King Kong (1976) - Adventure, Horror

Hohum Score

21

Watchable

A petroleum exploration expedition comes to an isolated island and encounters a colossal giant gorilla.

IMDB: 5.9
Director: John Guillermin
Stars: Jeff Bridges, Charles Grodin
Length: 134 Minutes
PG Rating: PG
Reviews: 31 out of 220 found boring (14.09%)

One-line Reviews (130)

I saw this on a double feature with the equally dull Bug (read the book the Hephaestus Plague instead) and nearly fell asleep during both.

Jessica Lange was better eye candy then Fay Wray and made for an intriguing love interest to Kong.

Despite it's bad reputation I actually rather enjoyed it.

This expands the story to become a parable extolling the significance of understanding and affection over empty corporate greed measuring everything only by its dollar value.

worth watching .

Terrible, yet slightly entertaining.

Just the same, Jessica Lange should hide in shame when viewers see her talking to Kong with a disco '76 sensibility (or lack of sensibility) and making trite jokes that should have inspired the great ape to squish her to shut her up.

Instead of the fast-paced and engagingly simple story lines of the originals, we got slow, uninteresting, and hopelessly convoluted story lines that no one could possibly care about - even if they could actually follow what was happening.

The thrilling dino-scenes have been omitted in favor of sequences of a more dramatic nature.

I found it big, exciting, funny and sad.

But it is entertaining.

Overall, this isn't a good movie, but the acting is okay and there are a few mildly entertaining scenes.

The changes they made to update Kong for the seventies were intriguing (as they wanted the script to be completely different from the Cooper/Schoedsack masterpiece), and I'm left curious, had Sir Peter Jackson chosen to make Kong a 21st-century schizoid apeman instead of doing a period piece, how that would have transpired.

I know that this version sometimes looks so naive but I think that this is one of its strength too because this movie just looks being entertaining nothing else.

And, while some of the scenes between Lange and the ape are campy and filled with cliché after cliché, they were still endearing and heart-warming.

Lange is stunning in her first film and Bridges wears a shaggy haircut and beard.

It's slow, at the time Jessica couldn't act worth a damn, had so many fake posters showing things that never happened.

Kong's death in '76 was even more pointless than in '33.

The only way I could consider it "thrilling" is thanks to John Barry's thunderous, booming music score.

However, the campy humor produces more groans than laughs while the variable special effects are strictly hit or miss throughout (Kong's dramatic entrance rates as a definite rousing highlight while his fight with a huge fake snake fails to pass muster).

The film flows nicely along, and is quite enjoyable right up to the moment Kong is first revealed.

Kline's sumptuous widescreen cinematography provides a breathtaking glossy look.

Another point in favor of this movie is that it lasts just 134 minutes instead of the 187 minutes of the 2005 which I found very long and sometimes boring.

And the leading male, a scruffy Jeff Bridges, is a huge bore, perhaps the second biggest reason for the film falling flat in so many scenes.

From a contemporary view point, the stumbles for this film are stunning.

However, the film is overlong and filled with pointless exposition that goes absolutely nowhere, while on the whole the entire Skull Island sequence is uneventful and devoid of tension, mystery and atmosphere.

The pacing is too slow and doesn't have a lot of action...

I kept waiting for it to turn bad and it does slightly in the last 15 minutes but up to then it had been a highly entertaining engrossing action movie.

The Editing is fast pace and exciting.

The story is poorly paced and dull, while I felt nothing for the characters and didn't believe at all in the contrived romance.

Although the hair styles are indicative of the 70's (Bridges's makes him resemble a Wookie), as are the clothing styles, I still find this movie quite endearing, adventurous, and entertaining.

Despite my preference for the '30s stop-motion model, I always enjoy watching monsters tearing up the skyline, and scenes like the one where Kong derails a train are inherently entertaining.

They move very slowly and the fingers move even slower, meaning they sort of resemble large fly swats.

The updating of the characters for 70s sensibilities now seems as dated as the ones in the original movie,and Jessica Lange's heroine just comes across as an empty headed bimbo.

Yet those Japanese movies are fun, action-packed and entertaining, for the most part everything that KING KONG isn't.

While the original Kong spent half the movie beating up an impressive collection of fanged agents of death, this film contains only one other monster, which, after a very brief and very boring struggle, never shows its rubber muppet-like self again.

The production is smooth, the photography impressive, the locations superb and the story and characters engaging.

Director John Guillermin gives this picture an impressive sense of scope, keeps the enjoyable story moving along at a steady pace, and stages the exciting climax atop the World Trade Center with flair and skill.

It has some breathtaking cinematography of both Hawaii (the stand-in for Skull Island) and New York City (capturing perfectly the New York I first experienced as a child), a terrific John Barry score and some reasonably good action that holds up the entire length of the film (and Rene Auberjoinois totally steals the picture with his one line, "You'll get better mileage filling your Cadillac with mulep***.

less faithful to the original,but more entertaining than the recently released version .

The biggest reason is the director, who has to take the rap for all the missed opportunities, for making an amazing ending dull, and for not sucking us into the ambitious sets and novel updating of the now-classic story.

The enthusiastic film-maker of the original version is replaced by an uninteresting oil-hunting expedition and Kong is just a man in a suit.

Its hard to dismiss memories of the 1933 film when it was so much more engaging.

Boredom .

I thought this film in particular was boring.

The musical score is quite compelling and lends quite a bit to the feeling of mystery and wonder this movie captures, though it is classic 70's score.

Now that the 70s are over, I see this as a giant waste of time.

It is entertaining, engrossing, and so classic you have to love it.

i found it more entertaining than the latest version,much more exciting.

Sometimes entertaining but too damn tedious to full enjoy .

And the NYC model was totally empty and sterile-clean when he went for his stroll--sniffing out the heroine!!

I recommend it to everyone who wants to relax watching a light and entertaining adventure movie.

It goes on forever and I found it frequently boring.

Thankfully, we have the 2005 version to perfectly blend the best qualities of the previous versions into one thrilling masterpiece!

its a cornball movie,bad but enjoyable.

Had another actor been cast in this preachy photographer role, liking and even thinking he understands simians over humans (especially the 11th hour American Military in Copters that he infamously cheers upon their destruction), would be annoying and/or pretentious, even cliché: Given his cred, it's no surprise that Bridges can be just cool enough to add a tinge of pulpy action hero to the hairy modern do-gooder...

While this production is now heavily dated and yes, there are campy moments, and the unbearable clichés, this was a state-of-the-art production in its time.

It's intriguing that they had originally wanted Joseph Sargent to direct with Peter Falk starring, and that Meryl Streep was considered for the role that eventually went to Jessica Lange.

I just found it a little dull.

Its suspenseful, terrifying, incredible and heartbreaking.

entertaining hokum .

' The thing about this, is that if it was made anywhere else, I probably wouldn't have enjoyed it as much as I did.

after that its all predictable adventures.

Entertaining, campy fun .

I don't understand why Dino De Laurentiis wanted to make this, it has dragged his name, Jessica Langes name and John Guillermans name through the mud for almost thirty year now - in fact, Lange managed to get up again and win two Oscars, so i suppose i shouldn't count her in this.

The scenes where Kong "rampages" through a suddenly empty Manhattan are substantially less fun (and less convincing) than even the worst of the old Godzilla movies.

The romance between Dwan and Jack seemed contrived once I got older.

One of the best features of the original is the thrilling Skull Island sequences with numerous dinosaurs.

I liked it as a piece of harmless entertaining fun although it can't really compare to the original.

While this endeavor does start off a bit slow, the necessary character development has begun, and takes place along the way.

The script feels slow and stilted, and the film is way overlong, playing out an all-too-familiar story at boring length.

To be frank, I've always found the original King Kong to be painfully boring.

Whether its the laugh factor (some of the special effects are silly while some things that this Kong does are damn right human rather than ape like), or whether its the 70's take on a classic film, this movie IS worth watching.

This seemingly dark adaption to Merian C Cooper's and Egdar Wallace's has proved itself to be - an enjoyable and uncanningly talented piece of work.

It's always fun to start a review by getting everyone p'ed off so they can get right to their "not helpful" vote and quickly move on, so here it is--if you are a big Steven Spielberg fan, there's a good chance you'll find this John Guillermin-directed version of King Kong entertaining, because all of the flaws typical of Spielberg are present here.

Finally, the beautifully gorgeous and stunning Jessica Lange, delivers an outstanding performance as the Beauty Who Charmed The Beast.

It's charming, action packed, beautiful, thought provoking, and heart poundingly scary at all the right moments.

It is fast paced too, which is something most remakes aren't.

Very dull—especially the "lush tropical, primitive island.

with yet another remake coming i hope they dont go back to the its no story line or character development origins!

The result, is a slow start, which is just bearable not to fast forward the movie.

Silly but Entertaining .

At least it's entertaining in the sense you can laugh at how inept it is.

I like the king Kong movies this one however was boring and the special effects were horrible.

For about a half-hour, King Kong is an enjoyable diversion.

Well, there's a little twist that ends up making the chemistry between Jack - who turns out to be a stowaway - even more exciting.

But it's fairly entertaining, and the last 20 minutes are now historically important, too - for obvious reasons.

The film is a little sluggish,and seems to display little imagination at times-consider how dull the island looks in this version.

Although Fay Wray was fine, the two male leads are bland and forgettable.

However, I will say that some scenes involving Kong, particularly the end New York scene, are mildly entertaining and worthy of a "guilty pleasure" viewing.

The story is simple and easily predictable.

It's used too often and moves too slow.

Although, watching a handful of people trying to make a film with 1930's equipment can get a little irritating and somewhat boring.

Pretty enjoyable until Kong shows up.

King Kong not only looks great, it looks big in every way, not just the gorilla, but the sets, the scope, the stunning scenery, big in every way.

As an exciting monster movie,it doesn't work much better.

This sequence required a thrilling battle between two colossal creatures and what we get is pretty weak and forgettable.

The only reason why parts of the movie were enjoyable was because they were taken from the brilliant original.

Quite possibly one of the worst movies I've ever seen .

Far too much of the film is written in one of the more well-defined senses of "contrived"--people end up where they do just so the script can continue.

The effects and story are very entertaining and Jessica Lange and Jeff Bridges are well cast.

Updating from beauty and beast myth with an enjoyable giant ape .

Even though Jeff Bridges was in it, and even a nipple slip of all things on the part of Jessica Lange, this film was a bore.

Very traditional, but also very entertaining.

The scenes on board the ship do an effective job of setting up an intriguing and mysteriously creepy premise.

It's a scary and very entertaining movie.

While not close to being the classic the original film was, the 1976 version of King Kong is definitely worth watching.

I have yet to see one American movie produced by Dine De Laurentiis that was worth watching.

All I can say is this: At 134 minutes, this is a great movie to fall asleep to.

The movie is an epic and I still find it as fascinating and captivating as I found it the day I had first watched it.

The film's worth watching just to catch Jessica in her curvy physical prime.

Jessica Lange's character, Dwan, does take time getting used to, but her affection for Jeff Bridges' character, Jack Prescott, is the only thing that makes her worth watching.

This was just mostly dull.

I prefer this one over Peter Jackson's version, because Jackson's version is too long in running time and boring from the moment with the giant insects on.

The shots of the island are absolutely breathtaking.

The next time I saw it I was surprised at how much I enjoyed it.

One of the worst movies of all time.

It wasn't beauty who killed this beast, it was boredom and bad acting.

There's a whole lot of pointless exposition, and when we finally get to Skull Island we see so little of it was such a disappointment.

Okay, I know, also long and at times slow.

Lange is rescued and the big gorillas strapped to an empty oil tanker and brought to New York where he is going to be exhibited for big bucks.

but that version succeeded in making the slow bits compelling enough not to lose interest.

For lack of a cash cow to justify this farciful journey, Wilson determines it would be best to bring back Kong, rather than return to his New York investors empty handed.

For sheer acting, Watts is the best of the three women, and because of her this latest version might be the most moving, though it is very long, even longer in the extended version.

King Kong himself is always entertaining in this even if he is incredibly goofy at times depending on which special effect they used.

Jessica Lange in her prime - worth watching for that alone.

Unfortunately, in it's efforts to do so it loses some of the excitement and adrenaline that the original had.

Its not a movie Id watch over and over again, perhaps once every year or two, but it is worth watching more than once, even if it is just to pick it to pieces.

With the above emerging in all too terrifyingly real comic proportions, I quickly found the whole film an entertaining joy to watch.

King Kong (1976) was a total waste of time and money from the always bankrupt producer Dino De Laurentis (he didn't learn his lesson then and he'll never will).