• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

King Kong... sequel???

I think that Jackson's King Kong has been the only Kong without a sequel (so far). The original had Son of Kong, the 70's King Kong had King Kong Lives and even King Kong Vs. Godzilla had King Kong Escapes.

King Kong Escapes is not a sequel to King Kong vs. Godzilla. Even though both movies are made by Toho this film film was a loose adaptation of the Rankin/Bass Saturday morning cartoon series The King Kong Show and was the second and final Japanese-made film featuring the King Kong character.

In King Kong Escapes he is depicted as the normal size for Kong and not the larger size that was used in the movie with Godzilla.
 
That definitely does raise my interest level. I've still only seen him the Thor movies, so if that is still true by the time that comes out, it'll be weird seeing him in a heroic role.
 
Is this the most recent Kong: Skull Island thread? If so...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
I love Comic Con time when the trailers all roll out! Thought John Goodman was John Rhys-Davies for a second, oops.
 
Looks spectacular with a fantastic cast. While it's good to know that Kong will be motion-captured (according to Wikipedia), it'll be weird to have an ape not performed by Andy Serkis.

I loved the bit between Samuel L. Jackson and John Goodman squaring off each other. Now that's a face-off!
 
You know for a movie that has both Samuel L Jackson and Tom Hiddleston in it, that trailer is surprisingly meh.
 
Do we know if there's a specific reason they're setting this in the '70s rather than today or the '30s like the original and Peter Jackson movies? Is the story possibly tied into Vietnam?
 
Possibly for that reason, although I wonder if ti's also because they're tying it in with the new Godzilla movie and want to set it sometime after those events.
 
Rapid reboots, like everything else, are not the recent innovation people assume. There were maybe a half-dozen screen versions of The Wizard of Oz in the 25 years before the Judy Garland film. The Maltese Falcon was made into films in 1931, 1936, and 1941. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde had two adaptations a decade apart, also in 1931 and 1941.
Most of those Wizard of Oz films were created in part by Baum and told different stories in the "Oz-iverse," One was an adaptation of the play and all but the animated one were silent. The MGM/Garland version was the first adaptation we would recognize as anything approaching a feature film adaptation of the novel.
 
Do we know if there's a specific reason they're setting this in the '70s rather than today or the '30s like the original and Peter Jackson movies? Is the story possibly tied into Vietnam?

Also perhaps as a nod to the remake from the mid 70s?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top