this in the cinema when it was released in the UK. My dad died in 1991 so I have great affection for this film, there are memories attached to it.
No dinosaurs, in my opinion, made the film more believable. The only creatures we encounter are a giant ape and giant snake. Apes and snakes exist in the real world. Dinosaurs no longer do, so this selective inventory adds a sense of realism to the film. To say a lack of dinosaurs makes the sailors' quest to rescue Dwan boring is ridiculous. When you think about it, there really isn't much to their search. They make camp the first night, fire off a flare and set seismic charges the following morning, and arrive at the fatal ravine crossing not long after that. The INCLUSION of battles between Kong and his neighbors would've slowed the film's pace, a problem which plagued the 2005 version. We know very well Kong will survive any battle because his fate will not be met until New York. It was accepted and praised in 1933 because the wonder of stop-motion animation was still relatively new and had not been utilized to the extent it was in that film. As presented in 1976, the film is able to devote more time to the human characters and the negative impact Kong's presence has on their lives (through no fault of Kong's). So, for me, no dinosaurs was a good thing. Imagine if Lucas had all the prequel technology at his disposal in 1976 when making "Star Wars." We would've been robbed of the wonderful human interaction we instantly fell in love with, subjected, instead, to an endless parade of CGI aliens, monsters, and physics-defying Jedi stunts akin more to Looney Tunes than plausible human ability.
I was 12 years old in 76, and Dino's Kong hit me right at the onset of puberty. Needless to say, Jessica had a definite impact on my awkward, hormonal pre-teen brain. I associated with Kong.. I knew why he looked at her like that.. and how awkward he felt trying to communicate with Dwan.. 76 Kong hit me at exactly the right age, and right stage in my life to form a kind of connection with Kong... yeah,Jack... This is totally my Kong !
I'd rather gouge my own eyes out than watch the outdated 1933 version or that travesty heaping pile of shit 2005 movie that Peter Jackson created. 1976 King Kong is a shear brilliant riveting masterpiece of a movie.
I love this movie. One of favorites, ever. One thing that I'll add in is the relationship between Jack and Dwan. To me, that played just as big of a role and made the movie about as much as Kong and Dwan, honestly. And it really makes the ending that much better, and more tragic. In my opinion. Love your work man, keep it up.
I'm a fan of this film, but it does indeed have things that really bug me. The no dinosaur thing may be my top gripe. Buuuuuuut another really big thing for me is the "Suitmation Kong" That is a downer for me. As skilled as Rick Baker is, and his masks are really cool, it is still Rick in the suit. I just don't dig that. I actually LOVE the giant Robo Kong, wish there was more of him! And the end of the film is great! Very emotional and heartbreaking, anyone who is a critic of that must not have a heart. BTW, I was 13 when I saw this in the theater with my dad. I really loved it at the time, and thought it worked pretty well except for the lack of Dinos. But as I got older, it has tarnished a bit, and I absolutely love the Peter Jackson remake.
As a lifelong Koong fan, where the 76 film kinda played loose with the sex stuff, at least it wasn't totally neutered sexually like all the other proceeding films. The recent "Kong" films where humans are bug sized to him, that isn't even really King Kong to me anymore. It's Kaiju Gorilla. Kong needs to have that girl he's obsessed with in the hand, to be Kong. Otherwise, just a oversized ape.
He didn’t really touch upon it. But to summarize, overall the movie is pretty dull and for a bigger and more modern version of the story it just isn’t as entertaining.
I admit the cast , skull island locations, relationship between Kong and Dwan is decent, but the film would be amazing if it had dinosaurs or large prehistoric like creatures like Kong Skull Island had.
So my dreams weren't lieing to me after all, I knew there was something missing at the snake scene, the door scene, and the one where he got to the train, and now the part where the Jessica was still unconscious
I personally really liked the movie and I can totally see your side of the argument and yeah guys if you guys don't like the movie well that's just your opinion
When I first saw the 76 king kong movie when I was little. I could this movie was a true loving amazing film that I have ever watched. And I'm sorry that you had to go through the horrible moment with the comments being negative, and being picky. Heck, I watched "the rage carrie 2", and it was one of my most favorite true loving, awesome movie. And some people say that carrie 2 movie was a fail and also a terrible film. But to me, carrie 2 has one of the most greatest musics that almost had me cry when i listen to them while watching this movie. And the 76 king kong film has the greatest adventures that I love to watch.
Def doesn't suck, but it is mediocre IMO. It's alright.. I don't think it had a very good ending, and while Jessica Lange turned out to be a great actress, I didn't find her to be very good in this role. Naomi Watts was far better and more believable IMO. To me neither remake is perfect. The Jackson film has heart, emotion, a great cast, and action, but Jesus Christ Peter Jackson 3 hrs 21 min long. I don't have all damn day to watch a movie.. The whole first half of that movie needed to be severely edited down.. I don't need to personally get to know every person on the ship, taking us to Skull Island.
My dad ran a movie theatre that played KING KONG in 1976. I was ten years old at the time, the perfect age for a giant gorilla movie. And even I thought it sucked. In fact, audiences back then thought it sucked, too. But you have to remember, in 1976 there was no internet to distract you or social media to share consensus. We had three crappy VHF TV stations on crappy little TVs. So even if the movie sucked, if it had a 40-foot tall gorilla, we still went to the theatre to see it. I actually appreciate the film much more today, however. It's still a bad film, but it's also an amazing time capsule of people, culture, and ideas. The obsession with oil may not seem as pertinent today, but coming off the Arab oil embargo which saw Americans sitting in gas lines for an hour had a major impact at the time. And KING KONG attempted to speak to that. Rick Baker's attempt at putting a human in an ape suit remains one of the best I've seen to this day. And he really does manage to get some emotion through all of those mechanics and makeup. Not bad. Of course, the 40-foot animatronic was simply too ambitious. It was probably more about PR, anyway. But yes, the bottom line is that it sucks, BUT it's one of those sucks where it can still be enjoyable to watch, and may be even must-see for any fan of 70s film.
This is nowhere near as good as the original. But it's also nowhere near as bad as sume people say. Let's face it we all missed the dinosaurs here. But the goal they looked to be going for was to bring kong to life. Make him look as real as possible. The music is fantastic by John Barry. I'd give it a 5/10. But the original is a fucking 10/10. And the Peter Jackson one is a 8/10.
Wow, someone else besides me enjoyed the 1976 Kong
Hey I liked it. It cured my fear of snakes.
Kong 1976 forever!
I love this movie and it is the only Kong, even over Kong Skull Island, where Kong was a BEAST. His roar is what a giant beast should be and his anger is what it should be. This is the best Kong of all time and i've seen Skull Island ten times too.
My favorite king kong movie and king kong lives
Snake Artist
I like it as well... It was good for its time...
There is one dino in the movie. The producer. :p
Dinoslay lol
Dinoslay lol
I see what you did there
I see what you did there😂. I honestly love that
I like King Kong 1976, this is my first King Kong movie since I was a little kid. :)
Juan Jose mines too
same
Too
Juan Jose same my uncle gave it to me
Me too. My parents said it was the original though. I guess they didn’t know about the 1933 version.
I personally didn't find the 1976 remake that bad, I thought it was decent. But I do agree with a lot of people complaining about the lack of dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures. Especially with the ending. Despite the movie's flaws, If I feel like this is a misunderstood remake.
I think the big mistake of of the 2005 version of KONG was they threw
in so many creatures at the beginning that when kong finally shows up
its anti-climatic. pass on the dinosaurs. Kind of like complaining that they didn't use Kong in the Jurassic Park movies.
LewisDavies2007 I thought it was great
LewisDavies2007 I complain more about the dialogue in 1976 where Jack comes off as an arrogant asshole especially with the natives that bordered on racist and Dwan‘s line “chauvinist pig ape”
1. King Kong is the first creature we see in every version 2. who is complaining that there is no Kong in the Jurassic Park movies?
Dinosaurs are overrated. Let’s see the love story
I actually enjoy the 1976 version more than the original. The score, the characters and the gore are much more satisfying.
@@thegodzillaatomicblastprod1702 Your obviously a feminist liberal Democrat whose offended by anything and everything. Don't ever leave your house you might get offended by the sun hitting your face thinking it was assaulting you.
SHUT UP SEXIST PIG
Oh my god yes me too!
A lot of it was very good. Some of it wasn't. Overall I enjoyed it.
Original Is Still The Best
3:04 that awesome deleted moment of Kong beating his chest and roaring after defeating the giant snake should have been kept
This is definitely my all-time favorite movie! My parents took me to the drive in to see it and it's stuck with me my entire life. 2 weeks ago I finally found and bought the gold Cadillac that blew up after kong threw it into a building, the one that was actually used in the film. Even though it was in a deleted scene only shown in the extended television version, it's still a dream come true for me, to actually finally own something that was part of this film.
King Kong 1976 was my first movie in theater. I was 8. I believed what I saw on the big silver screen. It was an unforgettable experience. Even 40 years after, I still loved it : Acting, soundtrack, cheesy special effects...
Amen 🙏brother
The Man-in-the-suit was done well by Rick Baker... But it wasn't a good look overall compared to the original or anything after.
I personally really don't think it was that bad save Kong's rape face moments in the movie The Kong design here is one of my all time favorites (before Kong 2017 came around) I loved the part were Kong Fights the snake but to be fair with just the Snake Kong really doesn't have any competition to be call "King"
I would've had a large Allosaurus/Tyrannosaurus/Raptor like monster stalk Kong and killed the sailors through out the film and when Kong is alone with Dwan in his lair the beast shows up and challenges Kong and attacks Dwan only for Kong to kill him but thats just me
I still love this movie though
The Last Dinosaur needed to show up; Nuff said. ;)
@@rovertlladnarnosmoht3845 King Kong killed all the dinosaurs on the island and eliminated his competition. That's why you didn't see any in this film. Also if the 1933 version didn't have dinosaurs on it you wouldn't be saying jack shit about this movie and you'd be praising it. Get over your fetish with dinosaurs.
And maybe Kong eliminated all his competition on the island and he's the last remnant of a prehistoric time... so no other beasts left, except for the snake.
Unless an excitation event caused it
*dam*
Kong is just admiring Dwan's feminine beauty, that's all - or that's all it looks like to me. What's "perverted" about that? By the way, I saw this movie on tv on that very night that it aired in 78. I remember that the debut episode of the tv series Battlestar Galactica was also aired SIMULTANEOUSLY on another channel (ABC. You can even look that up and verify it) and so was Dumbo (on The Wonderful World of Disney showcase) and I kept flipping between them, trying to catch portions of all three (this was still before we had a VCR in our household after all).
Yeah, I'm not sure weather Kong is perverted or if people who say that aren't just being puritanical.
Maybe because all the characters keep referring to Kong as a “turned on ape” in this movie. Jack especially being the “expert” here, everyone is taking his word for it, so us as the viewers are made to think that, too... maybe.
Plus, Kong’s eyebrows and groaning sounds he maxes when he watches her coupled with the score gives off an unintended creepy vibe, so maybe that’s what it is.
Ehh, what's a little beastiality?..perfectly fine for 8 years olds- err NOBODY.
Don't worry dude. I love this film too. I agree, they need to bring out a 2 disc Blu Ray version with the theatrical and extended cut. That would be awesome and a perfect addition to any King Kong collection 👍
@@TheKevinKruger Blu Ray is superior to DVD.
1976 was a good film. It had awesome practical effects, but it and the original still don't even come near 2005's King Kong. It was done beautifully, actually featured the love story of both Kong and Ann much more prominently and effectively and clearer, all while having such badass dinosaurs. It had very interesting characters, some of the best CGI to date, a beautiful soundtrack, and very heartfelt emotional scenes. That is how Kong should have been done, not have Ann screaming constantly like in the original, or Kong making those eyes at her like he wants her (if you know what I'm saying), but that he thinks of her as a friend and family that fills the void that all his other kind left behind as they met their dooms mysteriously. He protects her and cares for her and she does him, that's why that movie was so beautiful and effective. Way better then the original and 76 remake IMO.
Nah, it wasn't as good as the 1933 film or this one.
The ape-girl relationship wasn't even to be taken seriously in past films. It was either her screaming or Kong making that stupid rape face. It isn't until 2005 that the relationship is taken seriously and it actually makes sense. Being too long is not an issue, they could have made the theatrical cut shorter but I'd be fine with a 4 hour or 6 hour Kong film. King Kong 2005 fleshed everything out, it had you grow attached to the characters as well as feel the time it took to get to Skull Island. And the amount of action that goes on Skull Island makes up for that boat trip. The cast is great too, Naomi Watts filling the role of Ann perfectly. Like the only miscast person is Jack Black, and to me he isn't miscast, just different then the Denham from 33. Jack Black's Carl is a bit more greedy, but that doesn't mean he's miscast at all. The dialogue is excellent too, better then "Say I guess I love you". It isn't in any way a bad film, excellent visuals, music, acting, characters, stories, and heart put into the film. It has the best march possibly put out for any film, too. The production diaries and whatnot show that. It's made for people to grow into Kong and be introduced to it and expand upon the mythos of Kong. King Kong 2005 is truly the best Kong film.
I agree with your '33 sentiments.
The dinosaur stampede scene in the 2005 version was totally unbelievable, with everyone running in between the huge dino-feet and not getting smashed... and I agree it was miscast, Adrian Brody should've never got the lead role and Jack Black just didn't fit in...
This version of King Kong is and will always be MY favorite and BEST version!!
The reason the "twas Beauty killed the Beast" line is not uttered in the 1976 re-imagining, is probably because Beauty was never really responsible for Kong's death, it just sounds catchy and poetic to say so. We all know it was greed (in this case, the Petrox oil company, spear-headed in this version by the character played by actor Charles Grodin) that killed Kong. If the Company didn't trap Kong, and transport it to New York, Kong never would have been shot, and fallen to his death from a tall city building. When Petrox realized there was no fossil fuel to be found on Skull Island, they settled for trapping a giant marvel ape and making it a mascot for their Company.
King Kong (1976) in my opinion is a mix bag, and here are my thoughts.
1) As a re-imagining it does well, hell its pretty much the only Kong movie to not use the Empire State Building and use the now gone World Trade Center.
2) The scenery of the island and New York works well, and the miniture sets work and on par with the Japanese kaiju franchise.
3) Given there are no dinosaurs like Tyrannosaurus or even Stegosaurus, Kong doesn't have any competition apart from giant pythons.
4) I know its unintentional by the film makers part, they could had thought twice more making that creepy smile.
5) Dino kind of ruined the ending with King Kong Lives, so...... but still good despite people picking at it too much
so true especially number 3
I totally did not mind that line, "was beauty killed the beast" was not in this version because I never did believe that, in the previous version, it was her fault that Kong was killed. I always blamed the man who took Kong from his home. The only way I would have wanted that line in this movie would be to have either Jessica Lange or someone else say that beauty did not kill the beast, the man who took Kong from his home did that. I think a better thing would have been for Charles Grodin's character to have lived, said that line and Dwan starts hitting him and screaming that he killed Kong. The reason Jeff Bridges character looks disgusted at Dwan and doesn't go to her is he sees that she, once again, is choosing to play to the cameras. Now I'm not saying she was then not sorry at Kong's death. It is just that she was still to eager to become a star. Also, the discussion they had might have also been on his mind at that time. I think the sequel that was made should had both Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange appear in that film. Totally agree that there was too much seemingly sexual stuff in the film. I'm glad the makers did not intend that. But they could still easily fix it by reediting the scenes. Also, even now why not just add other monsters? I liked this version, cried at Kong's death. After it was over, I went outside and saw the full moon and cried all over again, remembering the scenes where he had looked at the moon.
Hi Big Jack and thank you for the review! This is, and has ALWAYS been my favorite film. I remember being 5 years old and seeing the HUGE build up and mass merchandising campaign for this. I have a question: I have had a copy of a broadcast of the 3 hour tv cut but it was basically unwatchable. How is the cut made from the 16mm? And the sound? And where can I get a copy? I have hoped for years that this would finally get a Blu-ray or proper hd release with both versions, special features, etc. With this cast and popularity of Kong, it's hard to believe it hasn't received it. (I'm sick of the lies that it was a disaster. It was actually the second highest grossing film the year it was released, with multiple rooms showing it in theaters and lines around the block!) Again, thank you for this. It was really great to hear your thoughts. I am subscribed.
Fantastic movie. By far the best of the 3.
My favorite Extended TV Cut scenes, would have to be Kong pounding the shit out of the Skull Island Wall (which was heavily extended) and Kong throwing a car at a building. (Which is a Deleted Scene) :D
I love 1976 King Kong & the music composed by John Barry made it even more awesome !!
wrong, king kong 1976 doesn't suck
Hardcore Toyz I'm sorry, this is one of my least favourite Kong movies. The only things that are good about the movie are the effects and that "Are you in there" song. Kong is a pervert and it's not an animalistic thing, he growls when he dosen't see Dwan's boobs (the original did it better), after Fred finds out that the oil is not in use until the next 10,000 years... he decides to kidnap a giant gorilla. The original it made sense, The people that are going to the island were moviemakers... therefore they will still have something to wow and amaze the world, it doesn't make sense because Fred is an oil maker... so basically he should've gotten fired before he even reached Manhattan... because his company is still out of oil, Dwan is stupid, Jack does nothing except be stupid, the movie has a weird tone, Fred is a weak villain, The ending is still crap even with the extended cut (it's only a little similar to the original), Jessica Lange (in her first role) is a horrible actress in this movie... thank god she learn how to be a good actress, no creatures except for that retarded snake, and that sexualised dancer which doctor. The sets, The filming locations, Kong's design, The robotic hands and feet (not that full crappy robot, just the hands and feet), and the "Are You In There" song The only good things about the movie in my opinion, The original is still better.
Patrick Johnson a
Patrick Johnson You are so bias. This movie is the best Kong film to date. The original is a great movie, but could improve in some areas. Peter Jackson's version is to identical to the original. Kong '76 is personally my favourite movie. The acting is fantastic. The special effects are better than today's CGI. My favourite film, and my favourite giant monster movie. I wish people will stop criticising the film someday...
Ross V first, the 76 movie had some dated dialogue, unfunny jokes, uncomfortable 9/11 predictions, bad special effects (except for the suit), and it butchered everything that was good about the original (which was everything). The original was fun and interesting, the 76 version was slow and cringey. It fails at being a remake and it fails at being it's own movie. I can only say 3 good things about this movie 1. The Kong suit 2. The soundtrack 3. It inspired some good rides. That's all! The original had nothing to be fixed (except for maybe Ann screaming, but Dwan couldn't even make up her mind about Kong), the 76 version needs to be exciting, fun, and INTERESTING!
@@ixlewerx Jessica Lange didn't learn how to act after this movie... she already could act. Her character was supposed to be a ditzy, naive woman and Lange was such a great actress that she made you believe it! As for the rest of your review, you're way off base and can barely articulate your points so your credibility is very low with your review.
76 is my favorite! its the one that got me into the whole king kong thing to me its the perfect kong!
It sucked!
I regret not going to the WTC those nights they were filming. Still have my NY POST news paper clipping with a great photo spread of Kong. Laying in the rubble.
Got an A in my journalism class for a story I wrote about the making of the movie. That paper I can't find. 😡
Great reviews.
Honestly, I don’t care if the extended cut is in widescreen or in full screen, I just REALLLLLLLLLYYYYYY wanna see that new footage!
Actually now when I think about it King Kong 1976 is a pretty terrible film
King Kong 1976 is a great movie
The big reveal in 76 absolutely WASTES Peter Jackson's which had zero build up or drama. Kong just bounds out.. boom here I am. The 76 version has an ENORMOUS build up and reveal. John Barry's music is screaming with intrigue and island mystery. Then the big crane up to show how big Kong is and the chest thump. I still love that scene today. You can keep Peter Jackson's Kong. I thought it was awful. Horribly cast. Totally the wrong people in the roles. Jack Black?? With his perpetually crossed eyes and screwed up face??? Just WRONG.
*Correction to your comment* King Kong 1976 is the greatest movie of all time.
Nah
It sucked!
I hate how everyone is so negative to this remake! I love the fact that Kong climbs the Twin Towers!
I love how everyone is negative to this movie.
The movie sucked!
@@Titan52berg Fuck off
King Kong movie without dinosaurs that like if someone made a movie with frank Sinatra and not having him sing one note
King Kong killed all the dinosaurs and eliminated his competition from the island.
Both Kong movies are really good for when they were made.......no CGI......real effects, were other movies of this type any better in 1976.....were any other movies of this type even made in 1976.
I honestly prefer 2005 King Kong and Kong Skull Island
Yes!!!!!!!
Same.
king kong '76 was actually pretty good. And No, some of it doesn't hold up today because it was 70's convention - but a lot of effects still hold up (thanks Rick Baker) and it was a nice romp, a campy and fun adventure not to be taken too seriously. As a kid, I loved it, and it was my fav. Kong until Peter Jackson's Kong came along.
Rene auberjonois’ role as Roy was pretty funny, but I usually prefer his voice acting roles, such as Ebony Maw in Avengers Assemble, Chef Louis from The Little Mermaid (1989), and Pepe Le Pew in The Looney Tunes Show(2011).
L E S P O S S I O N S
Now he along with Jeff Bridges, and the late Ed Lauter were the only good actors in the film. And I'm a huge fan of The Little Mermaid, that was-- and is my favorite Disney film. It's cool of you to bring that up. :)
R.I.P. Rene…
Thank you sincerely for putting this film back into its gigantic cult place , For me too it is the best King Kong, I love a lot of Jackson but his approach is much more "poetic" while this one is bestial and his ultra-sexualized side goes precisely in this direction, not to mention the death of Kong who highlights his suffering and the savagery of the human being as well as the sacrifice he makes for "the beautiful" .
Peter Jackson’s movie is more emotional and this one is more visceral.
Thank you so so much.
My pleasure.
@@BigJackFilms can you review on the white buffalo 1977 and the land that time forgot 1974 film and the lord of the rings extended edition trilogy in the next video please by the king kong 2005 is way better than king kong 1976 because the 2005 one has dinosaurs
@@BigJackFilms can you do a comparison video on king kong 1976 vs mighty joe young 1998 with suit actor who played kong anc joe at the same time Rick baker please
Natives were scary. Jessica was a smoke show. Charles Grodin is always good. Sfx were good in spots. Music was great.
I like King Kong 1976
Sorry for me hating this movie
I'll take it back man, once again I'm so sorry I may have hurt your feelings. Please forgive me.
Its cool dude. If you don't like the movie, that's totally fine. Showing your comment was not intent on negativity, but to show that I was listening to what allot of people have to say. I read comments all the time. Hell I like comments more than I do views and its great to hear what others have to say.
BigJackFilms Bonus Thank you, and as a thanks I will say a positive thing about the 76 film, the atmosphere, the atmosphere in thus movie is excellent, probably the best atmosphere in the kong films because it looks so cool. Also I read your description, it amazes me that King Kong has fanfiction.
Yeah, sadly I have not had the time to write latley. lol
@@BigJackFilms Hey dude. Have you heard the announcement that Scream Factory is going to release the blu ray version of this movie in May 11 2021, which will include both the theatrical, and extended cut?
@@bobthered313 Oh, he heard. Jack told me last week. You can pre order it, which I did! I can't wait 👍
I used to watch this movie a lot when I was a little kid
Rick Baker in the Kong suit looked good, but they also built a 40 foot tall Kong that only ended up being used for a few seconds in the film because it looked so wooden and fake. And Charles Grodin's character was really irritating. But this film introduced the world to the ultra fine Jessica Lange, so it scores major points for that.
Your commentary is spot on! I love this movie simply because it is King Kong. I thought the best parts of the movie were Rick Baker's expressions and John Barry's amazing music. I just thought the blood at the end was too much for me to handle. I cried like a baby because I thought it was so over the top. We know how things end up but it was just too much for this fan to handle. I was 10 yrs old when this movie came out and it really upset me. Though people have often complained about Kong's facial expressions, I think they are what made him so realistic. Baker did an amazing job and yes, some parts of the movie are overly sexualized, but come on, this is the most amazing Kong of them all as far as facial expressions go.
I was 6 in 76. There was definitely alot of blood. Pretty accurate considering they put 1,000 rounds in Kong. Peter Jackson's Kong was shot equally and I don't recall seeing a drop of blood. I suppose he thought there was too much blood as well. 🙂
the original 1933 king kong changed my life as a kid of around 7 seen it on tv and fell in love with monster movies , i seen the 1976 film as an 8 year old and really enjoyed it sure rewatching now its a bit dated but still is enjoyable LOVED the movie poster and still do and i will take the practical special effects anyday over alot of the boring cgi crap being dished out now ( excluding the marvel films there AWESOME )
The only problem i had with 1976 was there wasnt enough monsters
I mean, you can't let 12 to 15 year olds bully you into turning your back on what you love. You gotta learn to stop caring about shit like this, man.
the peter Jackson one is 100000,000000000000000000 times better
It's amazing!
They should've called it. Ing Ong. Like the 1998 movie. Zilla. That's how bad it was. The 2005 version stayed true to the original movie.
I am one of those kong fans that actually really do enjoy this movie. Every time i watch it, while i do agree that more monsters than just ONE giant snake or dinosaurs should've been in this movie, I love the movie or how it is. The special effects in this movie are seriously good reminding me a ton of the toho Godzilla films from the OG 15 film franchise. Overall, the 1976 remake of Kong is an overall great monster movie and should get some more love. So BigJackFilms...I'm in the same Petrox Explorer with you man on how awesome this movie is.
I didn't really like it because it didn't have Dinosaurs in it, not even the T-Rex. But I'd give the film a pass and some credit for having a cool Kong design, and it had some cool effects, and it taking place in the present is pretty cool. 5/10
King Kong killed off the dinosaurs on the island. He eliminated his competition.
You have to consider when it was made. The stop motion animation of 1933 wouldn't fly anymore in 1976, and it would be about another 15-20 years before the technology could deliver convincing dinos. The only thing they could have pulled off in 1976 would have been the Toho-style man-in-rubber suit technique. The result would have been a lot campier than they wanted it to be. One man in a suit is enough. Given the choice between shitty looking dinos or no dinos at all, I'll go with the latter.
King kong 1976 is my favourite king kong movie.
I'm actually quite fond of this film. It came out way back in 76 when I was in High School. Loved the soundtrack..
I agree, the musical score was more dramatic in this one, making King Kong more intimidating.
Alex RUclips Channel is a jerk. He’s attacking people in the comment section for liking this movie.
What’s very interesting is that Roger Ebert actually gave this film a positive review. In fact a lot of well known critics did. It’s a good movie but still lacks in comparison to the 1933 King Kong and 2005 King Kong.
1933 is outdated and 2005 is a complete travesty of a movie. I'd rather gouge my own eyes out than watch 3 hours of that garbage trash movie.
Kong 2005 is better then 76,76 is poor
*Says that Kong 2005 is better than 76.* *Forgets that 1933 exists.*
Agreed! 2005 is UNDERRATED! 1933 is a classic. 1976? I hate it.
I saw this in the theater when I was a kid, and I have always thought it was great. Honestly, I still think it is better than Peter Jackson's remake. Just my opinion.....
It sucked!
Cheer up, friend. Don't let anyone else force their opinion on you. To be honest, I find the '76 version to be more enjoyable than the Peter Jackson one.
Connor Brennan Well said! That's truly a philosophy I live by!
But personally (and this is just me talking), as far as remakes of the 1933 "King Kong" go (not counting "Kong: Skull Island" since that's a reboot as opposed to a true remake), the 1976 and 2005 versions are EQUALLY well done in their own ways to me.
1976 is the one i grew up with
Ha! Not even close!
Weeell that’s your opinion. I personally like the Peter Jackson version more.
All 3 movies to me are great.
The suitmation is great plus rare to see western suitmation. Also rare to see suitmation with that size.. normally the monsters are either towering over the buildings or human sized. And the effects in the finale are great, even if a bit overdone.
Good points all around. Movie could have been better, especially in the dialogue area (e.g.- "let Kong climb to the top of the World Trade Center.."). Why does he need to climb it? He could have just said something like, "let Kong make his way to the WTC, it reminds him of a place in his home, etc.) Then, when Kong gets there and sees he's surrounded, THAT'S when he decides to climb, surprising the soldiers and the audience. Just a pretentious choice, I thought. But overall it was quite entertaining AND suspenseful. For my money, the sacrifice scene is still one of the best scenes in movie history.
Well , I remember back in 1977 when the movie was on cinemas here in Brazil ... TV showed the 1933 version on a Saturday night ... and I went to see the new movie the very next day ... I was 9 years old ... I was so impressed about the new movie ... color , Kong was so huge on screen , and we immediately feel sympathetic to the 3 main characters... as I was so young I couldn’t see the sexualizing issues.. I was amazed about the whole history and the film ... and , just like you , remains being my favorite movie of all time ... I am so keen on this movie that I couldn’t help loving the sequel 10 years after ... which I watched on First session , on very first day ... seeing Kong live again was a personal delightful moment ... I loved your review , and kind of agree on the “ sucking “ points ... If I were wealthy enough , I would make a third movie on 76 Kong Universe , bringing a reunion of Prescott and Dwan ... and you know , by this time , Lady Kong is dead , and Baby Kong has grown up ... so ... a lot could happen ... thank you for keeping Kong 76 on the web !!!
I never got the “Sexualizing” of this movie in regards to King Kong’s behavior toward Dwan. I saw this movie in the theater and in a drive-in movie theater when I was a 7 year old kid, and I have seen it countless times as an adult. The first time I ever heard of the concept of Kong being creepy was watching a RUclips commentary on the movie. Up until that point I had never even considered that. Call me naive but I always just took it for what it looked like to me which was Kong being protective and sweet, taking care of Dwan. I mean he’s a wild ape for crying out loud. It’s not like he has an ulterior motive to look up her dress. When I think of creepy (albeit in a funny way) I think of the character Ralph FurIey masterfully played by the great Don Knotts on Three’s Company. With his ridiculous leisure suits and smarmy come-on’s with women he was the walking definition of “creepy”...funny, but still creepy. Now King on the other hand is this wild animal who is oversized and as wild animals are...naturally curious. There is nothing icky about the way Kong treats Dwan. Of the times that I’ve ever seen this movie I always thought that his behavior towards her shows Kongs good and gentle nature not him being seedy or perverted. I personally think believing Kong is creepy says more about the person claiming that than it does about the movie itself. Anyway, people need to lighten up and just enjoy this severely underrated and under-appreciated movie.
I dunno about Kong's expression, but whosoever calls Jessica Lang, as Dwan, "oversexualized" is either a homosexual or a feminist or a religious puritan.
Oh yeah...100%. Jessica Lang’s “Dwan” was/is super sexy. Along with Farrah Fawcett she was definitely a childhood crush. I was just referring to people calling Kong a perv. I just think that is preposterous. I think it’s creepy that people would think that. It’s just people looking for something to criticize and complain about. Stupid!
This is a much better film than the 2005 version. In ascending order of watchableness;
2005
1933
1976
King Kong Skull Island
2005 was too long for its own good, Jack Black was perhaps not the best choice for Denham, and the running dinos sequence, which was hard to believe in any case, made matters worse by being far too long. And the scene where Kong is tranquillised was not nearly as effective as in the 1976 version. The running dinos scene would have much less weak if it had been half as long. 2005 has some of the flaws that damage The Hobbit - it has too much flab.
1976 had humour, it had the bridge scene, it started in Indonesia instead of wasting time in the US doing very little, it had the fight with the giant snake, it had Kong blowing Dwan’s hair dry, it had Charles Grodin’s character, it had Kong in the ship’s hold, it was free of sappy sentiment. It doesn’t linger too long over any one scene, as parts of 2005 do. And it is both vivid and memorable. The close-ups of parts of Kong, like his paws, are especially memorable.
As for the lack of dinos in 1976, I never missed them. There are plenty of dinos in other films; this version of King Kong is not about them, and that is no bad thing. It’s about how King Kong gets on when he is faced by men. They prove to be more monstrous than any dino.
Although my favorite King Kong movie is the 1933 version, I do enjoy watching Kong 1976 when it comes up on tv and it the one I enjoy watching the most when I'm with friends. I wouldn't call it a masterpiece but i would say it has some very memorable moments. When compared with other Kong films, i don't think is as good as the others, but on its OWN it pretty good.
Also when I think of KING KONG (as a character) the 1976 is the one i like to think of the most.
Not only did this one have the best sacrifice scene (perfect visuals, music and Kong entrance) but it also had the best Kong breaking through the wall scene... AND it had a young, hot Jessica Lange!! Doesn't get any better when you add it all up with the rest of this film. Although Naomi Watts is damn hot too!
Agreed Grover, IMHO the sacrifice scene and the gate-smashing scene are both the best of any version.
@@OlympicLeprechaun Thanks! I just saw your reply now... lol... sorry!
I like this movie and I ship Kong and Dawn Anne.
I've actually liked this version more than I thought I would. When I first saw it on VHS, all I heard were mostly bad things about it - largely due to the film failing to live up both to the quality and time-honored power of the original and its typically blatant over-promotion by Dino De Laurentiis (actually nicknamed De Horrendous due to his interference over filmmakers' original visions, especially David Lynch's DUNE). Seeing it, I was taken aback by how actually good it was. Yeah it was campy and over-the-top at times, and a number of the practical FX haven't aged as well, but Jeff Bridges, the colorful settings, the scope, John Barry score filled with romantic adventure and tragic longing, and Kong himself both in design and character (my favorite of the three versions) are definitely awesome. And its own story updated to match the true tone of the 1970's actually resonates now more than ever (I noticed even that KONG: SKULL ISLAND borrowed the setting and themes.)
But what really makes this version stand out for me even more is three factors. One, like Kong here, I actually was on top of the World Trade Center in the summer of 1998, visiting it with my old man and kid bro, three years before 9-11! Two, I actually rode the Kong ride at Universal Studios with my family months later, years before it got shut down. Three and finally, I actually visited Hawaii with my family and saw on a helicopter tour some of the locations that had been used for the '76 version. I never really thought that movie was that close to me in more ways than one, but there you go.
I really wish they had one of the swamp scenes but with a shark and Kong battles a triceratops or a brontosaurus or a t.rex cuz it's just a giant snake
But...sharks don't live in swamps. :P
@@rovertlladnarnosmoht3845 it could either be a Cretoxyrhina, or a bull shark, since bull sharks have been known to venture into fresh waters.
For me it would be an Elasmosaurus. But a bull shark or Cretoxyrhina would work too.
Say BigJackFilms do you ever think about making a Let's Talk video about what if Sailor Moon gets an American live-action movie?
This movie is so Boring, so Not as Good as Jurassic World
Jurassic World was far much better. At least it had awesome CG visuals, solid acting, and dinosaurs!
King Kong 1976 is my favorite movie as well I definitely agree with you I know it's haters could just back off
king kong 1976 already has a 10/10 rating in my book, but if it had dinousors, it would have a 11/10
It gets a 16/100
It's good to finally meet a king kong fan insted of Godzilla.
Rahul Khote I'm a Godzilla fan and Kong fan.
CretaceousTheHunted same but I like Kong a little more
King Kong is going to shove his fist so far up Godzilla's asshole when they meet. King Kong is going to make Godzilla his very own personal sock puppet.
Brandon Savitski WOW, I have not heard something that wrong in a long time!
I like both
You have changed me mind. I now love kong 1976. The Hottest kong girl will always be 76!! She even mentions Linda Lovelace master piece
My favorite king Kong I remember my parents taking me to see it when I was a kid
Me too; I miss those days of innocence
At least Queen Kong had dinosaurs
Stop saying that Kong: Skull Island is inspired by King Kong 1976. Just because it takes place in the 70s and some scenes are similar that doesn't mean it's automatically inspired by King Kong 1976, it's inspirations were King Kong 1933 and the Toho King Kong films. Jordon Vogt. Roberts mentioned nothing about King Kong 1976. Now before everybody starts saying that I'm forcing jack to hate King Kong 1976 I'm actually not, I'm ok if he likes King Kong 1976 so much, it's his opinion on the film, I just don't like that he still thinks Kong: Skull Island was inspired by King Kong 1976. If you don't know what part of the video I'm talking about go to 5:57.
Because Jordan Vogt Roberts mentioned nothing about Kong 76 being an inspiration to Kong: Skull Island. The similar scenes in both movies are more likely just a coincidence. Anything that Jordan Vogt Roberts does not mention in interviews or movie commentary doesn’t count as “inspiration”. And if you ask “ Then Why does Kong:Skull Island take place in the 70s?” That was because so much technology had improved at this time, and the fear of war took place in this decade, he wanted us to see and feel what the characters were seeing and feeling. You can’t just say that kong 76 inspired Kong:Skull Island and have no evidence to back it up with. And saying that Kong fighting helicopters, the meeting scene, and Kong picking the main actress out of the water is not evidence.
John Cornell there’s moments of 76 in 05. How?
John Cornell seriously, I didn’t see any “resemblance”.
John Cornell but what does legal ramifications have to do with the inspiration to the film, that’s like saying that Jordan Vogt Roberts had to pay rights to the makers of the 33 film and the Toho films for having similar scenes, dialogue, and actions.
John Cornell but what about Jordan Vogt Roberts? Wouldn’t he need the rights to 33 and the Toho films too?
I love Kong 76! I was ok with no dinosaurs because I saw the island as just having over grown animals. The giant snake was extremely cool to! Kong 76 is probably the coolest looking kong!
You know Jack, when I saw this movie for the first time, I actually thoroughly enjoyed it despite some of its minor flaws. I will agree with you that its an underrated take on the beauty and beast story and that its really big in scope. And I actually found it interesting to see Kong's unveiling in New York take place outside instead of inside an auditorium. And I did actually love the casting of Jessica Lange as the beauty who charmed the beast. However, I am not too much of a fan of the change in our leading lady's name from Ann Darrow to Dwan. But that's just my opinion.
One of my favourate films, I love the music, and my dad took me to see this in the cinema when it was released in the UK. My dad died in 1991 so I have great affection for this film, there are memories attached to it.
My deepest condolences to you and your family. I'm glad the film can give you some found memories. I would love to see it with a live audience.
Thank you for your very kind words.
No dinosaurs, in my opinion, made the film more believable. The only creatures we encounter are a giant ape and giant snake. Apes and snakes exist in the real world. Dinosaurs no longer do, so this selective inventory adds a sense of realism to the film. To say a lack of dinosaurs makes the sailors' quest to rescue Dwan boring is ridiculous. When you think about it, there really isn't much to their search. They make camp the first night, fire off a flare and set seismic charges the following morning, and arrive at the fatal ravine crossing not long after that. The INCLUSION of battles between Kong and his neighbors would've slowed the film's pace, a problem which plagued the 2005 version. We know very well Kong will survive any battle because his fate will not be met until New York. It was accepted and praised in 1933 because the wonder of stop-motion animation was still relatively new and had not been utilized to the extent it was in that film. As presented in 1976, the film is able to devote more time to the human characters and the negative impact Kong's presence has on their lives (through no fault of Kong's). So, for me, no dinosaurs was a good thing. Imagine if Lucas had all the prequel technology at his disposal in 1976 when making "Star Wars." We would've been robbed of the wonderful human interaction we instantly fell in love with, subjected, instead, to an endless parade of CGI aliens, monsters, and physics-defying Jedi stunts akin more to Looney Tunes than plausible human ability.
I was 12 years old in 76, and Dino's Kong hit me right at the onset of puberty. Needless to say, Jessica had a definite impact on my awkward, hormonal pre-teen brain.
I associated with Kong.. I knew why he looked at her like that.. and how awkward he felt trying to communicate with Dwan.. 76 Kong hit me at exactly the right age, and right stage in my life to form a kind of connection with Kong... yeah,Jack... This is totally my Kong !
The lack of dinosaurs were the only thing that sucked. Other than that to me it was great.
I like 1976
I just watched it again tonight, it's dreadful, worse than i ever remember it....
I'd rather gouge my own eyes out than watch the outdated 1933 version or that travesty heaping pile of shit 2005 movie that Peter Jackson created. 1976 King Kong is a shear brilliant riveting masterpiece of a movie.
I love this movie. One of favorites, ever. One thing that I'll add in is the relationship between Jack and Dwan. To me, that played just as big of a role and made the movie about as much as Kong and Dwan, honestly. And it really makes the ending that much better, and more tragic. In my opinion. Love your work man, keep it up.
I don't think it sucks.
Kong 76’ was the best one ever
I'm a fan of this film, but it does indeed have things that really bug me. The no dinosaur thing may be my top gripe. Buuuuuuut another really big thing for me is the "Suitmation Kong" That is a downer for me. As skilled as Rick Baker is, and his masks are really cool, it is still Rick in the suit. I just don't dig that. I actually LOVE the giant Robo Kong, wish there was more of him! And the end of the film is great! Very emotional and heartbreaking, anyone who is a critic of that must not have a heart.
BTW, I was 13 when I saw this in the theater with my dad. I really loved it at the time, and thought it worked pretty well except for the lack of Dinos. But as I got older, it has tarnished a bit, and I absolutely love the Peter Jackson remake.
I saw King Kong as a double feature with Logan's Run in 1977. I was in heaven.
As a lifelong Koong fan, where the 76 film kinda played loose with the sex stuff, at least it wasn't totally neutered sexually like all the other proceeding films. The recent "Kong" films where humans are bug sized to him, that isn't even really King Kong to me anymore. It's Kaiju Gorilla. Kong needs to have that girl he's obsessed with in the hand, to be Kong. Otherwise, just a oversized ape.
It wasnt a bad film, just needed dinosaurs.
He didn’t really touch upon it. But to summarize, overall the movie is pretty dull and for a bigger and more modern version of the story it just isn’t as entertaining.
I love this film. It's my favorite Kong film of all time. And in my opinion, it has the best Kong design.
Nah this movie sucks
@@alexyoutubechannel8175 Your opinion.
I admit the cast , skull island locations, relationship between Kong and Dwan is decent, but the film would be amazing if it had dinosaurs or large prehistoric like creatures like Kong Skull Island had.
I like Kong '76 as much as you do, Jack. I get picked on a lot for it.
So my dreams weren't lieing to me after all, I knew there was something missing at the snake scene, the door scene, and the one where he got to the train, and now the part where the Jessica was still unconscious
Yeah the memory plays tricks; sometimes hard to recall what we remember was the TV edit or the original cinema cut
I personally really liked the movie and I can totally see your side of the argument and yeah guys if you guys don't like the movie well that's just your opinion
The sexualization wan't intended by the filmmakers!??!?! Uh,,,wrong. The film is vulgar and in-your-face sexual. What are you talking about?
This movie is Awesome, it’s you and the haters who “suck”, get over it.
Dont worry guys the extended cut of the movie is on youtube
When I first saw the 76 king kong movie when I was little. I could this movie was a true loving amazing film that I have ever watched. And I'm sorry that you had to go through the horrible moment with the comments being negative, and being picky. Heck, I watched "the rage carrie 2", and it was one of my most favorite true loving, awesome movie. And some people say that carrie 2 movie was a fail and also a terrible film. But to me, carrie 2 has one of the most greatest musics that almost had me cry when i listen to them while watching this movie. And the 76 king kong film has the greatest adventures that I love to watch.
Yeah, I'm not sure weather Kong is perverted, or if people who say that aren't just being puritanical.
Def doesn't suck, but it is mediocre IMO. It's alright.. I don't think it had a very good ending, and while Jessica Lange turned out to be a great actress, I didn't find her to be very good in this role. Naomi Watts was far better and more believable IMO. To me neither remake is perfect. The Jackson film has heart, emotion, a great cast, and action, but Jesus Christ Peter Jackson 3 hrs 21 min long. I don't have all damn day to watch a movie.. The whole first half of that movie needed to be severely edited down.. I don't need to personally get to know every person on the ship, taking us to Skull Island.
dbreiden83080 well after you watch the extended cut of return of the king 3 hrs and 20 minutes isn't that long.
Lots of movies are just ok. Big difference..
I think Jackson wanted to make a 5 hour Kong movie. Good Lord I just don't have the time.
My dad ran a movie theatre that played KING KONG in 1976. I was ten years old at the time, the perfect age for a giant gorilla movie. And even I thought it sucked. In fact, audiences back then thought it sucked, too. But you have to remember, in 1976 there was no internet to distract you or social media to share consensus. We had three crappy VHF TV stations on crappy little TVs. So even if the movie sucked, if it had a 40-foot tall gorilla, we still went to the theatre to see it. I actually appreciate the film much more today, however. It's still a bad film, but it's also an amazing time capsule of people, culture, and ideas. The obsession with oil may not seem as pertinent today, but coming off the Arab oil embargo which saw Americans sitting in gas lines for an hour had a major impact at the time. And KING KONG attempted to speak to that. Rick Baker's attempt at putting a human in an ape suit remains one of the best I've seen to this day. And he really does manage to get some emotion through all of those mechanics and makeup. Not bad. Of course, the 40-foot animatronic was simply too ambitious. It was probably more about PR, anyway. But yes, the bottom line is that it sucks, BUT it's one of those sucks where it can still be enjoyable to watch, and may be even must-see for any fan of 70s film.
This is nowhere near as good as the original. But it's also nowhere near as bad as sume people say. Let's face it we all missed the dinosaurs here. But the goal they looked to be going for was to bring kong to life. Make him look as real as possible. The music is fantastic by John Barry. I'd give it a 5/10. But the original is a fucking 10/10. And the Peter Jackson one is a 8/10.