#123movies #fmovies #putlocker #gomovies #solarmovie #soap2day Watch Full Movie Online Free – An expedition of the “Petrox” company, is exploring in search of petrol. A strange island where they arrive is the home of a giant ape, King Kong, that is captured by the expedition in order to make money exhibiting it to the world. When in the U.S. the huge gorilla becomes restless, trying to return home…
Plot: In this remake of the 1933 classic, an oil company expedition disturbs the peace of a giant ape and brings him back to New York to exploit him.
Smart Tags: #remake #giant_gorilla #stockholm_syndrome #1970s #expedition #bearded_man #full_moon #oil_company #chloroform #photographer #new_york_city #oil_exploration #fog_bank #wall #capitalism #woman_in_jeopardy #rampage #environmentalist #train_wreck #military #exploding_helicopter
|5.9/10 Votes: 29,862|
|6.2 Votes: 531 Popularity: 49.269|
No, you’re dead wrong. He was the terror, the mystery of their lives, and the magic.
1976 and I had already been spellbound and terrified by Jaws the year previously, I mean I was only 10 years old. Having been introduced by my film loving parents to the original King Kong from 1933, as soon as this update – in colour – was released, I stood in that queue for two hours to see it. I was spellbound, absolutely loved it, telling everyone in school or on the playing fields how great an experience it was. Those things never leave you, it’s love of cinema with youthful eyes, and none of us should ever decry those moments as being ignorance.
Much later in life, watching this reworking of the Kong story becomes a battle to not extinguish those youthful fires. For now you can see just how poor the effects are, in fact just how much of a cheat (through research) that uber producer Dino De Laurentiis was as he put this onto the screen. Conversely, though, you can now see just how adult much of it was. The pic is full of sexual connotations and imagery. I mean look at Jessica Lange’s first scene, she is introduced in a wet dress with erectus nippleus in full effect. I didn’t remember that as a 10 year old boy…
There’s some smart era concerns in the narrative, fuels, discrimination etc, and for sure the array of characters on show are 1970s intelligent. Hell! even the change to helicopter attacks instead of aeroplanes for the finale deserves respect – with the added sombre setting of the WTC twin towers now more attention grabbing – yet it’s hard to get away from just how poor the production is. So as we may still shed a tear as the giant beast is felled by his love for a beauty, and we curse mankind for just not leaving him on his island, this is still poor film making that comes close to shattering fond memories of the young movie lovers back in 1976. 5/10
I had first seen the outstanding original of ‘King Kong’, still transcendent and captivating in its then-prescient use of special effects wizardry, then Sir Peter Jackson’s recent remake, which was still extremely impressive. I had only heard horrible things about the 70’s version, but I have come to admire Guillermin’s films that I had watched, and look at that cast, so when I found the blu used, for a good price, I took a chance. It’s definitely the runt of the litter, but is by no means a disaster. 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. 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. Even being Canadian, seeing the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center made me wistfully nostalgic. The only part of the film that was excruciating to watch was when Kong is made to perform for the American Bicentennial festivities, and at the ending, I was curious how Lange got down from the rooftop of one of the towers so fast. The answer probably lies on the cutting room floor, and the editing was probably rushed for release date, so no one must have noticed…
Better than it’s given credit for
I know, I know–anything from the ’70s that didn’t star Jack Nicholson or wasn’t directed by Martin Scorcese is suspect these days, and if you’re talking about a heavily-hyped remake of an indisputable classic, the urge to take potshots is irresistible. But despite the dated special effects and elements of camp, the movie does not fall on its face into a Kong footprint. The doomed love that the giant beast felt for the beauty (who, in the person of Jessica Lange, is a stunner) is well-delineated, there’s actual excitement and suspense, and the allusions to the rape of the environment by “civilization” are not amiss here. Moreover, the movie’s intended humor really is funny. And John Barry’s score has stayed with me all these years, although the same basic sound recurred in his music for “Out of Africa” and “Dances with Wolves.” For anyone who was in New York on 9/11, there’s an inadvertent poignancy in this movie’s concluding scenes at the Twin Towers. I’m sure that within a few weeks of posting this, I will have seen Peter Jackson’s new version, which updates the effects with CGI technology yet returns the story to the 1930s. Speaking of heavily-hyped remakes…
Why Di Laurentis Made an Excellent “Kong”
Why is EVERYONE so down on the ’76 “Kong?” I JUST don’t get it. OK, the foreshadowing of the twin towers is dumb, but di Laurintis still made an excellent movie that gets bonus points for not being a slavish remake of the original version.
Why do I think is it almost as good as the first?
1). It has humor, which the first one lacked.
2). The actors are excellent and have space to stretch out with their characters, which is actually pretty cool for a monster movie.
3). I love the comments on corporate greed and gross consumerism.
4). Kong actually has a personality, and thus you sympathize with him. You are SAD when he… (can’t give it away).
5). Its scarier!
6). The music is just as good as Max Steiner’s pretty much perfect score for the original (and without a good score, a monster movie ain’t nuttin’).
7). The film-making is smooth and photography is excellent.
Original Language en
Runtime 2 hr 14 min (134 min), 3 hr 2 min (182 min) (television) (USA)
Genre Adventure, Horror
Director John Guillermin
Writer James Ashmore Creelman (based on the N/A screenplay), Ruth Rose (based on the N/A screenplay), Merian C. Cooper (from an idea conceived by), Edgar Wallace (from an idea conceived by), Lorenzo Semple Jr. (screenplay)
Actors Jeff Bridges, Charles Grodin, Jessica Lange, John Randolph
Awards Nominated for 2 Oscars. Another 5 wins & 1 nomination.
Production Company N/A
Sound Mix Mono
Aspect Ratio 2.39 : 1
Camera Panavision Lenses
Laboratory Metrocolor, Hollywood (CA), USA (uncredited) (color)
Film Length 3,675 m (Sweden)
Negative Format 35 mm (Eastman 100T 5254)
Cinematographic Process Panavision (anamorphic)
Printed Film Format 35 mm