Author Topic: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!  (Read 36211 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online stethacantus

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Liked: 200
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #825 on: June 30, 2020, 09:29:39 PM »
#4: King Kong Lives, with Linda Hamilton?

Yes.

 Dino De Laurentiis deal with R.K.O. was for a remake of King Kong and it's sequel Son of Kong. There was a big lawsuit between Paramount and R.K.O. and Universal and the estate of Merian C Cooper. First of all, Cooper had previously sued R.K.O. over ownership of King Kong. His contract with R.K.O. specified the films he made for them were independent productions. And while R.K.O. owned the copyright on the 1933 films, as the creator of King Kong Coper was supposed town the character. When Toho began filming King Kong vs Godzilla, Copper realized R.K.O. was making money off his creation without his consent. That lawsuit was eventually dismissed because Cooper could not find the documents that proved his deal with R.K.O.  At that time R.K.O. was not really R.K.O.   The studio had been sold to Lucile Ball and Desi Arnaz who renamed the studio Desilu. In 1967 Desilu was sold to Gulf+Western who has also bought Paramount and combined both studios into Paramount. However, prior to selling R.K.O. to Lucy and Desi, the film library was split off into a separate company, R.K.O General, and was not part of the Desilu deal.  R.K.O. General primarily made money licensing their films for television broadcast. It was R.K.O. General who licensed King Kong to Toho and Rankin/Bass. Since they were relatively a new company spun off from a studio that had passed through many owners, no one at R.K.O. General knew of Cooper's rights to King Kong, and were convinced they owned the full rights to the ape.

When Cooper died, R.K.O. began licensing Kong again. Universal was interested in remaking the 1933 film as a follow up to Jaws. They had distributed both Toho films in the United States which were both profitable for them. An executive from Universal had lunch with an executive from R.K.O., after which a deal was agreed on where Universal would be licensed Kong for the remake. Meanwhile, Dino De Laurentiis had wanted to remake King Kong, and had assumed that the rights to Kong were at Paramount who had basically merged with R.K.O. Studios. Paramount loved his pitch and agreed to do the remake, and then informed him that they rights were with R.K.O. General. Laurentiis then went to R.K.O. and signed a deal to remake King Kong and Son of Kong.

Now for the mess. Universal was already paying for ads in the trade papers announcing they were going to remake King Kong. When they found out Paramount was also remaking King Kong, they sued, claiming their deal preceded Paramount's deal. Paramount's lawyers claimed that in actuality, Paramount owned King Kong as they had merged with the original R.K.O., then produced the legal documents proving R.K.O. owned the ape. But those turned out to be the same legal documents that neither Merian C Cooper nor R.K.O. General had in their previous lawsuit, so once hearing the lost documents had been recovered, the son of Merian C Cooper refiled his lawsuit stating that the Cooper estate owned King Kong. During the trial it came out that the executive who made the deal with Universal didn't have the authority to make the deal. On the verge of loosing, Universal's lawyers came up with a Hail Mary. They discovered that Cooper had commissioned a novelization of King Kong which was published a year before the 1933 film in order to publicize the film.  The copyrights to the novel had been allowed to lapse, so Universal's lawyers argued that since the novel predated the movie, and the novel was public domain, then King Kong was public domain.

Now the outcome of the trial.
The Judge ruled that since  Laurentiis had actually signed a contract that he had the rights to remake King Kong and Son of Kong.
That R.K.O. General owned the film library and the rigts to it, not Gulf+Western.
That the recently rediscovered documents proved that the Coopers owned King Kong and not R.K.O.
However, while Cooper owned the character King Kong,  R.K.O. General owned the copyrights to the film itself, and therefore had the right to license the rights for a remake.
And that Universal proved that the story from the first King Kong movie was public domain  due to the novel being in public domain, and could go ahead with their film as long as they used the novel as the source material and not the 1933 film.

The fallout:
Paramount quickly made a deal with Universal, giving them a percentage of the profits from their King Kong remake provided they hold off producing their version of King Kong for at least a few years.
Universal bought the rights from the Cooper estate for King Kong, giving them the rights to any new King Kong movies. In the 80s Universal sued Nintendo over Donkey Kong, and Nintendo won the lawsuit by citing the 1976 lawsuit where the same lawyers argued that King Kong was in the public domain. Universal never made any films with King Kong, but rather licensed the character to other studios, such as Warner Bros. for Leggo BatmanReady Player One and Kong: Skull Island. Universal did make the Peter Jackson King Kong remake, but it was actually the long delayed production based on the public domain novel.

Which brings us back to King Kong Lives. Laurentiis had the rights to remake Son of Kong, and wanted Jessica Lange and Jeff Bridges  to reprise their roles. In the remake Jack and Dwan decide to return the dead Kong to Skull Island for burial, and once there discover Kong Jr.  But neither Bridges nor Lange were interested in doing a sequel, so the project was held up for years. Eventually Laurentiis warmed up to the idea of having Kong be brought back to life for the sequel. Eventually the only resemblance King Kong Lives had to Son of Kong was that both had a Kong Jr. Basically Laurentiis got away with making a new Kong movie without Universal's permission.


#1 King Kong ( 1933 )
#2 Konga
#3
#4 King Kong Lives
#5 King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters
#6 Mad Monster Party
#7 Queen Kong
#8
#9 Son of Kong
#10 A*P*E


Offline Temporary George

  • Disembaudio's Squadio
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Liked: 2
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #826 on: July 01, 2020, 01:39:42 AM »
This is George-2.0 on his new laptop, with a new account because the board can't seem to recognize my password, and says it has no record of my email when I asked for a new one (I'll have to check my 2.0 account on my old 'puter when I get home).

Anyway, it took some detective work, narrowing down the decade it was filmed and such, but I finally found it.

#3: Bye Bye Monkey

« Last Edit: July 01, 2020, 03:56:35 AM by Temporary George »


Online stethacantus

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Liked: 200
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #827 on: July 01, 2020, 12:38:41 PM »

#3: Bye Bye Monkey

Yes

There were three sequels to the 1976 King Kong. King Kong Lives was the official and legal sequel. A*P*E was an unauthorized sequel where a giant gorilla who had just rampaged through New York ends up rampaging through Korea. And another unauthorized sequel, Bye Bye Monkey, which features the dead corpse of Kong.  Director Marco Ferreri had heard about Tribeca,  an entire neighborhood of poor bohemians and artists whos homes were being sized with eminent domain and bulldozed by the city to be replaced with upscale housing for the rich. Ferreri wanted to do a film featuring  the defiant remaining bohemians still living there, facing  their world being destroyed.  Ferreri also learned about the existence of the original lifesized King Kong prop from the 1976 remake, and decided to incorporate it into the plot of his film.

The prop, which is just the front half of Kong, was used in a scene where, after being shot down from the top of the Twin Towers, Kong lays dying in the middle of the World Trade Center as 30,000 extras surge forward to see the ape. When filming was completed,  the prop was sold to an amusement park where it remained on display until it began to fall apart and was put up for sale again.  During its stay at the amusement park, Kongs closed eyelids were painted to appear to be open.

To build The World Trade Center, several blocks had been sized with eminent domain and combined into a single megablock. This decimated what was then Radio Row, a collection of stores that sold electronic components,  specifically parts for ham radios. The city had promised to make up for this by building an entire neighborhood of low income housing.  The Twin Towers and other tall buildings in the Trade Center needed to be anchored in bedrock,  which was 70 feet below ground.  The dirt excavated to build the towers was dumped into the Hudson River,  creating several blocks new land called Battery Park City, which was where the low income housing was to be built.

Tribeca, which was just North of Radio Row, was once mostly warehouses.  Cargo ships use to dock along every inch of lower Manhattan's shoreline,  which called for warehouses to store all the goods removed from those ships. But by the 1960s shipping had moved to New Jersey,  and the docks along Manhattan went into decline.  One by one the warehouses went out of business, and the dockworkers and warehouses workers who lived in the Tribeca tenements moved elsewhere.  Property owners began leasing the warehouse lofts for cheap to poor artists,  who couldn't afford to live anywhere else. The area soon attracted struggle actors, poets, and other bohemian artists looking for cheap rent. However, there was a bias against bohemians and the poor in general.  That, combined with the dilapidated state of many of the century old Tribeca buildings, convinced the city that Tribeca was an eyesore that should not be next door to their shinny new World Trade Center. Tribeca was designed for Urban Renewal,  with the city planning to demolish every building and replacing them with a neighborhood for rich stockbrokers  and bankers from Wallstreet.

At the time Bye Bye Monkey was filmed, most of the artist community had relocated to Greenwich Village East and Alphabet City, the area of St Mark's Place.  But many defiantly ignored the city's orders of eviction and refused to move. About two thirds of the buildings were either demolished or partially demolished.  This caused millions of rats to loose their homes, all which ended up taking over the streets. The city needed to take drastic measures and gas the neighborhood.  Remaining residents were warned to remain indoors whenever the gassing took place. Many of the rats began infesting the remaining buildings in vast numbers.

Ferreri had wanted to return the King Kong prop to the World Trade Center, so he could unofficially establish that the events in this movie took place within weeks of the events in the 1976 King Kong remake. But the owners of the WTC would not give him permission to shoot there. So he took the prop to the nearby Battery Park City landfill.  It was reasonable to assume the city would have carted Kongs body there to dispose of it. By never mentioning Kong by name and only allowing the audience to assume the dead ape was Kong, Ferreri could legally get away with making a sequel. I assume he felt Kong was a strong metaphor for what was happening in Tribeca.

Many critics who are not familiar with Tribecas urban renewal history have mistaken  Bye Bye Monke as a science fiction film taking place in some sort of dystopian future.  However,  with exception to Kong, everything I  the movie actually happened.  Americans really did all of this to other Americans.  The developers of the World Trade Center were supposed to use part of the money they made from renting the buildings to pay for the low income housing in Battery City, but never turned over a cent, and eventually got the city to agree that they would not need to pay anything,  including taxes, until 2001. Which never happened due to the Trade Center being destroyed on 9/11. With no money to build the promised low income housing in Battery Park City, the decision was made to allow half the neighborhood to be upscale housing to pay for the low income housing.  This only caused developers to drop plans for building in Tribeca and build in the much more desirable riverside property of Battery Park City. Eventually Tribeca was abandoned by the city in favor of building the neighborhood for the rich in Battery Park City, along with the World Financial Center.  Tribeca was redesignated for low income housing to be paid for at a later date by the WTC. But then a lot of wealthy individuals going to art shows in the lofts realized that lofts made great apartments,  which in turn caused rents there to skyrocket.  The land eventually went to build skyscrapers and upscale residential buildings,  while the remaining original buildings were converted into upscale housing, driving off the last of the artists and bohemians.  The rich seemed to follow the artist community like a curse.  Developers saw bohemian neighborhoods as potentially the next Tribeca and priced the artists out, who found a  new neighborhood that they would eventually be priced out of. They were driven out of the Village,  then Alphabet City ( as seen in Rent ), then The Meat Packing District, and currently Brooklyn's Williamsburg. 

#1 King Kong ( 1933 )
#2 Konga
#3 Bye Bye Monkey
#4 King Kong Lives
#5 King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters
#6 Mad Monster Party
#7 Queen Kong
#8
#9 Son of Kong
#10 A*P*E


Only one left.

« Last Edit: July 01, 2020, 12:52:47 PM by stethacantus »


Online stethacantus

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Liked: 200
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #828 on: July 04, 2020, 06:54:22 AM »
Just a reminder that this Italian/Canadian rip-off of the 1976 King Kong is still out there.


#8




Offline goflyblind

  • Ephialtes
  • *****
  • Posts: 7806
  • Liked: 7194
  • i was told there would be sugar syrup.
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #829 on: July 04, 2020, 06:59:55 AM »
kong's search for the king of pepperoni poutine?
dF = 0
d*F = J


Online stethacantus

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Liked: 200
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #830 on: July 04, 2020, 07:08:14 AM »
Perhaps it would be easier to search for the correct creature. When Dino De Laurentiis  sued Queen Kong, and while never actually winning the case, successfully shut down what was supposed to be a protected parody, a lot of other film companies backed off their plans for their own cheap giant ape rip-off films. But both Shaw Brothers and this film company hit the idea of changing the monster from an ape to this similar creature to avoid being sued.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2020, 07:10:23 AM by stethacantus »


Offline George-2.0

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
  • Liked: 386
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #831 on: July 04, 2020, 11:30:51 AM »
#8 - Yeti: Giant of the 20th Century


Online stethacantus

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Liked: 200
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #832 on: July 04, 2020, 12:41:55 PM »
#8 - Yeti: Giant of the 20th Century

Yes!

Not really much information about this movie exists. The production company was Stefano Films, but one online article explained how the film was financed by Canadian backers who wanted to release aa Canadian answer to King Kong. Hence this Italian cast  dubbed in English  film takes place in what is supposed to be Canada with a lot of familiar Canadian landmarks bluescreened behind the giant. Both Shaw Brothers and Stefano Films wanted to avoid a lawsuit from Dino De Laurentiis, who had prevented distribution of Queen Kong pending the outcome of his lawsuit against it's producers claiming he had exclusive rights to remake the 1933 King Kong which were being violated by the unauthorized parody. Laurentiis had his reasons for being litigious.  Paramount had just negotiated with Universal to prevent them from releasing their own version of King Kong. But any studio could produce a version of King Kong should they claim they used the public domain novel as the source material. Thee was a huge risk that multiple versions of King Kong would be rushed into production and compete with Laurentiis' version at the box office, and he didn't want that happening. By threatening to prevent any rival producers from releasing their versions of giant ape films, he made that genre a huge risk. Delaying a release would mean no chance of recouping production costs for years, something that could bankrupt smaller studios. So anything with a giant gorilla was a risk of infringing on King Kong. A Yeti was a completely different animal, but could still make a suitable stand-in for a giant gorilla, and therefore rip off King Kong without any risk of a lawsuit. Laurentiis had the same idea. The same year two knock off Kong films were made with Yeti's, Laurentiis released a knock-off of Jaws without a shark, called Orca. In fact, Orca was a direct FU to Universal's rights to Jaws. Not only did Laurentiis chose a sea creature that had the same name as the boat in Jaws, but included a scene where one of the killer wales decimates a great white shark. Universal retaliated in the movie Jaws II by having the carcass of a killer wale wash up on the beach after being attacked and eaten by a shark.

The crap image I used for Yeti: Giant of the 20th Century comes from the DVD, which looks like it was sourced from a VHS master. Recently they announced this film is being released again on home video for DVD and Blu-ray, which means I probably could upgrade. That is if it is a legitimate release this time and not just another cheap company using the previous DVD as a master. Have to wait and see if they actually scanned a physical film print for this release.

#1 King Kong ( 1933 )
#2 Konga
#3 Bye Bye Monkey
#4 King Kong Lives
#5 King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters
#6 Mad Monster Party
#7 Queen Kong
#8 Yeti: Giant of the 20th Century
#9 Son of Kong
#10 A*P*E


I actually could have actually pulled around 30 images from different films for this particular set. Perhaps some time in the future I could d a Vol II for King Kong and King Kong rip-off films.   In the meantime, it's time for someone else to put up the next 10 screen caps.


Offline Temporary George

  • Disembaudio's Squadio
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Liked: 2
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #833 on: July 04, 2020, 01:06:27 PM »
I'll dip my toe in the water if that's okay - not sure if folks are making own screencaps, or pulling images already posted on the internet - but I'll take the easier rout for my first attempt. Lets see how this goes... and there is a theme.

#1


#2


#3


#4


#5


#6


#7


#8


#9


#10







Offline Charles Castle

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1148
  • Liked: 730
  • I crap bigger than this movie.
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #834 on: July 04, 2020, 03:45:55 PM »
Is #10 A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night?

Is #9 Lost in Translation?
You know, if the space man puma thing turns out to be the correct religion, I for one will be very surprised.


Offline Temporary George

  • Disembaudio's Squadio
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Liked: 2
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #835 on: July 04, 2020, 06:11:25 PM »
Yes - two right off the bat


Online stethacantus

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1309
  • Liked: 200
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #836 on: July 04, 2020, 08:52:13 PM »
#6 Heartbreak Kid, often cited on the old Siskle & Ebert show as one of the best movies of the 70s.


Offline George-2.0

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
  • Liked: 386
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #837 on: July 04, 2020, 08:58:18 PM »
Yup (and Gene and Roger were right) - 3 in a row


Offline Edward J Grug III

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16815
  • Liked: 3035
  • Forum Tokens Collected: 5000
    • Glorious Bounty
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #838 on: July 04, 2020, 09:29:32 PM »
1 is The Adventures of Prince Achmed

4 Wages of Fear?
FINE


Offline George-2.0

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
  • Liked: 386
Re: mrbasehart's screencap quiz!
« Reply #839 on: July 04, 2020, 09:39:51 PM »