Cool News
70's Kids remade KING KONG in a little over 5 minutes!
Hey folks, Harry here and this hits a whole shitload of geek bones for me. First off, being a child of the 70s, seeing kids with the exact same kind of bad hair and fashion like I had as a kid, well it definitely sets off some of the nostalgic buttons that I had going off in my head. More than that though is the narrative that they set in this not quite 6 minute production of KING KONG that they made. Here they combined the Dino Kong with the real KING KONG to make something all their own. As if to say, why didn't they do it like this... and have dinosaurs fighting King Kong like they were supposed to!!! This was a big sticking point with me and my friends at the time. The stupid oil plot felt poignant to all of us, because OPEC was squeezing our gas pumps in those days and we thought that we'd have to be dealing with OIL issues for the rest of our lives. HA! Those silly 70's kids thoughts... So funny. Anyway - if you're a fellow monster kid, you'll get a kick out of this. Thanks goes to Paul Dini and EasyDreamer for the heads up!
Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus-
+ Expand All
-
feels suspicious to me.
-
Someone in there briefly looked like was wearing a mask like the one Falseface wore, but maybe my memory is bending to fit what I see now.
-
. . . flaming critique from bitter fan-douches who have never worked as hard as these kids did.
-
I'm guessing the voice overs were done by those kids after they became 40 year olds.
-
Aug. 23, 2010, 8:57 p.m. CST
"More than that though is the narrative that they set..."
by Jehovahs_Witness
"...in this not quite 6 minute production of KING KONG that they made." <p> My head hurts.
-
Aug. 23, 2010, 8:58 p.m. CST
No Jessica Lange in ass-hugging shorts=NO REMAKE!!!
by HollywoodHellraiser
Sorry but this is FAILED!
-
Whether by design, or because she was just as talented as ol Jess was back then - Portends greatness for her future
-
Agreed about this needing more Jessica Lange looking smokin, but that was probably better than the actual movie. And Jackson's remake.
-
Before shoot em quick Ratner does
-
Was expecting a "that 70's show" spoof
-
If so, which scene?
-
Aug. 23, 2010, 9:09 p.m. CST
Looks like shit compared to the Raiders of the Ark remake
by juryrigged7
Just sayin!!!
-
Wa-hoo! Yow! Woooaaah!
-
Because this site has good taste in movies....just look at the articles on the front page.
-
Aug. 23, 2010, 9:23 p.m. CST
I saw thiis on the Universal Monster Army site last week.
by The Reluctant Austinite
It's awesome. It's funny, I commented on the UMA that this should play at BNAT between features. Tim League loves to play stuff like this.
-
Do you mean to imply that two piranha 3d sequel stories aren't classy?
-
He would like to say that the lead kids in this film were niether stunning, a natural beauty, handsome or striking.
-
You fuckers slam a little kids movie?
-
At least I didn't fall asleep during this one. I think the acting was better in this one too.
-
I am pretty sure those dinosaurs are are Snap-Tite model kits from the 70's. Perfect for the kid who could not be trusted with modeling glue.
-
It sounds like they used a tie fighter sound effect a few times.
-
Are you sure you're a big prick?
-
Aug. 23, 2010, 9:56 p.m. CST
"the exact same kind of bad hair and fashion like I had as a kid
by Grasscutter
Yeah, Harry. You grew out of it. Sure.
-
I was afraid you'd blown your brains out, locke....you vanished for a while. It's good that you have returned to do something to fill your time until that inevitability.
-
they all seem to have Asperger's...
-
70s fimmaking was pretty rough.
-
Whoever made this was at least 16 or 18. Its been edited with adults doing the voices and has some nice claymation etc.They also made an alien movie
-
am i right Harry?
-
that dogshit tha peter jackson churned out!
-
Im only slamming it because it clearly lacked the Jessica Lange, Gorilla sexual overtones.
-
I had those dinosaur models by Aurora when I was their age! Just seeing those kits again made this flick for me.
-
is that what i'm hearing?
-
Aug. 24, 2010, 12:34 a.m. CST
I call shenanigans. No way this was made in the 70's.
by corellian_corvette
I agree with ironhelix. Going to call it right now: no way this was made "back in the 70's". The thing is pretty well paced - some of those overhead shots would be pretty hard to do by kids, the adult V.O. has the appropriate "ironic" levels of grunts and groans - I mean the sound editing alone is too perfect. Finally - no tech in the 70's that I can think of to get that "falling kong" shot. Looks like it was done on a computer. Nice try "young director trying to make it with a viral video" but I'm not buying. Pretty cool though.
-
That's all very fun, but it is very new.
-
Could this be part of the viral marketing for the Abrams/Spielberg SUPER 8 movie? Obviously it´s a fake.
-
I believe these are the droids you're looking for... http://bit.ly/agEujE
-
.... conviction as Jackson's botched version.
-
Because it was put up on utube 21 June 2009. <p>Not sure why people think this is fake or have a problem with the kids getting help from some adults with some know how. Ok. granted, this could be some updated version of something they made as kids, but so what? It's fucking great and is not trying to scam anyone. You naysayers need to stop trying to be such smartarses and enjoy life a little bit more. It's a bit of fun, you paranoid little fucks.
-
Maybe it's a family type movie like Jumanji? A family is being attacked by the aliens or whatever. Happens all the effing time in these movies.
-
Aug. 24, 2010, 2:37 a.m. CST
ok, if anyone had even bothered to watch the other films
by DrRumpledink
by those kids on that utube channel, you would have seen this on the star trek one - "Super-8 Fan Film made by kids on Cape Cod in 1978...Voices added 25 years later by some of the original cast".
-
on a Trek site, and it was pretty funny.
-
Good stop motion guys and great energy!
-
All you idiots saying it's better than Peter Jackson's King Kong....please, it's one thing to try to be funny, it's another just to be an ass for the sake of being an ass. Yes, Peter Jackson's King Kong was shit, but this is just 5 minutes of goofiness. Imagine having to sit through 3 hours of it.
-
Calm down. You might have realized I phrased that as a question. My problem isn´t the new soundtrack (which is obvious), but camera angles and editing.
-
I did and I gave you an answer to your question. The second part of my post wasn't even directed at you. I thought that was obvious seeing as it had nothing to do with what you posted. You were not being attacked, so you calm down. I'm quite calm, thank you very much. <p>It's now become clear that it's old footage some kids shot that they have edited and scored as adults (this bit is directed at you and your post).
-
...just to get to the fucking island!!
-
I went to take a quick pee, then fell asleep when I got back.
-
"19 minutes ago This is not genuine, for a start there's no way they could have produced a soundtrack like that with 70's super 8 equipment plus there is a lack of splice jumps or joins in the film at each shot change to show that it has really been "cut" on film. The footage may have been shot in the 70's on super 8 or probably more likely recently but the editing and sound has definitely been crafted on more modern equipment proved by the end credits which have a smooth/ clean scratch free digital quality." I'm sure if it were real we would have seen it years ago. Harry is prob participating in a viral marketing campaign designed to play on our assumed collective love 4 nolstalgia which will most likely backfire as we geeks don't like fake nolstalgia. nice try though..
-
now that'd be something
-
nice try.
-
Can't get those minutes of my life back. Damn.
-
Aug. 24, 2010, 7:50 a.m. CST
It could have been shot in the 70s, but it was edited recently
by ricarleite2
The soundtrack is obviously recent, and the last shot of Kong falling is a recent add-on. I say it's legit, but the actual film was changed later with better editing, a new suondtrack, and a final shot of Kong falling, which was probably missing on the original.
-
... I can tell this is not Super 8. It's 16 mm, and there is lightining. I still believe it COULD have been shot in the 70s (edited recently), but it was shot by adults.
-
I don't care if it's been updated. That's cool!
-
I don't care if it's been updated.
-
Oh come on, don't tell me you guys weren't riffing too. ;-P
-
Pretty fuckin' sad.
-
cool
-
cool
-
He should make more 5 minute movies.
-
The corporate amorality of it is still very relevant today. The 70's KING KONG was actually my favorite. It had one of the most intense musical scores of any film I've ever seen. And the chemistry between Kong and the woman was so sexually charged. It was interesting.
-
I'm pretty sure the shot at 4:03 is of the Toronto skyline around the mid-seventies. The Scotiabank tower hasn't yet been built but I can see the Bank of Montreal and Toronto Dominion bank towers (the black ones).
-
Had great effects and some awesome action scenes, but it was way too long and the acting sucked.
-
Heck, after Lovely Bones, I'm not convinced Jackson can tell a decent story for the life of him.
-
was rushed and had terrible effects apart from Kong himself. As for the "Action Sequences", anyone want to comment on that dumb Brontosaurus chase sequence!<p>CRAP I tell you, it was total CRAP!
-
Even the ones we were supposed to like...including Kong.
-
Clicking play after reading the desctiption by Harry. Waste of bandwidth.
-
It was the moment audiences realized that Jack Black is an insufferable jackass, that it's hard to stare at Adrien Brody's schnoz for more than 20 minutes in a supporting role, and that wannabe Hollywood starlets who romance apes are better off dead.
-
PJ's Kong was nothing like the original! The original was actually quite a dark, scary and tragic movie. PJ's was a cashcow movie full of hateful characters. Jack Black was totally miscast and as Jehovas_Witness has correctly pointed out. As great an actor Adrian Brody is, I just didn't buy him in the lead role!
-
but the audio is obviously new. Too sophisticated for average 70's tech.
-
This was indeed from the 70's. The all the creatures except the Kong were from snap-together Aurora dinosaur model kits. The T-Rex is not even painted yet-it's in the original red plastic. These kids could not have been real dinosaur/Kong fans however, else they would have known even at that age that the Saber Tooth was way out of scale for the Kong model and also they would have used the T-Rex for the fight and not the Allosaur. That Aurora Allosaur model was, I believe, the very first of the bunch to be put out and I remember how much I loved it but loathed the fact that it had incorporated into its design plastic drool dripping from its lower jaw. Aurora was the King of models in the 70's, with their dinosaur, caveman and movie monster model kits. Every boy had at least one of these kits in their bedroom, usually with bright red blood painted as running down their mouths and hands.
-
An unconvential piece of casting that actually worked.<p>Anyway, PJ's version was faithful to the original in many respects, however there were subtle differences. In the original, Kong is presented as a sexualixed beast who Ann can barely wait to get away from. PJ's version was more of a sentimental fairytale sans some of the less PC elements of the '33 version. The interpretation of the story where Kong and Ann have a platonic, quasi-romantic bond is one that predated Jackson's movie and seems to be one of those things, like the misquoted line 'Play it again, Sam' in Casablanca, where something that is not quite true to the original work has nonetheless lodged in the public consciousness as being correct. The original Kong is a rather dark, nasty movie. I dig PJ's version, though; it's simply a slightly different interpretation of an archetypal and well-known story.
-
Dino De Laurentiis' folly, with Rick Baker in a shitty monkey suit, a full size animatronic puppet that had all the fluidity of Frankenstein's monster, and no dinosaurs to speak of. Kong fights one frickin' rubber snake. At least Jackson's version had some cool setpieces.<P>It's true that PJ's version does steal from BOTH previous incarnations, though, whether self-consciously or not.
-
Being a false bill of goods, which is exactly what De Laurentiis' Kong was.<P>Set-pieces do not make a film great by themselves, but some well executed ones do provide a glimmer of entertainment even in movies that don't work as a whole. '76 Kong was as dull as ditch water - no atmosphere, no pace, crap effects, boring characters, no creatures, and had no action or great set-pieces to offset the tedium. Therefore it stunk worse than Kong's ass after ingesting 500 lbs of vindaloo curry. Jackson's admittedly bloated and indulgent effort still pisses over De Laurentiis' abomination.
-
"The classic tale of Kong, retold by kids in Hyannis, MA & Riverside, CT in 1978...Sound added 25 years later."
-
I think we are seeing a hybrid product here... the audio half was done within the last ten years, I'm guessing. And the '76 Kong RULES.
-
That is an really deaf dumb and blind comment. Lange had tons of life and character in her porn actress bimbo (sarcastic 70's gritty style character there) version of "Dwan" It was brilliant. You realize she soon after won the best actress for "Frances" and fucking was intense in "Cape Fear" right?
-
I guess I was too impatient to read!
-
you think PJ's King Kong is any better than The Mummy or Journey 3D. I would put all those films in the same category!
-
... bought and released this in 1976 instead of the Dino De Laurentiis' P.o.S.
-
i should hvae a daily column on this. "TakingScorpioscalls Super Movies on Camcorder -A-Day"
-
when they talk kongfilm? its becoming emotionally impossible to live day to day with this forget.
-
Is a better movie than Peter Jackson's Kong. despite having a gorilla suit and one fake giant snake... it whallops more mythical and emotional feeling in it. Just the staccato slo-mo scenes in Jackson's Kong ruin it for me... cheesy in any decade, more in common with an episode of Unsolved Mystery.
-
IT WAS ABOUT THREE HOURS OF SKULL ISLAND! FUCKKK!
-
...unlike Peter Jackson's version, which had no memorable characters and no real dramatic tension. (Jackson's flick looked great, though; I'll give it that.) The '76 version had incredible buildup and tension. I'm with ufoclub1977 in thinking it just packed more of a wallop and had a greater mythical element to it. And yeah, Jackson obviously drew some inspiration from it, but who wouldn't?
-
Now where's that Raiders remake those kids did?
-
Didn't know Harry would go ape over it or I'd have sent him the links. Then I'd be as cool as Paul Dini!
-
Rob's version of Star Trek - http://bit.ly/8YZPEE. He is a huge Kong fan & his business is @ www.splatpictures.com
-
because PJ hadn't made his shitfest yet. When he did, we moved our allegiance to him!<p>No matter how bad the '76 film was, it is in no way the mess that PJ made.
-
I'm not a PJ hater and do like some of his work. His Lord of the Rings films are great, Frightners was fantastic, Heavenly Creatures was good and Bad Taste was just clever.<p>However, Kong and Lovely Bones were just lazy works from a highly reputable and talented director. I don't want middle of the road rubbish and I don't want special effects thrown at me for the sake of just being special effects. He made a film where I hated everyone in it and everyone connected to it. I want my money back!
-
Get an editor or something. There are a couple of sentences in there that I had to read a couple of times, and I'm still unsure of what exactly you meant. Damn, man. Have someone proof-read this stuff for you. You are on an international forum, with your own website, act like a fuckin' professional, will ya? C'mon. Edit your shit.
-
Yup, it's me. Thanks for the nice comments and even the bashing, I love it all. 30 years later definitely provides a disconnect. I shot this in 1978 when I was 14 years old, after being alternately obsessed by and angry at the Dino Kong. I used a Bell & Howell silent Super-8 camera. I added the sound about 5 years ago so I would never again have to narrate along with the damn thing. There was never any adult help during shooting. I'm an editor these days so there was no way I was going to put this thing out there without taking out the horrible diagonal splice marks that lasted about 2-3 frames. Outside of those frames, the shots are in the same order and length as they've always been. The only other "enhancements" were a couple of dissolves, the end credits (so the other kids could finally get their props) and the Kong fall, because the falling rubber figure became undetectable among the growing number of film scratches. Thanks for watching, and Harry I still have the same hair.
Top Talkbacks
- Microsoft's Reveal Of The Next XBOX Is Upon Us, And Streaming Here!! -- 295 total posts 295 posts
- Has STAR WARS EPISODE VII Landed Its First Non-OT Cast Member? -- 485 total posts 187 posts
- Harry dives into STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS' spoilers to reveal the truth behind the blockbuster we're seeing! -- 1272 total posts 171 posts
- The New WOLVERINE Trailer Brings Forth More Jean Grey!! -- 171 total posts 171 posts
- So which character is going to be the villain in GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY!?! -- 147 total posts 147 posts
- Steven Seagal might be joining THE EXPENDABLES 3!! -- 261 total posts 108 posts
- Harry's 21st Picks & Peeks of 2013 has MEDIUM COOL, THE LAST STAND, THE BURNING, BATMAN, MIYAZAKI Blus and more!!! -- 75 total posts 75 posts
- So is JURASSIC PARK IV a remake or a reboot? Sam Neill thinks he has the answer! -- 61 total posts 61 posts
- Nordling Reviews STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS! Spoilers Abound! You Are Warned! -- 1358 total posts 52 posts
- Steven Spielberg to produce a live action Halo series for Microsoft! -- 42 total posts 42 posts