abe55

Of the three movies just based solely on King Kong, which one do you consider the best or your personal favorite?

Cornelius1047

Having not seen the 1976 version (with no particular interest in doing so), I'm going with Peter Jackson's version. I know, I know, the original is a classic. Unfortunately, it suffers due to its obvious limitations. I simply care more about the CGI creature, making the end all the more tragic. The movie, to me, breathes more and the longer running time obviously helps flesh out the characters. I don't subscribe to the notion that what came first was obviously better, but I also can understand why people dislike the remake. I found it a worthy follow-up to Jackson's brilliant Lord Of The Rings trilogy.

K

invisiblegt

The 1933 version. There simply is none other.

(I will attempt to post a bit more in depth when I return from work.)

NoirFan

The original, like many early sound films, is marred by some severely corny dialogue and stiff acting, especially in the first half before they reach the island, but the stop motion Kong still looks great today. My favorite ludicrous line of dialogue comes from a scene on the ship, when Bruce Cabot, as if he has just discovered how to talk, idiotically drawls "Say...I guess I love you." Fay Wray is a cutie pie though, and the action sequences work well.

TomOpus

1933

marty888

Despite some truely stunning sequences, the Peter Jackson version was ruined for me by the lackluster and unbelievable performance of Jack Black.

1933 wins big time.

rexinnih

1933. The Jackson version was visually stunning but nowhere near the same impact as the first.

Mr. Cinema

I know it's against the rules to choose a newer version over the original, but I'm doing that in this case. I enjoy Jackson's Kong much more than the others.

maingon

I love both the 1933 version and the 2005 version. I love the effects in 1933 version. The 2005 version did an excellent job of bringing king kong to live and making you really care about him and Naomi Watts is a plus in everymovie.

I like the 1976 version cause I grew up watching that movie alot. The King Kong suit is pretty good, I always thought he was pretty scary looking when I was younger.

Giles

1933 - the T-rex fight isn't as excessive or over the top as the 2005 version.

Kong is also more violent, the classic scene where he is stomping around the island stepping on the natives is blatantly missing from the 2005 version.

OldBoy

Holy crap!

clckworang

I would have to go with the first one as well. While I don't think Jackson's version was necessarily a bad movie, I thought it was far more flawed than the original, which was just a much tighter film.

Giles

there was really no need for the remake to have Jamie Bell and his character - that was very extreneous and could have easily made it to the cutting room floor. The film really didn't need to be just over three hours.

Palaver

Based on which one I would prefer to pop in my DVD player for a fun watch, I'm going with the last two hours of Peter Jackson's version. The buildup to the action was excruciating. Show Me the Monkey!!

I agree with the previous statement that Jack Black is badly cast here. The CGI work more than makes up for the flaws.

Maxflier

Ditto. That drives me crazy.
I LOVE all 3 Kong movies, but Peter Jackson's is my favorite.

Rizor

I'd go with Peter Jackson's version. It's long and a bit excessive, but I feel it's the best movie of the bunch.

The original is great, but like many movies of the period, it functions on a very basic premise without much complexity or depth.

Giles

but why should it, it's a action pic, it's one of the first hollywood films that knew how to keep the story going without going into unnescessary back story of it's characters - the film didn't need it.

tommyp007

Agreed. But I voted for 1933 as the best

Groucho

Where's the various sequels and spin-offs? Son of Kong, King Kong Lives, King Kong vs. Godzilla?

rennervision

This was a hard decision for me because I really like the 2005 version. But it has some flaws I can't ignore - namely some pointless character arcs that go nowhere. So I'll have to vote for the 1933 classic.

Hokeyboy

Peter Jackson's King Kong is perhaps the epitome of creator self-indulgence and excess, an affliction that also plagued the latter 2/3rds of the LOTR trilogy. The first was a masterpiece of filmmaking, the latter two -- while overall still entertaining -- were bloated, sluggish, and in need of more judicious editing.

But KING KONG took the flaws of the last 2 LOTR movies and exacerbated them. Given $30 million in payments, a blank check for production, and free reign over the entire affair, Jackson and his partners spared no expense in indulging his creative whims in this film. It's a beautiful looking movie, crammed with the type of detail and atmosphere that felt tangible and terrifying and wonderful all at once (with, yes, several exceptions, including that god-awful stampede scene). And that in and of itself exemplifies the fatal flaw of this film -- it takes what is essentially a threadbare storyline and bloats it out to a ridiculous 3+ hour running time, with too many extraneous scenes that stop the film's pace in its tracks. The stylistic excesses employed by the filmmakers cripple this film beyond the patience of even the most accommodating of viewers. Even Yasujiro Ozu would scream "HURRY THE FUCK UP!!!" at this movie.

Jackson's KING KONG is one of those magnificent cinematic misfires. There's so much to appreciate and admire, but it's enmeshed with an equal amount of needless effluvium that constantly works against the film. Every time I start to care and get excited about the movie, KING KONG starts boring me again.

To put it in perspective: I saw this movie with a sold-out crowd and by the time Kong slips off the Empire State Building and dies, some jackass in the crowd muttered "FINALLY!!" and the entire theater erupted in laughter. Anecdotal, I know, but I'd never seen a crowd turn on a movie so thoroughly since Matrix Reloaded.

TURNIPS! TURNIPS AND ANTIFREEZE!

Groucho

That's awesome.

Shannon Nutt

Thanks Matt. These are my sentiments exactly.

mndtrp

I'm with Matt, although I would have put it much less eloquently. If I could go through and edit it, it would take the cake.

As it is, I have to go with 1933's version.

sauce07

somebody actually voted for the 76 version

I have to go with 33, Jackson's was very good but the original is just perfect.