Review of King Kong

King Kong (1976)
7/10
Entertaining, campy fun
7 October 2001
Warning: Spoilers
Spoilers below!

King Kong never quite reaches the high water mark the original 1933 movie did, but it is quite good on its own merits. The special effects of the guy in the ape suit are not spectacular as others have mentioned, but are fairly well done and by 1976 standards quite good. The acting is also good, especially the debut of a young Jessica Lange.

One drawback of the movie is that it takes a rather liberal slant, and while this in itself is not a bad thing it would have played better in 1968 than in 1976. Jack Prescott is basically a hippie who just happens to be a scientist; he seems outdated in a film in the mid-1970s. Grodin plays the leader of the expedition, and comes across as more dangerous than King Kong in his ruthless quest to find oil. The liberal, questioning tone does not damage the film that much, but it does make it a little less fun than the original.

A lot of things are copied from the original 1933 King Kong, however; not only the plot line itself but some smaller points as well. Jessica Lange and Fay Wray both portray down on their luck actresses who end up on the ship mostly by luck or fate; when kidnapped by the natives off the ship, both rip a necklace from one of warriors which leads to the sailors going ashore to rescue them. Both the original Kong and the 1976 version shake exactly four sailors off a log bridge in the jungle. There are many other similarities as well, and it is interesting to watch both versions of the film to find them.

While not close to being the classic the original film was, the 1976 version of King Kong is definitely worth watching. When you realize that it is not trying to top the 1933 film, you'll relax and enjoy it for its own good points.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed