If you’re asked to pick a defining movie monster of the 20th century, it’s going to be a toss-up betweenKing KongandGodzilla.Godzillamight be the King of the Monsters, and have more movies to his name, butKing Kongdoes have “King” right there in his name, and his first movie predated Godzilla’s first by just over 20 years. Both are awesome, admittedly, and could stomp all over any and all regular-sized monsters out there who became popular in the 20th century thanks to the medium of film (sorry,Dracula,Frankenstein,The Mummy, andThe Invisible Man… wherever you are).
RegardingKing KongandGodzilla, both have remained popular into the 21st century, and have had several crossovers to date, too. But theKing Kongseries,between 1933 and 1986, is particularly interesting because it’s a little more digestible, and because some of the movies within the broader series are so strangeand different from the others. What follows is a ranking of every live-actionKing Kongmovie released before the year 2000: six in total, ranging in quality from not very good to all-time classics.
6’King Kong Lives' (1986)
Director: John Guillermin
Though the title wasKing Kong Lives,King Kong, as a series, kind of died after the release ofthis mostly forgotten 1986 film. It was almost 20 years beforePeter Jacksonremade the original filmand gave Kong a live-action film he more or less deserved, with that film not connected to those in theMonsterVerse, which have seen his popularity grow once more, to perhaps even higher heights. That’s all rambling, but it speaks to the fact thatKing Kongpost-1986 is more fun and/or interesting to talk about thanKing Kong Lives.
Thanks to a couple of goofily fun scenes, and the fact it’s not as technically incompetent as it could’ve been,King Kong Livesmight not rank amongthe very worst giant monster moviesof all time, but that’s pretty faint praise, all things considered. It brings Kong back after the 1976 film in a somewhat awkward way, and tries to go theBride of Frankensteinroute by giving him a female companion; a new love he’ll destroy for. It’s B-grade stuff at best, whereas the bestKing Kongmovies feel B+ at worst, and this ensures it’sonly really recommendable to those who are fond of giant monster-related schlock.
King Kong Lives
5’The Son of Kong' (1933)
Director: Ernest B. Schoedsack
WhileKing Kong Liveswas a sequel to a 1976 remake ofKing Kong,Son of Kongwas a sequel to the original 1933 film,and a memorably nightmarish one, perhaps accidentally. It’s notable because of how quickly it was produced, ultimately coming out in the same year that the firstKing Kongcame out, feeling rushed on account of it being not as entertaining, not nearly as long/epic, and not as technically well-made as the original.
It sees a return to the island that was visited in the first movie and, unsurprisingly, an encounter with the titular son of Kong, who becomes known as “Little Kong.” It’s a pretty generic 1930s genre flick, standing as something ofa low point for theKing Kongseriesas a whole.At least it’s only about 70 minutes long, and has a few scenes that could charitably be called mindlessly fun. That does mean it’s far from essential, but as far as time-wasters go, you could do worse, especially for a movie that’s over 90 years old.
The Son of Kong
4’King Kong Escapes' (1967)
Director: Ishirō Honda
LikeKing Kong Livesand debatablySon of Kong,King Kong Escapescan beclassified as a B-movie, but it’s thankfully pretty fun, so long as you’re cool with things being B-grade quality-wise. It was a Japanese/American co-production, and that gives it the flavor of a kaiju movie more so than mostKing Kongmovies. The plot here is wonderfully simplistic, too, having Kong face off against a mechanized foe that’s known as – no surprises here – Mechani-Kong.
If you want even more silliness, there’s also a human character called Dr. Who, so that’s something.King Kong Escapesispretty stupid, because of course it is, but itscratches a certain so-bad-it’s-good itch, and that makes it oddly recommendable. It’s not consistently great, as there are some slower parts, and the runtime of 104 minutes ends up feeling much longer than you’d think, but the high points make it worthwhile for fans of kaiju cinema, flaws be damned.
King Kong Escapes
Buy on Amazon
3’King Kong' (1976)
In 1976, the originalKing Kongwas updated tothe standards of a 1970s blockbuster. The resulting film was not as good as the original, but it wasbetter than some people give it credit for. It attempts to go bigger and better than the 1933 film, and though it doesn’t succeed at the latter, it arguably succeeds at the former. There’s more action, a lot more color (bye-bye, black and white), and more minutes runtime-wise, makingKing Kong(1976) more of an epic.
This does, in turn, make it a little less punchy, and the bloat found in the film is probably the thing that weighs it down the most. Well, it’s that or the lack of freshness, given it’s pretty much a redo of a movie most will be familiar with, but that’s to be expected, to some extent, when the titles are identical. It’s not a great remake, butit’s far from a bad one, and it generally justifies its existence when judged as a cinematic update/do-over.
2’King Kong vs. Godzilla' (1962)
Yep,Godzilla fights King Kongin 1962’sKing Kong vs. Godzilla. What more could you want? It doesn’t mess around concerning the parts thatdeliver on that promised smackdown, and when there are scenes that put the focus more on human characters rather than giant monsters,King Kong vs. Godzillaalso has some goofy fun. There isn’t really much drama here, as it’s more of a somewhat comedic adventure movie with a lot of bumbling around between the action set pieces.
That might technically make it one ofthe weakerGodzillaand/orKing Kongmovies, if you want to judge it in a more objective or academic way, butKing Kong vs. Godzilladoesn’t seem too worried about being that kind of movie.It wants to have fun, it wants to get weird, and it wants its two titular monsters to fight. If you’re okay with a film doing those things and not much more, you’ll probably have a blast with this one.
King Kong vs. Godzilla
1’King Kong' (1933)
Directors: Merian C. Cooper, Ernest B. Schoedsack
Kong has never been cooler or more iconicthan he was in the film he debuted in: 1933’sKing Kong. This is, by a comfortable margin, the bestKing Kongmovie of the 20th century, and it probably trumps any Kong-related movie released in the 21st century, too. It’s the giant monster movie that might well have had the biggest influence on the genre going forward. Sure, 1925’sThe Lost Worldpre-dated it, butKing Kongdebatably perfected what a giant monster movie could be.
The story is one that, if not as old as time, is pretty close to it, with people going to an island, capturing a giant ape, taking it back to a populated area, and then dealing with the consequences when it breaks free. It’s pure and satisfying in waysthat make it a classic to this day, and though it’s clearly an older film,King Kongis still creative and impressive on a technical front. It might not be entirely timeless, but it’s close to it, and stands as one of those original entries in a long-running series that can’t really be beaten, no matter how large or ambitious its sequels/follow-ups/remakes might get.
