Mighty Joe Young (1949)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Lady D

  
  The original film of Mighty Joe Young, dating back to 1949. There are obvious differences when comparing to the later version, CGI, effects etc, but the general plot of the film remains the same. This version's Joe, does look a little 'Reet Petit', but I still feel… More
  The original film of Mighty Joe Young, dating back to 1949. There are obvious differences when comparing to the later version, CGI, effects etc, but the general plot of the film remains the same. This version's Joe, does look a little 'Reet Petit', but I still feel that was good for the year it was made. An interesting watch, if only to see the evolution of an animated creature.

• Bruce B

  
  This was the best movie ever growing up, I must have watched it a 100 times on WPIX and WOR. If it was on I was watching it and to see it on DVD brought back enjoyable memories. A fantastic movie when you consider it was made in 1949 the special effects are incredible. About a young… More
  This was the best movie ever growing up, I must have watched it a 100 times on WPIX and WOR. If it was on I was watching it and to see it on DVD brought back enjoyable memories. A fantastic movie when you consider it was made in 1949 the special effects are incredible. About a young girl who is discovered with a gorilla, a very large gorilla and is brought to America for shows. Not as big or crazy as King Kong, but more enjoyable. The only disappointment in the film was near the end when the filmed turned an awful brown color, my guess original film was damaged, and that's a shame. I'm giving this one 5 stars how could I give it less. The commentary film was an added bonus.

• Conner R

  
  An extremely bizarre movie that blends apes with cowboys. I really don't know what was going inside their minds when they thought that this would make a logical part III to King Kong (even though it's not really a sequel). It's kind've fun to watch because… More
  An extremely bizarre movie that blends apes with cowboys. I really don't know what was going inside their minds when they thought that this would make a logical part III to King Kong (even though it's not really a sequel). It's kind've fun to watch because it's so corny and ridiculous.

• Tim S

  
  Fantastic effects, great story and a terrific performance from Robert Armstrong. A vast improvement over Son Of Kong, it's easy to see why this won an Oscar for special effects.

• Cameron J

  
  And in this corner: Mighty Joe Young! Come on, don't sit there and tell me that when you heard that title, you weren't picturing this big fur ball stepping into a ring, dukin' it out with Kong Kong... who also has a really boxer-y name. Wow, Merian C. Cooper and Ernest… More
  And in this corner: Mighty Joe Young! Come on, don't sit there and tell me that when you heard that title, you weren't picturing this big fur ball stepping into a ring, dukin' it out with Kong Kong... who also has a really boxer-y name. Wow, Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack must have been "ape" about boxing. Okay, that's enough pun-ishment, now let's get to talking about this classic... that not a whole lot of people have heard of. I mean, I guess it's doing well, but if it wasn't for Disney coming along in '98 and the fact that people kept going to see that movie to wash the taste of '98's "Godzilla" out of their mouths, this would have just been "that" other giant ape movie that Ernest B. Schoedsack did, because Cooper kept taking the credit for directing "King Kong". Hey man who's been dead since 1979, maybe the a reason why your co-director's getting almost all of the credit is because he knows more about how giant ape movies are done. No, this film isn't at all that bad, but it's certainly no "King Kong", and for several reasons. This film came out at the last breath of the '40s, and yet it is so startlingly '30s, and I know that sounds like I'm being overly contemporary, but just because this film had limitations, that doesn't mean that it wasn't a product tainted by cheese, as well as some looseness in the editing department. Hey, I don't know about y'all, but if my only means of editing was cutting little frames with tedious carefulness, I probably wouldn't be a big fan of tightening things up either. Of course, the tedium of trimming that footage can't be any more intense than the tedium found in the looseness of, well, another film, because this film is not at all dull in its looseness and slowness, but it does lay a heavy blow to the atmosphere and pacing, rendering everything very dry and leaving the film to rapidly lose speed until you finally fall out when there are no giant gorilla going around, destroying everything. Well, that will grab your attention, as will the dialogue, which, as I said, is very '30s, being pumped with cheese and melodrama that is exacerbated by the fact that our "leads", Terry Moore and Ben Johnson, are awful. Again, I know it's a 1949 film that thinks that it's a 1930s film, but this gets inexcusable, and every time, and every time we have to hear Johnson deliver his lines with bone stiffness or sit through Moore hamming it up and - so help me - dramatically staring off into the distance, the film gets a little less sufferable. However, just because she and other missteps dilute the palatability of the film, that doesn't mean that the film ever loses you. Sure, it's a film all but buried in the sands of time, because it isn't terribly memorable, but at the end of the day, you'll find yourself having a grand ol' time, partially because, even though it had been 16 years since "King Kong", this team's taste in production had not gone rusty. It doesn't matter if it was 1933 or 1949, Willis O'Brien knew his special effects, and while the none-Joe Young effects are really dated, our main ape is as top notch as Kong. Sure, there's no getting around the fact that it's still a big stop-motion gorilla, but for what it is, the mechanics are almost seamless in their movement and blending into the environment to where even the emotion of Mr. Joe Young is palpable, which isn't to say that the effects don't come into play quite nicely when action flares up. Now, if you want some hardcore, awesome, giant ape action sequences the likes of you couldn't even imagine, then, well, you should probably be watching Pete Jackson's "King Kong", but if you don't want to get too much action, then this film will do, and very much so, with plenty of the action being surprisingly tense and thrilling to keep you on the edge of your seat. Still, when you're not getting thrills, you're getting charm, certainly not from Ben Johnstiff and Terryble Moore, but from, well, Robert Armstrong, who was always a real charmer, but I didn't expect him to make this good of a charming anti-hero. Granted, by 1949 alone, that type of sleazeball anti-hero was so overused that weren't so much tired of him, but seemingly programmed to like him, because we were so used to him, but man, Armstrong still plays that part well. Still, even he wasn't in the film, the subject matter and story alone would be enough to win you over, because this isn't another "King Kong" like you would expect. It's a unique story with conventional themes, but themes that Ernest B. Schoedsack still explores with such tenderness and charm, and for every moment the film loses you, it quickly wins you back, regardless of the high cheese factor in the script, and at the end of the day, that's all that matters. Overall, it would seem as though no one told Ernest B. Schoedsack that it was almost the '50s, because this film falls into thematic conventions, as well as cheesy writing, loose editing and bad acting that were all tired after the '30s, yet if you don't mind that, then feel free to sit back, relax and enjoy then-stellar special effects - that remain respectable today - and thrilling moments that break up the consistent charm that ultimately makes Schoedsack's "Mighty Joe Young" a generally entertaining minor classic. 2.5/5 - Fair