Son of Kong

Welcome back to “Halloween Month,” where I will look at the sequel to the 1933 classic, “King Kong,” which is titled “Son of Kong.” What’s that? You never heard of the movie before? That’s because everyone is spending too much time talking about the first one, which is the reason why people may not know that this movie existed, and it’s one of the first monster sequels and the first “Son Of” movie titles.

Back in March 1933, “King Kong” opened as a huge hit in New York. Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack went to the studio head of RKO Pictures pitching the idea of a “King Kong” sequel. Cooper was saying he wanted the sequel to be even bigger and better. RKO was fine with the idea, under certain conditions. The film would have half the budget of the original, and be finished and released by December. It was 10 months from when they pitched the idea, and had only nine months to complete it. The reason behind this was because the studio wanted the original to still be fresh in everyone’s minds because the idea of making a sequel was new. They didn’t want anyone to forget the original and didn’t want other competitors to come along first and make their own “King Kong” rip-offs. Also, I guess everyone could get this; they wanted the movie in time for the Christmas holidays. That’s more important than making a good movie? Luckily, the creative team did the best they could. No, it’s not a masterpiece but it’s much better than how people may have thought about it when they saw it or heard about it. I have to admit, I didn’t hear about this movie until last year when I saw James Rolfe’s “Monster Madness 8.” After that, I had to go out and see the movie.

This film has been culturally criticized for years because of being released the same year as the original, but the film itself isn’t so bad. Jamie Grijalba said in his review, “It isn’t really horror either, but we’ve come a long way in that discussion and we’re just not moving forward after those early discussions that tried to narrow down, while I’d like to widen the concepts of what a horror film truly can be.” Anyway, King Kong’s son doesn’t appear until 40 minutes into the movie, and we can only see a glimpse over a hill at first, and that’s all we need, if anyone wasn’t concerning with the deep plot featuring Robert Armstrong returning as Carl Denham, the man who brought Kong to New York, Helen Mack as Hilda, Frank Reicher as Captain Englehorn, who first went to Skull Island and John Marston as Nils Helstrom, the man that sold Denham the map to the island in the first place, you could now thanks to the presence of the beloved offspring of Kong. Victor Wong returns as the cook on the ship, Charlie.

However, let’s be honest. If a 70 minute movie where the monster appears at 40 minutes in doesn’t have you hooked or interested, it’s probably atrocious, and this movie is not, because it handles the relations and the drama between the characters extremely well. Every one of them is related because of past fights, relations or even wants of revenge. They all have something against the other, yet they must all work together once they are stuck in Skull Island after they are left alone by the crew of the boat where they arrived. Grijalba mentioned that:

It’s funny how at the time the sailors and other staff of the ship are constantly compared to Russians (communists) but almost as if it were a joke, but later we realize that their ideology isn’t far from that, or at least to the concept that the USA had of communism at the time, where they say that they don’t need captains or chiefs or any authority to run their own. And he’s right, but let’s keep the ideology discussion aside.

The film is good and remains watchable because of how well the human drama is managed and how well the monster work still is at the time the movie was made. Kong’s Son looks nice, even though it was made from the armature of one of the original Kong models, and at times a cartoonish-like model that remains interesting to see react at many of the new things that happens around him. Grijalba ended his review by saying, “Maybe like the Son of Godzilla, this movie remains with its charm and overall well made structure, that is put back because of a messy structure and an overall sense that the movie lacks a lot of budget and a lot of reason of even existing.”

If you haven’t seen this movie, go and see it, especially if you have seen the original. If you have never heard of this movie, now you have. I definitely say give this movie a chance because it still is good, even though it’s not as good as the original, but it’s still worth checking out. Add this on to your list of movies you want to watch for this month. I, myself, wouldn't mind checking this film out again whenever I get the chance, and I'll rewatch it as many times as I can because it's still a good movie.

Hopefully all of you have enjoyed today’s review, stay tuned tomorrow as I continue in the “Kong-a-thon” for “Halloween Month.”