Talk:The Son of Kong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

	This article, category, or template is part of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to horror film and fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.

Contents 1 Realistic Sinking? 2 Creature Identifications 3 Remake 4 Petersen---Where from? 5 Capitalizing the dinosaur names 6 Image copyright problem with Image:Denham and Hilda.jpg

[edit] Realistic Sinking?

You know, I was just thinking...How could an earthquake collapse a whole island like that? Skull Island is really big; and that earthquake wasn't even that bad. Is this junk science or ludicriciy? Scorpionman 12:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Not all that big, but certainly in the tens of square miles. It's probably Junk Science. It's probable that they just didn't want to make a THIRD movie, and so did away with the whole thing. The island seems to just disintegrate and sink, which may make sense since it seems to be largely sedimentary. (Uplifted seabed, perhaps?) CFLeon 00:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Creature Identifications

It seems like this entry has the same problems as the page for the original: editors insiting on precise identifications of the critters that the creators never intended. CFLeon 00:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

That's as may be, but some fans are like that. I myself have, since yesterday [2/10/2006], been considering the idea that the backstory of 'King Kong Lives' [a son], could be twofold. It would help flesh out Kiko, AND if you say that 'King Kong Lives' is set in 1943 (ten years after Kong died), then it would give credence to the idea that Kong's mate birthed a second son, and that this second son is who we see in 'King Kong Vs. Godzilla'.

[edit] Remake

Since Peter Jackson redid King Kong, is he planning to do a Son of Kong as well, or did he just have the expeditions in World of Kong take the place of a sequel? Ratso 17:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Not sure. I'm wondering if he or Columbia will remake King Kong vs Godzilla with his Kong fighting Columbia's Godzilla.

On the King Kong Production Diaries, Son of Kong, and a sequel, were both greenlit by Universal Pictures before King Kong had even been completed. The filming was supposed to begin for both soon after the completion on King Kong, with release dates in June and December 2006 respectively. They were apparently cancelled after King Kong's lackluster debut in theatres. Ryo Hazuki 00:41, 11 December 2006

Actually, that was an April Fools joke. No sequels are planned.Superstooge 16:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

That's too bad. He really oughta do one. Scorpionman 02:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Petersen---Where from?

Who says that Hilda's last name is Petersen? "Hilda" itself is nowhere in the film but in Helen Mack's billing in the opening credits. Admittedly, the IMDb says one Clarence Wilson has the uncredited role of "Mr. Petersen," but they do not say that this is Hilda's father (although their posted birth date for this actor definitely makes him old enough for that part), who himself is not named in any way shape of form in the movie. I plan to check my vid tonight and listen to EVERYBODY 's names and see if I can find a Petersen. Afterwards, I'll revise this article one way or another, depending on just what I do and do not find, unless somebody else has done something compatible with my search results in the interim (if identifying these characters as the Petersens comes out of the script, that certainly needs to be explained here). Ted Watson 20:40, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

UPDATE: I found "Petersen's" on the poster advertising Hilda and her father's show, near--but noticably short of--its top. This is not necessarily their own last name, and is too subtle for "Mr. Petersen" to be an acceptable ID for the role of the father. Hence, I am making changes to both billings (I have, BTW, submitted a similar change for Wilson's credit line at the IMDb, as well; that'll take at least a few days before it gets posted). Ted Watson 19:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Capitalizing the dinosaur names

Some time ago I had a discussion with another user about whether the dinosaur names should be capitalized or not! Here is a link from Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs which proves that I was right about writing the names of the genera in upper case, no matter whether it's used in a scientific way or not: Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs#Species. They even have to be italicized. General terms like tyrannosaur are not capitalized, whereas genera names like Styracosaurus are. Sometimes it might even be confusing if one writes the genus in lower case; in some cases the reader can't differ between genus and suborder/family.
And if you take a look at other articles about dinosaur films, like e.g. King Kong (1933 film) or Jurassic Park (film), you will see that the names are always written in upper case. So in short, the names should remain captalized in order to obtain unity. Dutzi (talk) 01:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

O.K., I see what Wiki's rules are on the point (I am the "another user"). However, by definition of much more fundamental Wiki rules, no Wiki page itself "proves" anything, and I do not believe it is correct, as there are far too many analogous books and articles on such that do no such thing (and in fact I see nothing on the linked-in page that indicates not to distinguish between formal, scientific discussion and informal, common usage, which is what SOK is; point it out and I'll apologize). This means that those other Wiki articles listed do not qualify as precedents, either. Nevertheless, as capitalization, or even italicization, of these words does not affect one's ability to read, enjoy or learn-from the article, I won't push the point any further. (Note to administration: See, I can be very civil and concede an argument where I still think I'm right when it's called for.) Ted Watson (talk) 19:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Denham and Hilda.jpg

The image Image:Denham and Hilda.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)