|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on May 18, 2021 3:12:57 GMT
Jeff Bridges really had a lustrous set of hair and beard.
That final moment between Dwan and Jack says a lot.
Kong is one helluva bloody mess in his final moments.
That $500,000 40 foot animatronic Kong barely gets any screen time.
Not sedating Kong on the boat ride back to New York. Why?
Between the original, 1976, and the 2005 version, the 1976 is my least favorite but that doesn’t mean I hate it.
The Blu-ray includes the three hour TV cut.
|
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on May 18, 2021 3:20:30 GMT
It was basically a good movie, if one doesn't expect a lot. The "preachiness" is well founded, but bores most people after a while. The hypocrisy and hatred (the hero cheering for Kong when Kong kills human beings) is totally sicko. The ideology of natives missing a big beast is not well explained by the ideology. The real reason was explained in another movie, where Kong serves as guardian against truly vicious monsters, but that's not why the hero believes Kong is important to the natives.
However, the hero and heroine are likable enough to make it a watchable movie. Their "average next door looks" make them even more relatable as opposed to the original version of a superman-superwoman couple. Jessica Lange is just an average looking woman that would never be a guy's first pick at the party, and the same for Bridges. They're just an ordinary looking pair. And that's the biggest appeal here, really.
6/10, better than the Fay Wray, but not as good as the Jack Black.
By far, the very best Kong film is the one with the most charismatic actor in lead, Robert Armstrong, and that is SON OF KONG. This one got it all perfect, the pathos, the depth of character, the hottest heroine of the Kong films, and the best story. 9/10
The Godzilla/Gojira, Mothra, Rodan films are generally better, because the Japanese capture a much better atmosphere than American film makers. We get identifiable characters, especially in the more "fantasy" oriented ones like "Son of Godzilla" and "Mothra". The camaraderie is something that Americans can't seem to cope with, and many spoiled brat Americans get their feelings hurt by this fellowship, out of jealousy of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on May 18, 2021 3:24:09 GMT
I like it, particularly Jessica Lange. It's got that old-school adventure feel to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ass_E9 on May 18, 2021 3:54:32 GMT
I recall nothing, except that Charles Grodin probably was very unconvincing in his death scene.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonesjxd on May 18, 2021 10:52:08 GMT
I bought the Shout Factory blu-ray and watched the three-hour cut over the weekend. I had only ever seen this movie on TV growing up, seeing it in high-def I realized this was very much a prestige picture. This came out in the wake of The Poseidon Adventure and Jaws, Paramount was clearly thinking Oscar with this movie. The cinematography in the movie is really incredible, the scale of the movie is huge and the score really might be my favorite thing John Barry ever composed. I will really say this is my favorite version of these core human characters, Charles Grodin as an anxiety riddled oil executive turned PT Barnum wannabe just works better for me than a self indulgent filmmaker. Jeff Bridges as a cynical, basically anti-human primate paleontologist is interesting both in the context of 1976 and being a prototype for so many of todays detached movie heroes. And then there's Dwan, first off Jessica Lange is electric in this role, she's stunning and oozes with screen presence. For most of my generation we know her as the cornerstone of American Horror Story, but it's a wonder she wasn't the hugest thing in Hollywood after this movie. The origins of her character are kind of shrouded in mystery, all we know is she goes by Dwan, she claims she was an aspiring actress who was aboard a film directors yacht that exploded. That's pretty much all we get out of her, but what we soon learn is this woman never matured past the emotional state of a 16 year old and literally the only way she can express herself through sexuality. Watching this movie again in the wake of the Weinstein and Epstein scandals it kind of tells you the subtext of what the filmmakers were going for with her character. She fell off a casting couch straight into the hands of a giant ape. Now onto the ape. This certainly is not my favorite King Kong, but it's certainly the most bizarre version of him. While I do think there are shots of Kong in the movie that really do work well, it is still just Rick Baker in a suit, and so much of the perspective filmmaking just doesn't work. Kong as a character is really stretching the bounds of decency. Kong doesn't want to be friends with Dwan (like Kong '33), he doesn't see her as a pet (like Kong '05), he doesn't see her as an insignificant curiosity (like Kong '17), this Kong is horny and is courting Dwan for sex, they even use the word "rape". This takes that Kevin Smith scene about Superman having sex with Lois Lane and multiples it by a million, it forces you to think of too many really bizarre and disgusting possibilities for that alternate ending of them staying on the island and consummating their relationship.
Interesting movie, I'm happy to have it in my collection because I'm a big Kong fan. I put it in the C+/B- area.
EDIT:
I actually prefer there being no dinosaurs on the island. That is a big plus for this movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by wmcclain on May 18, 2021 11:07:16 GMT
King Kong (1976), directed by John Guillermin. This version is not much admired, and in fact it doesn't have a lot to offer. They spent a lot on the ape effects, but the illusion of size and space is mostly missing. Hawaii provides some nice Skull Island locations, but there is also too much soundstage work. We're used to the Beauty and the Beast aspect. We always feel pity for Kong and wonder at the strangely emotional and sensual bond between him and Dwan (yes, that's her name). They try to hit something more here: the worship of celebrity, parallel to the natives' worship of their ape god. Introducing Jessica Lange as our heroine, guided by horoscopes and torn between fame and love. It's hard to see stowaway scientist Jeff Bridges through that hair, but he either has his mouth hanging open in astonishment, or clenched tight with outrage: "There's a girl out there who might be running for her life from some gigantic turned-on ape!" Charles Grodin is supposed to be both funny and irritating as the oil company big cheese. He gets the irritating part right. He's stomped in the end, thank goodness. Kong climbs the World Trade Center in this version and jumps between the towers. His end is bloody but reasonably quick. They say 30,000 people showed up as extras for the street scenes. John Barry score. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on May 18, 2021 11:11:59 GMT
I hated it.
That ape had a rape face throughout the movie and the effects are awful. Kong animatronic looked like a circus attraction.
|
|
|
|
Post by rudeboy on May 18, 2021 11:25:35 GMT
The '33 film may be one of the five or ten greatest films ever made imo. This one isn't terrible, as I recall, but even as a kid I found it dull, with an unconvincing Kong and only that lousy snake to keep him company on Skull Island. Jackson's folly at least had some (too much) ambition.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on May 18, 2021 13:49:07 GMT
Campy and boring.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on May 18, 2021 20:52:08 GMT
KING KONG is terrifying, but also repetitive at times. The special effects still work to this day, but Fay Wray and Bruce Cabot have no chemistry. This was one of the 1st movies with sound and the makers clearly wanted to squeeze the juice out of it, because Wray screams her lungs out so many times! I know this was a landmark for monster movies and disaster movies, but I felt it was also a landmark for torture porn. I mean, the monsters' deaths aren’t graphic because there couldn’t be many close-ups, but the way the title character kills them is still gruesome. And after killing them, he moves their bodies around. And when the humans shot the STEGOSAURUS and it kept moving and they kept shooting at it... Yikes! 8/10 SON OF KONG is more of a long epilogue than a sequel. Most of what happens are just the post-effects of the events from the 1st movie. In that one, KONG didn’t appear until 40 minutes in. That was fine then because it was a 100-long minute movie, but they do the same thing in this 70-long minute movie. Fatal mistake. And when KONG JR. appears, it just becomes more of the same. Except this time they wanted to add more comedy, so the tone is uneven. CARL DENHAM whines the whole movie about KONG’s death. And he helps KONG JR. saying that he owes it to the family. What was the point of all of that if he was going to cause KONG JR.’s death (as well as the island natives’) and then not feel that bad about it?! 3/10 It takes way too long for the title character in ゴジラ (GODZILLA) to appear. Instead, the movie focuses on very boring characters. But when he does show up... Good God! He’s terrifying! The special effects have aged well and having a social commentary about the nuclear holocaust doesn’t hurt. 4/10 ゴジラの逆襲 (GODZILLA RAIDS AGAIN) 3/10 What I said about ゴジラ (GODZILLA) appearing way too late in his film also applies to モスラ (MOTHRA)... but it’s twice as bad. It takes a long time for the title character to appear and, when she does, it’s as a larva. She turns into a moth 15 minutes before the movie is over. The fact that she flies is a display of better special effects than its predecessors, but it doesn’t make you forget that every other technical aspect sucks. 1/10 The humans in キングコング対ゴジラ (KING KONG VS GODZILLA) are surprisingly not boring (and I’m not just saying that due to Ichiro Arishima’s hilariously bad performance). Because of that, this could easily have been better than ゴジラ (GODZILLA)... if it wasn't for the special effects. The ones in the 1st movie have aged well not because of their quality but because of the trickery to hide imperfections. This movie has a lot of lighting, close-ups and scenes during the day that expose the imperfections. Also, most of KINGU KONG'S gestures are laughable. Oodaku (the giant octopus) is one of my all-time favorite movie characters. He's the scariest and grossest monster in this franchise. I wish it had been given a spin-off. 3/10 モスラ対ゴジラ (MOTHRA VS GODZILLA) 3/10 三大怪獣 地球最大の決戦 (GHIDORAH THE 3-HEADED MONSTER) 1/10 怪獣大戦争 (INVASION OF ASTRO-MONSTER) 0/10 ゴジラ・エビラ・モスラ: 南海の大決闘 (EBIRAH: HORROR OF THE DEEP) 0/10 怪獣島の決戦: ゴジラの息子 (SON OF GODZILLA) 0/10 キングコングの逆襲 (KING KONG ESCAPES) 0/10 怪獣総進撃 (DESTROY ALL MONSTERS) 1/10 ゴジラ・ミニラ・ガバラ: オール怪獣大進撃 (ALL MONSTERS ATTACK) 0/10 ゴジラ対ヘドラ (GODZILLA VS HEDORAH) 1/10 地球攻撃命令: ゴジラ対ガイガン (GODZILLA VS GIGAN) 0/10 ゴジラ対メガロ (GODZILLA VS MEGALON) 1/10 ゴジラ対メカゴジラ (GODZILLA VS MECHAGODZILLA) 4/10 メカゴジラの逆襲 (TERROR OF MECHAGODZILLA) 1/10 KING KONG showed that the title character was a victim, but only at the end. Throughout the rest, he was a monster. KING KONG 1976 emphasizes more on the idea that he’s a victim and on the idea that he loves ANN--I mean DWAN. So it easily could’ve been on the same level (if not better) than the original movie... if it wasn’t for the special effects. I mean, the suit and the giant robot look real separately, but they don't look similar enough, which is distracting. The makers didn’t want the title character to be seen as a regular gorilla, so they asked actor/make-up artist Rick Baker to walk like a human. No problem there, but why did he walk like a human who had just woken up? I can buy that the earth doesn’t move everytime KONG walks, but what about when he falls down? And when he jumps from one building to another? Speaking of that, there wasn’t even a scratch on the ledge when he landed. 5/10 KING KONG LIVES 1/10 GODZILLA 1998 3/10 It would be unfair to say that KING KONG 2005 is the best of the franchise for having better production values. It’s the best of the franchise because it combines the positive elements of the scripts of the 1933 and 1976 versions. The result is... well, everything. I mean, the movie has drama, comedy, action, adventure, horror and romance. It has both epic moments and intimate moments. Also, Naomi Watts' performance is great. I don’t mind that it’s 3-hours-long, but it didn’t need to be. A lot of the action sequences are either too long or just unnecessary. Ironically, it felt like some scenes were missing. Specially what happens between the capture of the title character and his show in New York. This remake gives a full personality and a backstory to most characters. Even ANN’s fellow actors (who only appear at the beginning) felt important. However, except for ANN, JACK, CARL and KONG, they all disappear during the final part. So what was the point?! 8/10 GODZILLA 2014 4/10 ------------------------------------- You can read comments of other movies in my blog. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on May 18, 2021 21:00:24 GMT
It’s pretty dull when compared to the original and the Peter Jackson one. The only particularly noteworthy thing about it is that it’s clearly a product of post-Vietnam/Watergate America.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 18, 2021 23:58:26 GMT
I prefer it to the 2005 version which I hate.
Kong is a Pepsi commercial character in that. The idea that the woman would not be afraid of a giant ape--especially in the 1930s is just ridiculous.
It's a horrible remake of the 33' film. They add useless characters--and even though script was written by Jackson's wife--the original was also written by a woman so no glass-ceiling was broken there.
The 76 film is a bad remake of the original--no dinosaurs except a limp snake, the ape walks on two legs, but the mask technology is amazing and was groundbreaking at the time.
Jeff Bridges--who is this hippie? He and Grodin are good in a bad remake.
As for Bruce Cabot--I think he was perfectly cast because he is supposed to be rough-a tough egg who goes sappy--he kinda does-I especially like the way he mumbles "I'm sorry" when he hits in her face by accident.
I don't think he and Ann were supposed to have chemistry because you are supposed to feel sorry for Kong by the end--and if Cabot was too likable then it would interfere with that.
Driscoll is the one who comes up with the airplane idea. You would never see a character like that now.
I bet the next remake will suggest he and Briggs have a thing going on.
Or him and Captain Englehorn. And Charlie the cook will support Red China.
They should make Ann a tranny. Kong would be like: what the fuck? Let me fall off this building to get out of this freak show city.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on May 19, 2021 0:27:23 GMT
I prefer it to the 2005 version which I hate. Kong is a Pepsi commercial character in that. The idea that the woman would not be afraid of a giant ape--especially in the 1930s is just ridiculous. It's a horrible remake of the 33' film. They add useless characters--and even though script was written by Jackson's wife--the original was also written by a woman so no glass-ceiling was broken there. The 76 film is a bad remake of the original--no dinosaurs except a limp snake, the ape walks on two legs, but the mask technology is amazing and was groundbreaking at the time. Jeff Bridges--who is this hippie? He and Grodin are good in a bad remake. As for Bruce Cabot--I think he was perfectly cast because he is supposed to be rough-a tough egg who goes sappy--he kinda does-I especially like the way he mumbles "I'm sorry" when he hits in her face by accident. I don't think he and Ann were supposed to have chemistry because you are supposed to feel sorry for Kong by the end--and if Cabot was too likable then it would interfere with that. Driscoll is the one who comes up with the airplane idea. You would never see a character like that now. I bet the next remake will suggest he and Briggs have a thing going on. Or him and Captain Englehorn. And Charlie the cook will support Red China. They should make Ann a tranny. Kong would be like: what the fuck? Let me fall off this building to get out of this freak show city. I would’ve guessed that you would hate the 76 film the most for having an environmentalist and anti-corporate message and for having the black crew member survive Kong’s initial rampage...
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 19, 2021 0:53:03 GMT
I would’ve guessed that you would hate the 76 film the most for having an environmentalist and anti-corporate message and for having the black crew member survive Kong’s initial rampage... Why would I support corporations or be anti-environment? That's a dumb thing to say.
Considering the movie takes place in the 70s during the energy crisis there's no surprise to that--the quest for oil on the island wasn't a crazy update, not as bad as having a playwright sub-plot in the 2005 version.
And that's just stupid to say about the black crew member. I don't even remember that.
At least they kept the islanders black which was accurate since African tribes migrated to islands in the Indian Ocean. Making them Polynesian or Maori was not more accurate but less so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spike Del Rey on May 19, 2021 15:44:13 GMT
John Barry's score and Jessica Lange's boob flash are the only two redeeming aspects of this turd.
|
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on May 19, 2021 15:48:20 GMT
Just bought the new Shout Factory blu-ray today.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on May 19, 2021 15:51:36 GMT
Just bought the new Shout Factory blu-ray today. I like their releases including reversible covers with the theatrical poster art. |
|
|
|
Post by Jep Gambardella on May 19, 2021 18:38:34 GMT
King Kong (1976), directed by John Guillermin. This version is not much admired, and in fact it doesn't have a lot to offer. They spent a lot on the ape effects, but the illusion of size and space is mostly missing. Hawaii provides some nice Skull Island locations, but there is also too much soundstage work. We're used to the Beauty and the Beast aspect. We always feel pity for Kong and wonder at the strangely emotional and sensual bond between him and Dwan (yes, that's her name). They try to hit something more here: the worship of celebrity, parallel to the natives' worship of their ape god.Introducing Jessica Lange as our heroine, guided by horoscopes and torn between fame and love. It's hard to see stowaway scientist Jeff Bridges through that hair, but he either has his mouth hanging open in astonishment, or clenched tight with outrage: "There's a girl out there who might be running for her life from some gigantic turned-on ape!" Charles Grodin is supposed to be both funny and irritating as the oil company big cheese. He gets the irritating part right. He's stomped in the end, thank goodness. Kong climbs the World Trade Center in this version and jumps between the towers. His end is bloody but reasonably quick. They say 30,000 people showed up as extras for the street scenes. John Barry score.
I totally bought the attachment that the Naomi Watts character felt for Kong in the Peter Jackson version. Jessica Lange in the 1976 version? Not even remotely believable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on May 19, 2021 19:11:42 GMT
In the original he's alone. Even the villagers-they don't worship him-they fear him and try to keep him out--going with the sailors to block the gate.
But by the time of the sequel, he was now regarded as a tragic figure- Denham apologizes to son of Kong in one scene.
But making the woman care for him is anachronistic (especially if set in the 30s) and unnecessary.
He's more of a wild independent creature in the original. But come on, in the 2005 version he's totally domesticated. They took the "goes sappy" line from the original and made it completely literal. At least in the 76 version he wasn't giggling at a dance routine.
He did undress Ann in the original film--the problem was, since they were not using a puppet, it is harder to avoid the sexual innuendo since it is a guy in a costume. He's not going to be acting so innocent as a puppet would appear.
The original Kong was more like a spider monkey in mannerisms than a gorilla.
|
|
