Rating: 
Summary: It's tough being compared to a legend.
Review: I will agree this movie gets ripped on more than it deserves but for whatever good things it has going, it seems to have just as many bad. It has a great John Barry score , a great visual look , and some great looking locations. The restored aspect is far superior to the full screen version and the DVD looks great. Bridges is ok, and Grodin plays a good sleazy corporate weenie type. Where the thing drags for me is the Jessica Lange character. We know she is an Oscar caliber actress and even though this is her first big role, I'll blame the writers for it. Some of her dialog is so bad it's almost good. She does look great here (she was in her early 20's). If you go into it without comparing it to the original, it's not a bad adventure/action/monster flick.
Rating: 
Summary: M.F. from south Arkansas.
Review: This is a great movie the special effects were outstanding Kong looks very reel.The actors were great also it does not take away from the orriginal it lives up to it.So buy this movie!
Rating: 
Summary: Best If Seen Before Age 8!
Review: I remember seeing this movie when I was maybe five years old, when it ran on TV. I remember the scene where Kong battles the giant snake and rips it apart -- that image was so horrific it gave me nightmares for years. Then, when I was in college, I rented the movie and watched it again. The instant I saw that snake, I was on my feet pointing at the TV screen, shouting "Fake! It's a #!@! toy snake!" It's silly, I know -- the cinematic equivalent of finding out the monster outside your bedroom window is just an old gnarly tree. Honestly, it's a pretty wretched movie, but for a while there, it had me good and scared.
Rating:
Summary: JESSICA LANGE - THE SOLE REASON TO SEE THIS FILM
Review: Sure, Ms. Lange's performance seemed a bit spacey and unintentionally comical. But her performance did hinted at her acting potential - which is enormous, as we now know. She exudes a kind of innocent charm that few other actresses have. ALSO, HER BEING IMPROBABLY GORGEOUS DOESN'T HURT THE FILM EITHER. She is the true American beauty - and she got brains too!!!!
Rating:
Summary: An Updated Remake, for 1976...
Review: I used to see this movie all the time and loved it, especially with Kong wrecking the city. But compared to the origional, the sexuality in this movie is pretty blatant. In '33 Kong tears off Fay Wrays clothes in a playfull manner. In this version he smiles as he peel's of Jessica Langes top! The SPFX were good for the time. Even though some people think Kong was played totally by a giant animatronic ape, it was only used for 3 scenes in the movie. But the Kong suit created by Rick Baker and Carlo Rambaldi is one of the best things about it.
Rating: 
Summary: worth a laugh maybe
Review: the only reason i didn't give this just one star was because there were some interesting native scenes in the beginning of the film. other than that the effects were awful, the acting was nearly as bad and like i said, it's more laughable than anything else.
Rating:
Summary: Why are there bad reviews on this film??
Review: I really wonder why are there not enough positive reviews on this film. Some tend to compare with 1933 version. Then there are comments that this is only about a monkey in a suit. 1976 didn't had the special effects technology that they have it right now, base on the limitation factor I feel that the makers of King King 1976 did an excellent job. There are always movies or serials that always remind us of our young days when we were growing. Star Wars, King King, Jaws, Charlie's Angels, Bee Gees, ABBA are landmarks in our memories that remind us of yesteryears. This movie may not be a classic to the critics but it is a classic for those who were kids, yes we were kids. Now that I see it again, I enjoy it and so does my family. This movie is just excellent.
Rating:
Summary: Big budget remake thats not as bad as its reputation says.
Review: The remake of 1933s king kong is great.There have been some drastic changes,but in its own way it still a great advenure film.I liked how they changed the Empire state building into the world trade center,and the helicoptors replaceing the planes.Very good.
Rating:
Summary: Good Retelling of the 1933 Classic
Review: I first saw this movie when I was 8 years old and was blown away by it. I hadn't seen the original at the time, but since then I have. I love both of them. Although this version is somewhat dated by Jessica Lange's spacey performance, the film still survives on it's immpressive special effects, witty and fast paced screenplay, and an amazing score by John Barry. It may not have the magic of the original, but on it's own merit, this film is classic of it's genre.
Rating: 
Summary: Waste of time
Review: This movie is just a waste of time. I was hoping it'd be an updated version of the 1933 classic. Maybe tweak it or fine-tune some of the weak points. But instead they threw out all the stuff that made the original Kong so great (the tight plot, the cool special effects, the eerie music, the psychotic dinosaurs, and so on) and made it contemporary. The new plot is just weird, the music isn't that great, the special effects are worse than Godzilla, and there aren't any dinosaurs, save a paper-mache snake that shows up for maybe half a minute. Throwing in swears DOESN'T make the movie any more sophisticated! Ugh.And for the record, most of Kong's scenes WERE done by a rubber suit. The giant robot Kong was only used in a few scenes.
|
