Here are my thoughts on the lesser-known sequel to 1933's King Kong, which stars Robert Armstrong and Helen Mack. My review of King Kong: • King Kong (1933) Movie...
My Mom told me there was a sequel as I was watching Kong on Million Dollar Movie on WOR TV NY in the late 50's. They reran Kong 3X a day, mimicking what used to be common, a ticket to a movie theatre allowed you access to the show all -- day -- long! (To be fair, every movie ran that way.). And why not? Then like now, the most part of you nickels and dimes went to candy and popcorn, you'd eat more all day long, so they liked you to stick around....... Bob Armstrong had a lifelong career, but he always was thrilled playing Carl Denham in the second movie, because he got to be a leading man, and he got the girl at the end of the movie! Oh yeah, she recommends they split the treasure 3 ways, not four, indicating --- she's with him.... By the way, two things stand out. One is Max Steiner got to knock out the second movie's score. and believe me he didn't get $50K for this one as he did in King Kong. Copoper paid him out of pocket when the studio balked, but when they screened the movie, the studio reimbursed the fee. NOBODY did leitmotiv, and Steiner contin=ed the approach of a musical theme for the characters. Second is, sound improved dramatically between the two movies, you could hear the difference through 1950 ish consoles, more depth, base and dynamic range. Still deep in the pre code era, released November 1933, it was nice to see a more demonstrative female AND the male protagonist who was supportive instead of damsel in distress. Great analysis! I know these videos are demanding, but never get discouraged. After all, "that's no way to talk. I'm not very good. The review isn't very good. You want to tell people how good you are! Throw out your chest! Brag how good you are....." You deserve subscribers so ask for them! After all........................ "Well you said, stick to you......"
I remember in the early 80s on Thanksgiving in the NYC area there used to be a movie marathon of King Kong, Song of Kong and Mighty Joe Young while a rival channel would show a Godzilla movie marathon. I love your admiration & in depth review of classic cinema.
Actually, you’re slightly misremembering this. The marathons were shown on the same channel, but on different days. The Kong marathon was on Thanksgiving Day, the Godzilla marathon was on Friday.
I was one of those fans who was initially disappointed with SON OF KONG but came to love it. First of all, let's acknowledge that this was the FIRST "Monster movie" to ever have a sequel - and it established how it was possible to revisit the subject when you have KILLED OFF the main character ( thus we got BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, DRACULA'S DAUGHTER, SON OF DRACULA, SON OF FRANKENSTEIN, etc... ) The most regrettable thing about SON OF KONG is it's conveniently tidy ending with the entire island disappearing into the depths of the ocean. I've rationalized an idea that works better for me - the movie unfolds exactly as seen in the film up until the earthquake occurs. Kinko indeed helps Denham to escape but, the island isn't actually destroyed. This is merely the story which Deham and Hildy tell others in order to prevent other adventurers from seeking out Skull island and allowing the inhabitants to live there without further outside interference.
I always like when movies actually bring up the aftermath of the first movie. Like in ghostbusters 2 where they got sued by the city for blowing up the marshmallow man and are doing kids parties now. Adds a level of realism to a fantastical premise. Son Kong might not be the classic of the original but for a movie made in 9 months with a smaller budget it’s fairly impressive.
I think a key word to describe this film might be "charming". I find it completely amazing that the production crew were able to knock this film out in such short time on such a short schedule, and wind up with a pretty entertaining film. It'd be hard for any film to live up to the epic wonder of a KING KONG-type entertainment. Perhaps, however, the producers should've taken longer to come up with a sequel, one that could have dovetailed into a third film as you suggest, which would've meant a different take altogether on SON OF.... But I do find it an entertaining film for what it did set out to do. (A couple of other films related to the original KONG's universe that are worth mentioning/recommending for discussion: SHE and MIGHTY JOE YOUNG---the latter which also starred the same lead as KONG, as wall as a giant ape who escapes and some of the same technicians behind the scenes bringing it all to life. SHE also involved some of the same people behind the camera (and also including that spunky Helen Mack again on screen). I would not normally recommend such a thing (tho I may have already done so elsewhere), but the colorized version supervised by Ray Harryhausen is well worth consideration. It's hard to believe some of the big scenes---the ritual dances, fiery action etc nearer the end---were NOT filmed in color, considering the amount of detail that was required to deal with all the moving bodies etc. I believe it was maybe Ray's second favorite film behind KONG, and it seems he dedicated himself to a getting a colorization job done right. Now, may the purists have my head! ;-(
Just came across this channel !!! How it has evaded my attention all these years goes beyond me. I have always loved "Son of Kong", it is an all time favorite! Thank you for all of these videos and book reviews!
I first saw Son of Kong on TNT or TBS in the early 90's. I recorded it on VHS and watched it numerous times. I still love the movie. While obviously not on par with King Kong, I would say Son of Kong has better character development.
8:40 - Because of the rush to completion, they couldn't do the planned Brontosaurus stampede that Willis O'Brian wanted to do, but Peter Jackson did manage to add it to his (in my mind "true life Carl Denham prequal") King Kong 2005.
A great review, thank you. I love this sequel, it's delightful, and although it doesn't have the awe of King Kong as a spectacle it's certainly an enjoyable film. Quite an accomplishment given the timescale in which it was made, I'm guessing that it was done to 'cash in' on the success of King Kong, I feel that it was a pity that they invest more time or money into it though as I feel that it could have been the first of many sequels, either the studio didn't appreciate the original as much as the public at the time or they didn't see the possibilities in it as a series, this could possibly be due to the times, as you mentioned it was during The Great Depression.
I watched Son of Kong for the first time as a kid on late night tv, I believe around the 30 minute mark. I loved it as a kid, they used to play the original on the Saturday afternoon movie matinee. Later one of the broadcast networks did a Kong marathon of the original, son and the 1970s version. That was in the 80s and I wouldn't see son of Kong till a few years ago when I bought the 3 DVD set of King Kong, son of Kong and mighty Joe young. I enjoy the movie though I don't watch it often. Maybe I'll do my own marathon of Kong movies (from the original to the Japanese version, the 70s remake, the 2000 female and Kong of Skull Island.). Although I don't have King Kong Lives (the sequel to the 70s king kong) good luck tracking that down for a review.
As usual, Ms. Weiselberry, you have done a splendid job of critiquing another film. And I have seen Son of Kong recently, and I agree with your opinions and observations about this movie. Incidentally I recently saw the original silent version of Oscar Wilde’s Solome on RU-vid! If you have never seen it, it’s not too risqué , and is one of the excellent silent films!
It's hard not to be a little sad when he saves Carl up until the last second when he is trapped and drowning when the island is going under. It's not as well done as say Joe Young's burning orphanage climax, but it is still right up there. It guess it is a little more in the feels because this is a baby animal that still knows what is right and wrong. At least sort of. The cave dragon was pretty cool. The nearly transparent eyes on it are creepy. I enjoy the movie, except for the 4th wall break that happens more than once in the film. Just sort of pulls me out of it. Anyhoo, you are cheery and informative as ever in this review. So that makes it a highlight to watch :) I hope all is well and wish you a good holiday :)
Glad you enjoyed this little grade B sequel to Kong. Most of the people responsible, dismissed it at the Tim. I always thought Helen Mack deserved better in her career. She was a favorite of David O Selznick. Of course, if you want an Arctic follow-up, there is Schoedsack & Cooper's version of H Rider Haggard's SHE with Randolph Scott and Helen Mack.
The modern Kong remakes always get the Denham character wrong. The newer movies ('76 and '05) just don't work, because despite Denham's flaws, we have to share his passion for adventure, or fantasy of Skull Island doesn't make sense. The whole purpose of the newer movies was to demonize the Denham character, which renders the movies less fun, although I do enjoy the '76 remake more than the '05 version. Here in Son of Kong, Denham gets to admit his errors without the viewer having to abandon him as a likable character. Also, Helen Mack is a strong addition to the film. If you haven't seen the 1935 film 'She', also a Merrian C. Cooper fantasy film, it is worth a look and Mack is great in it as well.
I love this movie and have great memories of it. I grew up in NYC where they always showed a great movie marathon every Thanksgiving. The lineup sometimes varied, but it usually involved watching the parade in the morning, and then King Kong, Son of Kong and Mighty Joe Young. Watched all three every year! Have you done a review of Mighty Joe Young yet?
I'm glad you remembered both Rose and Mack...I think Hilda is actually an underappreciated character in the pair of original films. As much as I love Wray and Ann Darrow in the original, I've always found it tough that she can't spare even a modicum of sympathy for Kong and his predicament. I do appreciate the subsequent, more empathetic portrayals by Lange and Watts. Hilda's love of animals (including Kong Jr.), and her ability to stand with the boys, sets her apart from her peers in the genre, thanks to Rose and Mack. And I know the film is lacking in the kind of iconic images that '33 Kong had in abundance...but that shot of Kong Jr. holding Denham above the waves has always stuck with me. Thanks for this review!
I remember seeing ‘Son of Kong’ a couple of times and found it entertaining and good fun for an 8 or 9 year old. Not sure if I would go back and watch it again since TBH this is just a lesser ‘Kong” retread. I think ‘Mighty Joe Young’ is more worthy of a rewatch than SoK.
If Son of Kong had been released before King Kong I think public reaction would have been different. It would have amused audiences and they would still have liked the effects. Then if they watched King Kong afterwards they would have appreciated the improvements and both films would have been successful.
Haven't seen this in many years, and after your description of the plot I realize I barely even remember it. I probably last saw it during the Thanksgiving Kong-a-thons they used to air back in the day. Not to be too picky, but that was a Styracosaurus, not a Triceratops. Anyway, thanks for yet another cool review Jerome!
You made a good point at the end of your video -- probably, if there never was a King Kong, this would seem to be a better movie - but it carries the King Kong "trademark" ...l and it can;t stand up to that scrutiny ... they couldn't capture that lightning in a bottle a second time... and you're also correct.. this was a strike-while-the-iron- is -hot , one more time to the well before it dries kind of film. Never attempted to be the shining film that came before... another wonder review - you are a delight to watch.
Haha the expression on Son of Kong's face!😂 I need to see these movies!! You could write a fan fiction for a "third" installment.😉 I hope you had a wonderful thanksgiving! I am very much looking forward to Christmas season this year!🙏
Oh, I've seen it, alright. Dozens of times, like the film about his old man. I call it about the greatest Saturday afternoon matinee one could hope to see. My recurring theme, "if they only made 'em the way they used to". That will be in the titles of my first feature film, along with, "no digital effects were used in the production of this movie."
I'd read another commenter compare Kong Jr to Stan Laurel lol, I actually thought that too, maybe it was the head scratching, Kong Sr as Hardy with Kong Jr as Laurel, both wearing bowler hats, " it's a go picture🎬. I like Son of Kong a lot now but remember feeling underwhelmed the first time I saw it but my appreciation for it has grown since then, I guess King Kong casts a tall shadow lol. I like it really for most of the reasons you mention. very happy to see this review. ~ Thank you Ms Weiselberry ~
I don't know if I have ever seen this movie before - can't recall. I do like it. There are interesting parallels to Godzilla here. An iconic first movie and a hastily produced sequel for both franchises. I've also just watched the two G movies, so the comparison is fresh in my mind. I prefer the first G movie, but Son of Kong is a better film, in my opinion, than G Raids Again. I agree with you that Armstrong is better here - his character is much more likeable. I also liked Helen Mack. She's different than Fay, but I didn't want just a repeat of the first movie. She seems to be the most sensible and grounded character in the film. And it's because of her that Son helps them - she's always suggesting things, but not doing. I guess old-time sexism had to make the man do everything. Doesn't really hurt this movie too much, but the sexism of the past is often quite annoying to watch in these old movies. I also like the plot of the movie. All the things that happen here make sense from his problems with the law to the crew not wanting to go back to Skull Island. I do agree with you that there were a couple of convenient things that happened. Glad I finally watched this. A third movie would have been interesting. I would have wanted the island and Son not to be destroyed completely so they could have gone back there. Maybe to make the movie he was trying to make without trying to capture any creatures.
Saw it when I was about 10. The ending destroyed me, cried myself to sleep that night. Hoped against hope that this time the Monkey would survive. Didn't help that Son of Kong was so sweet to his human friends. Kong's death was tragic but he had killed dozens of people and had to be stopped. You really wished they had left him on his island. Still I agree no where as good as the original but still a good watch if not taken too seriously.
I think you are spot on with this one. Pretty much matches my thoughts when I watched it five years ago. I felt Kong Junior had an Island of Misfit Toys vibe which undercuts the seriousness of their situation. Also, I wonder what filmmakers had in mind by making Junior white. I watched Mighty Joe Young this past summer and didn't think much of it, though the effects were better.
"Romey," so glad to catch you at this late hour, and before anything else I want to give a shout out to Rocky, the poor owl who was found inside the Rockefeller Plaza Christmas tree but released into the wild. If you haven't seen this particular news story, I'd be interested in your reaction to it should you ever look it up. A proper serialization of post-Kong adventures would probably involve a hook that finally gets away from the Kong name, perhaps Beyond Skull Island. I can't see a series of Denham movies working unless he keeps stumbling across new wonders at least as remarkable as Kong, maybe call them Denham's Detour. (I like how his name suggests "denim," as in "You're going to want to wear some good sturdy jeans where we're going.") Movie trivia: I notice that a pivotal figure here is named Nils Helstrom, and that if you add an extra L you get Dr. Nils Hellstrom, the fictional host of the 1971 pseudo-documentary The Hellstrom Chronicle. I have to wonder if the makers of Chronicle were having a little fun referring to Kong. Chronicle isn't much, a very straight scientific argument that insects may inherit "our" world ... and yep, sure, why not? I would ordinarily take a pass on a title like this -- who really wants to track down, say, Son of the Sheik? -- but you make a good case for it. Thank you, and owl be seeing you.
Awesome review, this was a surprisingly decent sequel despite feeling rushed being released only a year after the original Kong. Peter Jackson's King Kong is still my favourite King Kong movie!
This was an enjoyable, fun sequel. My favorite line comes from the fight with the cave bear. "Say can he scrap ! just like his old man." Little Kong is a bit more expressive in this one. It's easy to like him. You can find that fight sequence here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XCSweP45x2s.html Your excellent reviews never let me down, JW. Sanity and friendliness, unchained !
I seen this movie a few years back and I remember liking it. Unfortunately I haven't seen it since and I can't really remember too much about it. The original Kong is a movie I remember all too well and even Mighty Joe Young. If you can, could you review Mighty Joe Young too? I'd love to hear your thoughts on that movie.
Great review, thank you. I always liked it - it has charm - and aims for a younger audience. It's up there with Mighty Joe Young. Not great, but good fun.
I liked Son of Kong. It was different. I kinda like the the story. It got boring at times. But I guess I was waiting for to see Son of Kong. It's humorous. Like the dinosaurs in the movie. I wish it had more dinosaurs. You can the movie was rushed. But that's okay. Son of Kong is way better than Son of Godzilla. I think?🤔 Yeah, I'm a huge Godzilla Fan. I like that Kong was fighting some of the dinosaurs. The Ending was sad 😢 to little Kong dies at the end of the movie. The movie was Good Though. From a scale of one through ten. I give it a 6.4 GrEaT Review. Is Mighty Joe Young next?🤔 Oh yeah that wasn't a Triceratops . It's a Styracosaurus.
As a kid, i thought it took forever to get to Skull Island. So, Kong dies because it is the logical conclusion. Sad, but he was never going to leave Manhattan alive. Lil Kong ending is super sad because there is no reason for the island to sink. You just want him to have a happy ending. Lil Kong saving his father destroyer out of love is pretty deep though. More sad.
Excellent review of a movie I know I saw as a kid during my ape craze but can't remember much of. Even then, I could feel the absence of the sexual element of the original and surrendered to boredom.
I've known about this movie for years and never watched it. I'm a huge fan of the first King Kong and maybe I thought I'd be just disappointed. But I think I give it a shot with an open mind and just enjoy it for what it is. Have you watched the 2017 Kong:Skull island movie? I didn't think I would enjoy that one as much as did. That is one of my favorites. Great video! Take care.
I saw Kong: Skull Island a few years ago (did a mini review of it at the time, and that's where I floated the idea of a Godzilla review series!). I enjoyed it, but I'd like to watch it again to get a more definite opinion. Whenever I do that, I'll review it. :)
I have a soft spot for this movie. Considering the rushed, cheap production, it's much better than it has any right to be. I also understand that Robert Armstrong preferred making this movie to the first film, because he enjoyed giving Carl Denham more of an arc and making seem more like a real person.
Haven't seen this in decades, but I remember being disappointed that it was just a lot of talking and running around, and no monster scenes until well into the second half. The animation was jerky. Lack of a budget killed this one.
I enjoy this movie for what it is, despite them not even getting to the island until more than halfway into the movie, but I don't know how differently I would feel if I didn't grow up with it. Going in knowing it's going to be goofy makes it more enjoyable, but I think I would probably have disliked it more if I had seen it for the first time as an adult. I like the sort of odd choices for the creatures though, and that there are a lot of those kind of sequences once they do get to the island. And I will say that even as a kid, I found the monkey sequence boring. It seemed like there were always overly long sideshow-type scenes like that getting in the way of my monster movies as a kid, from the dance in *The Valley of Gwangi,* to the incredibly annoying song in *Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman,* to the monkey and singing in this movie. Little me had no patience for it. But I still count myself lucky to have grown up in the '90s, when movies like this were still shown on more channels than just TCM.
