KING KONG Done Wrong

Posted by: Monster Island News on June 11th, 2010

Written By: Ken Hulsey
Sources: Robert Hood / Avery Guerra

Over the decades there have been some truly awful movies made about “King Kong”. Many of these include, “King of Kong Island”, “King Kong’s Fist”, “King Kong Lives”, the UK made “Konga” and the American/Korean co-production, “A*P*E”, which in the eyes of most monster movie fans, is the worst ever produced.

Well, that is until now. I believe we have a new champion.

Granted, “A*P*E* is a mess of a monster movie, but compared to the new “King Kong” made in Bangladesh, the film actually looks palatable.

Really, this new “Kong” film has to be seen to be believed. Think of it as a typical “Bollywood” musical with a giant gorilla in it.

In other words, a remake of the 1976 Dino De Laurentiis film, with musical numbers.

No, really …….. I’m serious.

Along with all the singing and dancing, there are some of the worst special effects ever featured on celluloid. So bad that Ed Wood would be jealous. Oh, and where they ran out of money for effects, they just inserted footage from the 1976 “Kong”.

Now, I don’t know anything about copyright laws in Bangladesh, but I can only assume that there will be some phone calls placed to lawyers after this gets out.

True, film makers in Bangladesh don’t have the money or resources that their counterparts in Hollywood do, so after the money gets shelled out for actors, dancers, choreographers, song writers and the like, there just isn’t any left for a decent monkey suit or cardboard for buildings.

That is a given.

A loosely translated press release for the film stated that “Banglar King Kong” is the product of the combined efforts of director Iftekar Jahan and producer Sharmin Osman for the government backed FDC (the Bangladesh Film Development Corporation).

Apparently in the document Jahan rambles on and on about how wonderful the advanced computer generated effects are in his movie.

Which says one thing to me. Jahan has never seen his own movie.

Jahan also mentions in the release that the “Kong” costume and the CGI software used in his movie were purchased in the US, that the film was filmed in remote areas of Bangladesh, and that the film stars Munmun, Danny Sedak, Shamim Osman, Afzal Sharif and Kazi Hayat.

Here is the rather brief synopsis for “Banglar King Kong”:

King Kong comes to Bangladesh in search of love, and finds it.

Well …….. that pretty much sums it up doesn’t it?

From the trailer, which is quite lengthy, it is more than obvious that this is nothing more than a direct rip-off of the 1976 remake of “King Kong” with some singing and dancing thrown in to appeal to cinema goers in Bangladesh.

Hey, if ya thought that the ‘ice skating scene’ in Peter Jackson’s “King Kong” was bad, imagine having to sit through two hours of that kind of stuff?

Why can’t people just leave “King Kong” alone?


Here, if you think that you can stomach it, are some photos, and the trailer that keeps on going for “Banglar King Kong”:


About Monster Island News
Founder of the popular monster and sci-fi blogs Monster Island News and Godzilla 3D News and Information. Ken Hulsey began his writing career in 2000 when he founded a popular site with fans of Japanese sci fi/monster movies (Godzilla, Gamera and the like) and other B movies. In 2008, he closed down his original site and created the blog "Monster Island News" a showcase for classic horror/monster films and independent/alternative cinema.

10 Responses to “KING KONG Done Wrong”

  1. Kimble responds:

    Don’t forget King Kong vs Godzilla!

  2. Ken Hulsey responds:

    I would have included the Japanese entries in my list of BAD King Kong films, but I fealt that the films produced by Tanaka, Honda and Tsuburaya (KK vs G & KK Escapes) were classics in their own right.

    King Kong vs Godzilla rules!

  3. Kopite responds:

    Even the worst King Kong rip offs and parodies seem to have nice looking women. This Munmun lady looks like a real curvy cutie and The Mighty Peking Man had the gorgeous Evelyn Kraft in it. Who cares about the stories when you can ogle pretty ladies??????

  4. MattBille responds:

    Don’t knock King Kong vs. Godzilla. I doubt that a more enjoyable piece of celluloid silliness has ever emerged from the monster genre. With its slapstick fights (the tree in the mouth is classic), hammy acting (it even comes through in the English dubbing), and the mock grandeur of opening with a quote from Hamlet, it’s perfect in its own cockeyed way.

  5. Aaronious responds:

    Now I’m inspired. I think I’ve got an afternoon free and $24 in my pocket. I think it’s time the world saw *my* version of King Kong.
    Bwa Ha ha hahahahaha

    Oh wait – I’ve lived it. Gorgeous blond who betrays. Never mind. I’ll keep my $24 in my pocket and just look at wedding pics instead.

  6. JMonkey responds:

    Seriously that last image almost made me lose my breakfast. Who are these people. I guess there is no accounting for taste. TOO bad King Kong isn’t really there to crush the studio and stop travesties like this from happening. Long live the King of Apes.

  7. Kopite responds:


    Yes but at least films like this new ‘Banglar King Kong’ are cleary tongue in cheek and non serious send ups. They are a bit of a laugh.

    Now, your anger should really go to a travesty like Peter Jackson’s King Kong 2005. A multi hundred million dollar serious movie that did great injustice to the original 1933 King Kong. The claim was that Jackson and co said they were going to make a legitimate proper remake and that it would be faithful to the spirit of the original. Yet what did we get? A sickly sweet chick flick bastardisation and slap in the face to Merian C Cooper’s original masterpiece.

    Peter Jackson’s overbloated cartoon caper makes me angry, not stuff like Banglar King Kong.

  8. hetzer88 responds:

    It’s like an Indian verson of those famous chop-socky imports from the far east, which were so prevalent back in the 70’s and 80s. This flick is very much over the top and the special FX are about as good as any I have seen that were coming out of Hollywood in the early 1920s. Kudos all around for this picture because until you witness truly awful, no one knows how bad it can really be.

  9. MattBille responds:

    I can’t agree with the trashing of Jackson’s King Kong. Yes, it was overblown, overstuffed, ecologically absurd, and riddled with inconsistencies. And while Naomi did a superb job, Jack Black never seemed right. I want Bruce Willis digitally inserted in future releases.
    But it’s about Kong himself. And Kong was breathtaking. Despite knowing that a gorilla scaled up by a factor of four couldn’t move in real life, I thought Serkis and Jackson and the CGI wizards made Kong very real indeed. That’s what this movie will be remembered for.

  10. Kopite responds:


    King Kong 1933 was never simply a scaled up facsimilie of a ‘gorilla’. That’s where Peter Jackson went wrong. The original intention of Merian C Cooper WAS for a giant gorilla but Willis O’Brien and Marcel Delgado went and gave Kong a look and mannerism that was totally unique (“neither beast nor man” as it said in the film) and much more incredible and fascinating than just a souped up gorilla and Kong in ’33 was a nightmare angry rampaging bloodthirsty “monster” who would kill anyone in his way.

    I also don’t recal the original Kong ’33 watching sunsets, doing sign language and going ice dancing and I don’t recal Fay Wray juggling and dancing for Kong hehe.

    Jackson’s film was a huge disappointment. It had the potential to be fantastic. It wasn’t. It is not saved by the great FX of Kong himself, especially when the FX elsewhere is unimpressive. It is ruined by poor direction, superfluous backstories, terrible editing, 2 main characters wrongly cast and the reason why I say it’s a slap in the face to the original is because Jackson and co repeatedly claimed he was being faithful to the original.

    Jackson was not brave enough to be faithful to the original despite repeated claims he would be. He thought more about trying to please women by turning the story into a chick flick and he thought more about trying to please 12 year old boys of the computer age with completely ludicrous ‘action’ scenarios. His film was not ‘King Kong’. It was more like ‘King Kong meets Mighty Joe Young meets Old Yeller’.

    Additionally, Jackson took almost as much from King Kong 1976 as he did from King Kong 1933, despite being on record as slating the 1976 Kong. Totally bizaare. King Kong 1976 is all over Jackson’s film.

Sorry. Comments have been closed.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.