Anakja King Kong

source: Son of Kong

Son of Kong is no Kong Sr. but is still pretty entertaining, though it drags kinda bad before you can actually get to the good stuff on the island. Kong Jr.'s F/X are fine, the dinos and etc fun too. I thought Armstrong was kinda a block of wood, but Helen Mack fine. Typical of the time, too bad they didn't make a third. Something to jump up and down about, sure. **1/2 outta ****

I am very interested in finding out if anyone else besides myself remembers a scene at the end of this movie that is missing from the Turner movies release of Son of Kong. This scene I speak of is pretty clear in my mind as to having been there on TV viewings of this film when I was a child. The missing footage should come between the scene of Carl Denham being rescued from the sunken little Kong's hand into the life boat to the rather abrupt cut to the lifeboat's occupants seemingly dying of dehyration/exposure before being rescued by a Dutch ship.To my recall there was a quick cut after Englehorn pulls Denham into the life boat to the natives in a couple of typical native long boats frantically (almost comically)rowing away in the turbid waters. The chief is seen in the front of one of the boats rowing quickly. To this Denham states "well at least the chief made it" I cannot say if thats 100% verbatium because its been a long time since I've seen it but the quote from Denham is close enough. Anyone else remember this AND would like to comment ? on it?

Down the years there have been some pretty terrible sequels to great movies. In modern times, films like Exorcist II: The Heretic, Jaws II, Highlander II: The Quickening and Speed II: Cruise Control stick in the memory for all the wrong reasons (mainly that they aren't fit to be mentioned in the same breath as their predecessors!) Funnily enough, even old masterpieces from Hollywood's golden era were not safe from the curse of the lousy sequel – as evidenced by this somewhat embarrassing follow-up to the mighty King Kong. Rushed into production just months after the original, Son Of Kong is a piece of cinematic profiteering that merely stains the name of its illustrious forebear. Sadder still is the fact that this film is made by many of the people responsible for the earlier classic. Same director (Ernest B Shoedsack), same producer (Merian C Cooper), same composer (Max Steiner), one of the same scripters (Ruth Rose), some of the same actors (Robert Armstrong, Frank Reicher, Victor Wong) and even the same special effects guy (Willis H. O'Brien). How could the group of people who once made something so wonderful come up with something so feeble second time around? Following King Kong's infamous destruction of New York, the entertainment producer who brought him to the Big Apple - Carl Denham (Robert Armstrong) – is bankrupt and facing likely imprisonment. His old seafaring friend Captain Engelhorn (Frank Reicher) offers him a chance of escape by taking him aboard his ship to the East Indies, where the pair of them hope to reinvent themselves as merchant seamen. In the remote port of Dakang, Denham and Engelhorn unsuspectingly pick up a murderous Norwegian called Hellstrom (John Marston) who has recently killed a white man in the town. The white man's daughter Hilda (Helen Mack) also boards their ship, not realising to begin with that Hellstrom is aboard. With their fortunes flagging and the crew growing restless, Hellstrom deviously persuades Denham and Engelhorn to return to Skull Island, where he claims there is a legendary buried treasure. They agree, but the crew are not happy about their new destination (especially since Engelhorn's last visit cost many of his crew their lives). When they arrive, they discover that Kong has a young son. After rescuing the baby gorilla from quicksand, they set about discovering the lost treasure. The son of Kong helps them in their quest, protecting them from prehistoric monsters and helping them to smash down walls that block the way to the fabled hoard. Son Of Kong is not an absolute failure, but it is pretty terrible just the same. There are a couple of levels on which the film is partially successful. For one, Armstrong and Reicher give enjoyable performances much as they did in the first film. For another, Willis O'Brien's special effects are again quite innovative for their time – the dinosaurs especially look effective, though the son of Kong himself is a rather lacklustre invention. In most other aspects this film falls short. The story is much less compelling this time, with silly developments and no noticeable attention to pace and characterisation. There are no set pieces to speak of so, while the original movie ended with its famous Empire State Building sequence, this one climaxes with a whimper. Worst of all excitement is missing, primarily because the son of Kong is presented as a friend rather than a foe… by making him so cute and cuddly they've taken away the film's potential for suspense and tension. Son Of Kong is quite unworthy of its predecessor – for a much better film along these lines look out for Mighty Joe Young (1949) instead, and reserve this one for the Kong completists.

Brought out within the same year, the quickly handled sequel "The Son of Kong" would pale in comparison to its milestone original, but would remain enjoyably lightweight with a more prominent comic tone and consisting of a mildly robustness to the action. Too bad it just goes on to rush things, then actually thinking it out because the story isn't as compelling as it could have been. Little creativity shows, despite its stringy sub-plots. The story follows on from "King Kong", as promoter/producer Carl Denham finds himself in a lot of hot water for introducing Kong to New York. So to escape the lawsuits and reporters, he and the sea captain end heading out to sea. Although things change when they're told there's treasure on Skull Island, and before coming across this they encounter a miniature Kong. After an amusing opening (Denham hiding out) it only goes on to feel like its slogging it out in an stretched out manner, until the lively nature picks up (when they reach Skull island --- which takes them quite awhile) and then it breezes by in no time. Kong's son doesn't have that menace and uncontrollable aggression like father… instead it has a child's temperament; curious, lovable and friendly. Due to that there's little in the way of dark moments and the suspense is faintly structured, with a more playful style winning out and these three stooges antics is even played up to the camera. *Shrug*. Nonetheless the interactions especially between Denham and baby Kong remains charming, if goofy. Even the wrestlemania between Kong and prehistoric beasties can be diverting, if lacking the punch. The likable Robert Armstrong, Frank Reicher and Victor Wong effortlessly reprise their roles. Helen Mack is okay as the female siren. Ernest B. Schoedsack's steadfast direction is measurably controlled due to obvious time/budget constrictions, but decent animation FX is used for Kong.

Which isn't to say it's better (or as good as) the original KONG, which is a film that will never be equaled (as De Laurentis and Peter Jackson spent millions proving). But as sequels go this one is just right. When modern film makers produce a sequel to a hit movie they essentially remake it only bigger. If the original had ten explosion the sequel has a hundred, if the original had one big angry monster the sequel has five. In other words they take a good idea and turn it into something tedious and overblown. The producers of SON OF KONG shrewdly realized that they could never top the original so they gave us a pleasant little followup instead. As another reviewer aptly noted, SON is a light dessert after a steak dinner, which is just what you want. The effects and action are good, the humor is excellent, and I for one prefer Helen Mack's spunky gal to Fay Wray's insipid heroine. So sue me.

In this quickly produced sequel to the iconic King Kong, Carl Denham (Robert Armstrong) and company head back to Skull Island in search of treasure. Once there, they run into the expected larger than life monsters. Fortunately for our group of explorers, they also run into Kong's offspring who proves to be more agreeable than his old man. Son of Kong was put together in a hurry and it shows. Willis O"Brien's stop-motion work is not as convincing as it was in King Kong. Creature movements are even more jerky and unnatural than in the original. And the screen time given to O'Brien's creatures has been reduced to a fraction of that in King Kong. Instead, the characters spend the majority of the movie on another island with not much to do other than bore the audience. It's a real shame that more time and care wasn't taken with this sequel. King Kong deserved better than this. Several members of the original cast are back, but neither Robert Armstrong nor Frank Reicher appears to be as interested in the proceedings as they did in the original. Helen Mack is on hand to basically take the Fay Wray role. She's a poor substitute. But the worst part of Son of Kong was the decision to allow baby Kong to mug for the cameras. There are a couple of scenes where the ape looks right at the camera and all but winks at the audience. The effect of these scenes is to completely destroy any suspense and credibility the movie might have had going for it. It just makes the whole movie seem silly.

I cannot blame RKO for rushing this film into production. After all, "King Kong" made a fortune and the public was clamoring for more. However, I wished they'd rethought plot just a bit before they began filming, as it started off so great but then the movie degenerated into a bit of a sappy affair. The beginning of "Son of Kong" was great. Now that Kong was dead, a LOT of New Yorkers were mad at Denham (Robert Armstrong)--and everyone was ready to sue him because of all the damage the creature did! I loved this, as too seldom do sequels talk about the public's reaction to the idiot who orchestrated the big mess! And so, he sets off to sea and goes in search of a fresh start. Now you would think with a planet this big that the chances of Armstrong's character to stumble upon another enormous ape would be practically nil. Yet, despite not trying to do so, he ends up finding what appears to be Kong's younger and a bit smaller son! What are the odds?!?! However, and here is where the film falters, this Son of Kong is nice...really, really nice. He smiles and mugs for the cameras repeatedly AND is incredibly helpful and kind towards Armstrong and his new hot babe (Helen Mack). The end result is a film that might please little kids and those who don't want a violent monster film....but the other 98% probably will be disappointed by this kindler, gentler sort of ape! Watchable but it could have been a lot better.

Following the events of King Kong, director Carl Denham (Robert Armstrong) finds himself being sued right and left for all the damage Kong did. To add to his troubles, he discovers a grand jury is about to indict him so he sets sail with Captain Englehorn (Frank Reicher). These are the only two of the main cast members from the first film to return. Eventually the two run across the man who sold Denham the map to Skull Island and he tells Denham there is treasure on the island that they left behind when they captured Kong. So they all return to Skull Island, along with a pretty stowaway (Helen Mack). Once there, they find an albino "Little Kong," the son of Kong from the first picture. Obviously this was a rushed production. It was written, shot, and released the same year as King Kong. In many ways it feels like a B movie. It takes over forty minutes of this barely over an hour movie for Little Kong to show up. Out of those forty minutes, there's maybe ten or fifteen minutes of necessary story. The rest is filler. When Little Kong does show up, it's not that impressive. He's played mostly for laughs, at times resembling the Bumble from Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer! But he does have some nice fight scenes with dinosaurs and a giant bear. Robert Armstrong reportedly liked this movie more than King Kong. If that's true then it probably speaks to Mr. Armstrong's vanity since he got to be the romantic leading man and hero for this one. He's likable and his performance is fine but Carl Denham being made into the hero is one of the many problems with this movie. Denham's rough edges are what made him such a good character in the first film. Softened up, he's a rather bland character and a poor fit for leading man. Helen Mack is no Fay Wray but she's very attractive and does about as well as can be expected given the weak script. Willis O'Brien's special effects are not surprisingly the highlight of the picture. Ernest B. Schoedsack returns to direct, although noticeably without Merian C. Cooper, who is only an executive producer on this one. Doing sequels is tricky business, then and now. Even more so when you're following up one of the greatest films of all time. The truth is King Kong didn't need any sequels. But greed always wins out in Hollywood. Is Son of Kong a bad sequel? Yes, of course. I don't see how that could be disputed. Is it a bad movie? Not really. It's watchable and even entertaining in spots. But the specter of its predecessor is always looming over it.

Sequels to films that were a big success is a tradition that is still being kept up to this day. It was rife even back in 1933 too; and this is shown by the fact that King Kong, probably the greatest monster movie ever made (definitely at that time), spawned a sequel within the same year! It's obvious that this was made with the spare parts from the first film; this is true with respect to the effects and sets, and even more so with the ideas. Basically, the writers had to get film director Carl Denham back on Skull Island; and they definitely did that. Despite the fact that bringing the great ape back to New York landed him in all kinds of trouble; mostly in the form of lawsuits, Carl Denham is soon back aboard skipper Englehorn's raggedy old tug boat. At first, the pair (along with their skeleton crew) stick to doing business in Middle Eastern countries; but it isn't long before they bump into that guy who gave Denham the map to Skull Island, and before we know it - Carl Denham and co. are heading back to Skull Island in search of some treasure! You might think this whole plot is just a lame excuse to land Denham back on the island so that another film could be made. And it is. It's a shame that this is such a weak film, because seeing how the whole Kong fiasco affected the central characters could have been quite interesting. We do get a little insight as to their post-Kong fates, but it's only slight; and only refers to the characters of Denham and the skipper. The film does reunite original Kong director Ernest B. Schoedsack with several of it's cast members; but this only adds to the oddity that such a brilliant film could spawn such a terrible sequel. The creature of the title is the giant ape's dumb offspring; which doesn't provide scares or laughs; as it's too stupid to be scary, and too unfunny to make the audience laugh. The fact that it pops up without so much as a mention in the first film makes this film even more farcical. This film goes for laughs rather than scares throughout, and hardly ever succeeds in getting any. Denham's one-liners are more ridiculous than funny, and only add to the overall shambles that is this film. Really, there is absolutely no reason to see this. It was made purely to cash in on the first film's success. Fans of Kong (like myself) will hate it because it's junk and anyone who wasn't a fan of Kong will have no reason for seeing it anyway. Don't bother!