Movies

40 Years Ago, Paramount’s King Kong Movie Got a Sequel (& It’s Still the Worst in the Entire Franchise)

In 1976, 43 years after RKO Radio Pictures’ original King Kong became a pop culture sensation, Death Wish and Conan the Barbarian producer Dino De Laurentiis released a remake, starring Jeff Bridges, Charles Grodin, and Jessica Lange in her film debut. While De Laurentiis hoped it would be as big as Jaws from the previous year, it ultimately ended up underperforming. Even still, while a $90.6 million worldwide total wasn’t the $150 million expected of it, it was still a figure nearly four times its $23 million price tag. It made money and, like with just about every movie that makes money (even ones where the title character is dead as a doornail), there was hope for a sequel.

Videos by ComicBook.com

In fact, only one year after the release of King Kong, he claimed there would indeed be a sequel. In his words: “Steve McQueen made a picture in which he died at the end, but they made another picture with Steve McQueen. Many stars die at the end of a picture and then go on to the next picture. Kong is a star. We are going to have a new story, a new Kong.” From that loose, questionable logic came King Kong Lives…a whole 10 years later (which is also when it’s set).

What Got the Ball Rolling on King Kong Lives?

image courtesy of de laurentiis entertainment group

Easily one of the most bizarre monster movies ever made, King Kong Lives has Kong not dead, but in a coma. He was shot off the Twin Towers and ended up in a coma. Let that sink in. That would be like if Jaws 2 had the same shark come back after having blown up with the utterance of “Smile you son of a—.”

The Terminator‘s Linda Hamilton plays his surgeon, Dr. Amy Franklin. Kong is going to die unless he gets a heart transplant, which has been temporarily solved via an artificial heart, but he’s unable to regain consciousness because he’s lost so much blood. Without a transfusion from another mega-ape, he’s going to be gone for good. Dr. Franklin teams up with adventurer Hank Mitchell, who has recently found himself in the presence of a female counterpart to Kong, to get this transfusion completed.

Once he regains consciousness, Kong senses “Lady Kong,” frees her, and they team up for a roam around the wilderness. As one might expect, the military becomes involved, led by Lt. Col. Archie Nevitt (Beverly Hills Cop‘s John Ashton). Lady Kong is captured by Nevitt, who also seemingly kills Kong, only for Kong to track down his love in time to face the military and be there for the birth of his son.

That’s right, the movie ends with a sitcom-y labor where the mother is a giant ape. It’s all pretty ridiculous, and while there’s entertainment value in its ludicrousness, most of the audience has probably checked out when they realize the film’s events only become possible when King Kong gets a heart transplant and blood transfusion. There’s a reason RKO’s Kong was followed with Son of Kong as opposed to any effort to resurrect an extremely dead King Kong.

How Did King Kong Lives Turn Out?

image courtesy of de laurentiis entertainment group

This is a movie with a fairly large level of ambition, even if that ambition is absurd. To pull any of this off without it being overtly campy, there had to be enough money for not just another King Kong suit but for Lady Kong and their child, as well. There also had to be enough money for sequences such as Kong’s surgery, Kong’s fight against a bunch of hunters, and Kong’s climactic fight against the military.

However, even though it was a full 10 years later, Lives only had a price tag of $18 million, or about 75% that of King Kong. This movie was never going to look particularly good, and it sure doesn’t.

The 1976 King Kong isn’t high art, and it does have a fair level of camp involved, but it’s a tolerable level of camp. King Kong Lives is just a full-on campground. And, while it has its moments of fun, it’s also plagued by long, dull stretches of yawn-inducing scenes involving Mitchell and Dr. Franklin falling in love just like Kong and Lady Kong.

Critics responded as one might expect they would. The 1976 King Kong has a 55% on Rotten Tomatoes while King Kong Lives holds an 8%. And, considering the decade-long gap between the first and second films, audiences couldn’t have cared less about the movie when it came out, at least in the United States, where it grossed a paltry $4.7 million, or about 9% of what its predecessor made. That said, it was the highest-grossing foreign film of the year in the Soviet Union, so at least there was one section of the Earth that apparently really dug it.

Stream King Kong Lives on Shout! Factory Amazon Channel.

What is your favorite Kong movie? Let us know in the comments.