What's so bad about King Kong (1976)?

A lot of people hate this movie and think it's one of the worst King Kong movies. But I thought it was pretty good!

SPOILERS

I think that Kong's death is the darkest and most dramatic of all the movies where he died, and I mean that as a compliment. You are much more sympathetic for the ape here, than you are in the 1933 original.

And I felt the ending that followed, where the blond woman's love interest leaves her there with the reporters with the attitude "You wanted fame, you got it", was a better ending than the beauty killed the beast ending, which we already know anyway.

I thought the special effects and photography were really good and John Barry's score was top notch. Two quibbles I have is that I wish that the movie is that I wish they had stuck with the crew coming to the island to make a movie premise.

I just found that a lot more intriguing than coming to the island looking for oil. Why change it to an oil venture? And I also wish that there were dinosaurs on the island like in the original and the 2005 remake. But all in all, a good if not great remake, that outdoes the original in a lot of ways.

But since it wasn't well recieved, is it underrated perhaps?

I like Jeff Bridges' older movies, including KING KONG. The problem I see with it that might prevent others from getting into it is that there's no sense of wonder about the whole thing, It's not a very subtle motion picture. And despite efforts to help the outfit look more real, it's quite obviously a man in a suit. The biggest problem with the look of Kong, facially, is that his eyes are too close together. It just gives it away and it's distracting. Sometimes, the mechanics of its maw give it a menacing look, but in the main, it's an unsuccessful costume. Rick Bakker's efforts at ape realism in Gorillas in the Midst, some ten years later, really could've benefitted this movie.

Oh I thought the suit looked really good, and was very convincing for me. I mean it's still better than the 1933 special effects in some ways. When you say it's not subtle enough, what do you mean exactly?

Just my two cents - I thought Kong's face was very well done, but there are some cuts in the film between the costume, robot Kong and the ultra-stiff life-size robot Kong that are really obvious.

You can see some of those cuts here where the giant animotronic Kong is just so bad.
(Still, the people getting stepped on in this scene really disturbed me as a kid - for some reason I remembered it being much more horrific than it looks here - unless they changed it.)

Lol! I wonder if anyone thought that was kongs member rather than just a snake. The timing of it all. Comedy gold.

I'm actually surprised people say it's bad, when so many love the original, which didn't have better effects by any means. I mean I am no 70s special effects expert, but I think he looks more impressive than othe 70s monsters I have seen.

SPOILER

I love when the Fred Wilson character gets stepped on. I wish they had kept it the same way in the 2005 version and have Kong kill Carl Denham.

I think it's a little long but otherwise very good for its time.

Can anyone help me answer a couple questions about the storyline at the end of the film?
1. Why was the treatment of Kong so blatantly so cruel when all he wanted was to be left alone with Dwan [Jessica Lange].
2. What was the point of the soldiers attacking Kong with flamethrowers?? Were they trying to drive him down off of the towers? Or were they actually trying to kill him by slowly burning Kong to death? Again, what's up with the obvious excessive cruelty???
3. A 50something foot tall Kong vs three Huey Iriquoi helicopters and six articulating mini-guns?? Again, excessive cruelty and gore...
4. Lastly, Kong is attacked by three helicoptors...three. So how is it that after Kong smashes the nose of the first helicoptor, there are STILL THREE helicoptors still strafing Kong,? And when Kong destroys the second helicopter, the last helicopter just stopped shooting, almost like they really wanted Kong to experience the last unimaginable pain his body was going through after being literally cut to pieces and bleeding out...AGAIN...was the excessive cruelty and torture really necessary??

Poor Kong gets no respect. Everybody wants to kill him.

I'm biased, because I fell in love with Jessica Lang at like the age of five or six. Is there a gorilla in that movie or something?

I found all KING KONG movies to be terribly bad and rather pretty uninteresting, so i was damn shocked to realize i actually loved the latest "KONG" version! That one with LOKI!

I think the biggest complaint or biggest laugh the movie received at the time was because of KONG brushing Jessica Langes top off nearly.. His death was pretty damn brutal with copters repeatedly using machine guns to gun him down before he fell to his death

He ain't Harambe. He's a big dirty ape. And he's after our women!

Because F--- him. That's why! Fire burns.

Clauswitz Doctrine. Overwhelming force. You know why I have a 500 Magnum? Because they don't make a 550!!! Crush enemy. See him get mini-gunned before you. Hear the lamentation of his Dwan.

Kong was a disgusting beast who was sent back to hell knowing the sting of entering into our realm of existence. We sent a message to him and Godzilla, and that giant moth, and all those other damned jumbo critters that we aren't taking their crap anymore. Is war necessary? Strictly speaking, no. But it's man's favorite game. Really, his only game. Kong came to play. He was served. He existed without our knowledge and therefore existed without our consent.

One of the things I think they improved upon in the ‘76 version is making you understand and sympathize with Kong.

I think it's great! I love all the main Kong films. I watch 33, 76 and 2005 regularly throughout the year.