GamerTab That was an excellent one.

VividSimon Simply Perfect

UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

adonis98-743-186503 A petroleum exploration expedition comes to an isolated island and encounters a colossal giant gorilla. King Kong (1976) is a much better film than the IMDb rating suggest it is. I really liked the fact that the movie stayed true to the characters origin and even tho it does get kinda ridiculous at times like Kong trying to play with Dwan and he eventually slips off her dress by accident or the fact that during a big chase threw the streets of New York Dwan asks for a drink when a giant Ape is on a loose and stomps people. Also i gotta give the Production a credit there were some pretty good shots and the practical effects were quite great for a 70's film plus i did liked both Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange. The whole story of Kong was always quite sad cause Kong was just an innocent animal that fall in love for a woman and unfortunately he lost his life and basically sacrificed himself in order for her to live and the way that this whole thing is portrayed here is much more "realistic" on it's own way. Great Cast, Good Performances, some good Goofy Moments and some really good Practical Effects and overall i quite enjoyed this film way more than i was actually expecting. (A+)

davidlamb4 As a 17-year-old student at the local college I saw this film at our small-town cinema. I was fairly uncritical and to me this seemed pretty good as a 'big event' film of the day. But I saw it at a matinée, and my abiding memory is of the climax in which Kong is shot to pieces, in glorious technicolor. Small children, their faces wet with tears and breaking their hearts, were carried out by their mums, having presumably gone to the cinema as a Christmas treat. Clearly the film's certification was incorrect.

blackkatbone It's not a popular opinion, but this movie has all the bad effects of Wrath of the Titans and none of the charm. Lange's character is vapid and obnoxious. It's cheesy and over-dramatic, and the movie's only saving grace is its commentary on big oil and Western greed. I did not see the 1930's version, so I can't make a comparison.

Scott LeBrun 1970s style re-imagining of the legendary cinema beauty-and-the-beast story stars Jeff Bridges as Jack Prescott, a hippie-ish paleontology professor who hitches a ride with an oil company's vessel. Their fearless leader, Fred Wilson (a shamelessly hammy Charles Grodin), is convinced that somewhere in the ocean near Surabaya is an island that's just rich with potential. Of course, we all know the story: what the adventurers find instead is an enormous ape, revered by the people of the island. Wilson attempts to salvage something out of the trip by transporting Kong back to NYC and putting him on display, but we know nothing good can come of this.This Dino De Laurentiis production is really not that terrible as its reputation would suggest. It just suffers some from a bit of overlength, an inadvisable campy approach, and its silly, silly characters & dialogue. The special effects (overseen by Carlo Rambaldi, later to create E.T.) are variable - sometimes they work well, sometimes not so well. The treat is watching makeup effects legend Rick Baker don a gorilla costume for some scenes. Although this remake is done in colour and widescreen, it just doesn't quite have the atmosphere of the 1933 film. It might have been nice to see a few more wonders on the island; as it is, we only get to see Kong do battle with a giant snake. The fact that in this instance Kong climbs not The Empire State Building but The Twin Towers may affect how some people respond to the film in this day and age. One obvious asset is the majestic music score by John Barry.Bridges is likable, but there are times when his character might infuriate some people. Grodin performs as if the filmmakers told him to "act more like Robert Armstrong" (Carl Denham in the 1933 production), and the character is so obnoxious and sleazy that you can't help but cheer when he inevitably gets his. Many viewers thought that Jessica Langes' debut film performance was highly inauspicious, but her appeal and beauty are undeniable. There's a very strong supporting cast: John Randolph, Rene Auberjonois, Julius Harris, Jack O'Halloran, Dennis Fimple, and Ed Lauter. It's nice to see 50s sci-fi star John Agar in a cameo as a lying weasel of a city official; John Lone, Corbin Bernsen, and Joe Piscopo have bits.In the end, the love that Kong lavishes upon Dwan (Lange) is still pretty poignant, and you can't help but feel very bad for Kong.Followed by a sequel (!) 10 years later, incredibly enough."King Kong" '76 misses its potential for true greatness, but it's still pretty decent entertainment.Seven out of 10.