Herochat

Son of Kong

ultrabender

  • **
  • 426
  • +2/-2
    • View Profile
Son of Kong
« on: October 19, 2018, 07:15:26 PM »
Has anyone else seen this abortion of a sequel for King Kong. It was a very rushed sequel in 1933. it came out shortly  after the first King Kong. Script writer Ruth Rose intentionally made no attempt to make a serious film on the logic that it could not surpass the first. She stated "If you can't make it bigger, make it funnier." . The story was very poorly written, the characters sucked, it was trying too hard to be funny,  it was only 69 minutes long, very low budget. Hell even RKO and Ruth Rose knew it was going to be a horrible movie. Little Kong is very lame and easily forgettable.



I can see why this shit sequel was forgotten as it sucked.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2018, 07:23:15 PM by ultrabender »

Riv1

  • ************
  • 20228
  • +65/-1058
    • View Profile
Re: Son of Kong
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2018, 01:04:33 AM »
I watched that movie like a hundred times growing up.

breaking scourge...was no challenge

HalloweenJack

  • ********
  • 9214
  • +35/-8
  • Rowdy AF
    • View Profile
Re: Son of Kong
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2018, 06:57:31 AM »
it hasn't been forgotten. It may not be your cuppa, but it's an okay movie.

Riv1

  • ************
  • 20228
  • +65/-1058
    • View Profile
Re: Son of Kong
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2018, 07:40:18 AM »
^^^yeah, as a grown up, i appreciate the part about Carl Denham getting his ass sued off because of the events in the original movie. That in itself was a nice follow up.

breaking scourge...was no challenge

Thanos6

  • *****
  • 1583
  • +19/-17
    • View Profile
Re: Son of Kong
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2018, 08:25:26 AM »
It features continuity; a realistic look at what would have happened after the first film; brought back the supporting cast from the original; has the special effects genius behind the first movie return to work his magic again; tried to balance comedy, action, and drama; and at the end, the stereotypical token Chinese cook is given an equal share of the treasure along with the other heroes, which would have counted as being progressive at the time.

This is despite the fact that it's:

*from early in the 'talkie' era;
*made incredibly, ludicrously quickly;
*one of the first film sequels;
*one of the first sci-fi/horror sequels;
*and probably could have made money if they had done just about anything and slapped the KONG name on it.

Honestly, I consider it nothing short of miraculous that it turned out as well as it did.
Truten forever!

Riv1

  • ************
  • 20228
  • +65/-1058
    • View Profile
Re: Son of Kong
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2018, 09:12:18 AM »
Great points all around.
They did very well for being in uncharted waters.

breaking scourge...was no challenge

ultrabender

  • **
  • 426
  • +2/-2
    • View Profile
Re: Son of Kong
« Reply #6 on: October 20, 2018, 09:53:14 AM »
I thought this movie sucked after watching back in 2017. it's one of the worst sequels I have seen. the title should be called "The Aborted Son of Kong". Godzilla can have lame sequels to but atleast you can find good Godzilla movies.

Only the very original first King Kong of 1933 is great.

Riv1

  • ************
  • 20228
  • +65/-1058
    • View Profile
Re: Son of Kong
« Reply #7 on: October 20, 2018, 12:09:55 PM »
Okey doke.

breaking scourge...was no challenge

ProjectCornDog

  • *******
  • 4494
  • +10/-14
    • View Profile
Re: Son of Kong
« Reply #8 on: October 24, 2018, 05:56:37 PM »
I genuinely find it fascinating there is split opinions about this movie here, awesome.

I want to see it now lol.