My own Answer is "Yes".

I like this one quite a bit. I give the filmmakers credit for updating the story to the 1970's which gives the movie its own identity, but the campy humor tends to be more annoying than amusing.
You've seen Guy Standeven in something because the man was in everything.

I like it better than Peter Jackson's remake. Sure, there are no dinosaurs and a stupid rubber snake and it has other flaws, but the movie stays in the same tone and feel.
Jackson's film doesn't know what it wants to be, one minute it's an adventure story, then a romance, then a thriller, then glimpses of horror, then it becomes a "buddy movie" with Ann and Kong, more like Mighty Joe Young than King Kong, then the tone shifts to something else, then back again etc. It's bloated and all over the place, and much of the effects have not aged much better than the effects in '76. That brontosaurus stampede looks dreadful.
The Kong suit in '76 doesn't look the best, but the masks were extraordinary, they pulled off expressions very well. I'm friends with Rick Baker, so I've heard lots of stories and I really appreciate all the work that went into it all.
With all that said, the original 1933 film is the superior Kong film. As old as it is, I can watch that film again and again and just be amazed by it.
A Legend Never Dies

I know what it is!
It is one of the planes that was about to hit one of the towers on 9/11!
Kong saves the day!
"Please vote to preserve the unique character of Warren…" - Robert Duvall

I'm not really sure.
Heck, I am not really sure that it is even an aircraft.

What kind of aircraft is he crushing in his right hand?
"Please vote to preserve the unique character of Warren…" - Robert Duvall

It's aight.