Does anyone else think the King Kong remakes are better than the original? (cinema, film)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know most people hate remakes, and I'm on of those moviegoers that often likes the original better.
However, I feel the two King remakes both surpass the original overall. I saw each King Kong movie in order, starting from the original when I was 10, then the 70s remake, then the 2005, etc.
But watching the original again I feel it's a very style over substance movie. The special effects overshadow character development which is not necessary bad at all. It's a landmark special effects movie for it's time and it's still a good movie classic.
However, I feel that the two remakes are improved cause I feel that not only the woman is a stronger character, but also Kong, and their development together.
SPOILERS
I really like how in both remakes the woman character is genuinely upset to see Kong die, and cares about him. Where as in the original, she couldn't be more relieved to see him get killed in the end, and all the heart is just taken out of it, at least for me it was.
The 2005 one is the best overall, but the 1976 one I feel has the best ending, because it felt the most tragic for me, the way Kong's death was done. The biggest minus of it though is that Kong is the only monster on the island besides the giant snake and there are no other prehistoric beasts.
But that is just how I feel about the remakes surpassing the original, but what do you think?
I saw the original King Kong movie in a cinema in the late 60s. It came over better than on the small television screens of that time.
I feel the original film is the best one. The story moves along at a good pace. The Peter Jackson version had the participants arriving on Kong Island, in the same time the original film had Kong dead, and the movie over.........
The later versions had colour, and much better effects of course, but the original for me, has more heart.
Fay Wray is great in the 1933 film. Boy, that woman could scream.......
While the special effects are smoother in the remake, those in the original are quite something, especially given when it was made. And they’re still sufficiently impressive today.
The remake just feels kind of routine, generic, and a little slick compared to the original. There’s more depth and grittiness to the original and I feel more sympathy for Kong, for whatever reason.
Definitely prefer the original. Unlike the remake, it’s a film I’m willing to see again.
Oh okay I feel that in the remakes, they turn Kong into an actual character and Ann Darrow is a better character too, in both remakes, cause in the original all she does is scream the whole time.
In the remakes she actually cares about the monster, where as in the original she couldn't wait for him to be killed and was relieved in the end, without caring.
So I feel that you have more empathy for the creature in both the remakes than the original, cause a character has empathy as well.
A lot of people say the original is better cause of the special effects being more ground breaking, but aren't the characters being better developed more important that how good the special effects for the time are?
I thought the remakes had more heart therefore, and with the original, the filmmakers seem more interested in just the special effects, and they let that trump character development.
IN 1933, King Kong was as remarkarable for its special effects as Star Wars was 40 years later.
Even more so. Movie goers all over the world had never seen anything like it. It set the special effects bar so high that it was as great an advancement to the medium as Technicolor was, later in the decade. Unlike Star Wars, which built on existing special effects, King Kong was all brand-new, with a story that never imitated any predecessor.
I thought that the Peter Jackson re-make came the closest to the original. King Kong was a beast, and acted as a beast does. Only Jackson understood that as well. In the original, Kong was the top predator, but he had competition in creatures that were just as large and powerful.
In 1933, before the advent of the film industry's self-censorship of sex and gruesome violence, the original King Kong had both to spare, and the scene where Kong tore the huge python's head apart was shocking. It still is, 85 years later.
Hollywood didn't return to that kind of graphic violence until 1969, in Sam Peckinpaugh's The Wild Bunch.
The other re-makes didn't focus on that animalistic aspect, but Jackson did. And in some ways, I thought he did it better than in the original. The scene where Kong and Ann are on Kong's mountain top lair where Kong is nursing his wounds from a fight and gazing out on his domain was really great.
But the love story in the original was by far the best. At it's heart, the story of King Kong is one of unrequited love, and that's something that every human can connect with. It's what made the last line in the original so memorable.
I didn't like Jackson's King Kong. Talk about CGI overkill. When Kong started sliding on the ice, I was like, ok time to stop watching this.
But that's what I mean though when I say that people put special effects above the characters and story, and they care about whether it was CGI too much. Plus people also complain about how they don't like an actor wearing a King Kong suit in the 70s. So wouldn't CGI be better therefore?
I loved Jackson's KING KONG. Loved it. In fact, if I made a list of my favorite movies, it might even crack the Top 20.
I loved the 1976 version when I was a kid. Watching it now, there are still large parts of it I really like. But I see more of its flaws now too.
The original is a classic and should be judged as a movie of its time. But yes, it has lots of story flaws, both in terms of character and theme. But it's still an extremely important movie in the history of cinema.
It is true that the 76 one has flaws but I can't help but finding more rewatch value with that one over the 30s it seems. I find that Kong's death was the darkest and saddest the way it was executed in the 70s one.
I loved Jackson's KING KONG. Loved it. In fact, if I made a list of my favorite movies, it might even crack the Top 20.
I loved the 1976 version when I was a kid. Watching it now, there are still large parts of it I really like. But I see more of its flaws now too.
The original is a classic and should be judged as a movie of its time. But yes, it has lots of story flaws, both in terms of character and theme. But it's still an extremely important movie in the history of cinema.
I refer to the ‘76 one as "soft porn" Kong,lol. The scene where he takes Ann’s top off and his eyes roll back in his head is hilarious to me. I thought the whole movie was awful overall however, cheesy with a very second rate Kong. I loved the most recent remake, watched it 1000 times (but after the first few, I started turning it off right at the “ice skating” scene, as I don’t like watching the sad ending.
The original however was unbelievable filmmaking for the time. The special effects especially the dinosaurs are awesome. I don’t think you can say “better” or worse when talking about a classic that was so far ahead of its time. It’s much easier to take an already created story and tweak it for a different twist than to create something original.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
