Queen Kong

Never has a film contained so much embarrassment. Not only on the part of the directors, producers, writers and actors, but on the person who has accidentally been duped into watching it. Perhaps the first thing I should say is that I watch bad movies - BAD movies - all the time. They don't phase me, I can sometimes see things in bad films that others can't. Maybe those things aren't there. Either way, bad movies get a lot of bad rep.

Farouk (Frank) Agrama's 1976 atrocity, Queen Kong, is almost certainly the worst film I have ever seen. Worse than Plan 9. Worse than Raiders of the Living Dead. Worse than Bride of the Monster. It is about 750 billion times worse than the Dino DeLaurentiis remake of King Kong and about 984 billion times worse than Peter Jackson's over-long take on the story.

Frankly, this film was doomed from the start. It was produced by Harmony Gold, a typically useless independent company (though they managed to drag themselves out of the gutter in the 80's and are now quite reputable). The writers/producers Ronald Dobrin (Robin Dobria) and Farouk Agrama (Frank Agrama) have assembled one of the worst casts, constructed THE worst ape suit and hired the least skilled effects technicians. The result is, as you can imagine, not pretty.

Much of the film takes place in Lazanga (where they do the Konga...apparently) though you would be forgiven for mistaking it for the English countryside. Combined with the bottom rate acting of Robin Askwith (better know for "Confessions of a Window Cleaner" which is hardly Citizen Kane) and the obviously embarrassed Rula Lenska, this is indeed a depressing affair. The utterly ridiculous ape suit is beyond laughable - much like the film itself - it is just depressing.

As the location moves to London (which recreates the theater scene from the 1933 King Kong in a cheaply designed open air setup) the script descends even further and the production values crash and burn. Surprisingly, it isn't the first time London has been ravaged by a giant ape (see 1961's KONGA) but it IS the first time the ape has looked so unconvincing. Cue cut scenes of postcard London landmarks and a dire-straits intimate moment between Queen Kong and Ray Fay (like Fay Wray - geddit?). Before you know it the film is over and you have lost 90 minutes of you life.

If you want to see a bad film, watch Agrama's 1980 effort (Dawn Of The Mummy) and avoid this one. It is beyond being simple 'bad', it is a crime against cinema (it seems that Paramount Pictures agreed, they attempted to sue Harmony Gold in 1976). This film is also guilty of theft. It WILL steal 90 minutes from you which you WON'T get back. Go ahead, call the police, they won't be interested! Do yourself a favour. Don't. Just don't.

"Queen Kong" has been hard to find on DVD or even video until very recently. Sadly it really isn't worth the effort, but there are many laughs to be had at how bad it is.

The film parodies the exact same plot as the famous classic, the twist here being that all the genders have been reversed. I don't think that would ever have worked as a movie, but as the budget here is so excruciatingly low, it is doomed no matter how funny the jokes are...and they are NOT. The general tone is something along the lines of a1970's Benny Hill special, most obvious in a scene when the lady jungle explorers walk past a giant Muppet-style animated plant tendril which proceeds to grope them in the boobs and bums as they jiggle past, squealing in light hearted protest. Yes folks, it really is that low. Well maybe that's harsh, in fact "light-hearted" is quite an apt description, as nearly all of the cast behave as though they are convinced that nobody is ever going to see this movie and they all just enjoy themselves without trying to actually do any acting at all.

I'll take Rula Lenska out of that observation though, as she does actually apply herself to the thankless role of "Luce Habit" the movie director and big game hunter, even though the lines she has to say are all toe-curlingly awful. It seems to me like the whole movie script was worked out on one evening in a bar and written on a napkin. In contrast to Rula Lenska, Robin Askwith behaves like he's got no brain at all.

The giant ape herself doesn't look too bad (yes - I was surprised too!), but no real effort is made to make her look 64 feet tall...she's constantly filmed next to very ordinary bushes and shrubs that never look remotely like full sized trees. Amazingly, there are some very large and not too shabby miniature sets made up to look like Tower Bridge and other parts of London, but sadly the budget must have been used up on making Tower Bridge, as when Queen Kong climbs Big Ben, they blend her image with just a photograph of the tower, and we only ever see the pointed roof in close up! What really screws "Queen Kong" into the ground is the really, REALLY, bad jokes in the script, which honestly would have been turned down by even the lamest TV sitcom. Very funny jokes would have made the threadbare production values bearable, but as it stands there's nothing good coming at you from any angle. Only the rarity of the movie makes this DVD worth tracking down.

When I saw Konga from 1961, I thought it was the worst King Kong parody ever made. I had no idea how wrong I was before watching this. Even for a comedy/parody, it was atrocious and depressing to watch.

This movie was meant to capitalize on the 1976 remake of King Kong and make it a comedy, but thanks to the shoestring budget of $632,000 and total incompetence of the cast and crew, this film is so shamelessly campy and cheap, it was a jaw dropping failure. And worst of all, all of the jokes fall flat on their faces.

The sets for the village and wall were incredibly cheap and the miniature city Queen Kong rampages through doesn't look very good either. Even by budget 70s movie standards, the creature effects were God-awful. The Queen Kong suit looked inferior to Konga with only her eyes being functional. The T-Rex and Pteranodon suits were even worse being loose fitting, rubber outfits that looked less impressive than a child's home-made Halloween costume. You can even see the monsters moving among normal sized plants and trees because there wasn't enough money for a miniature forest set.

I know this is a parody, but they could have at least tried to improvise more or rework the humor. Just so you know, Monty Python and the Holy Grail only cost about half as much as this and was a smash hit. Maybe if the crew handled things a little differently with their meager budget, they could have made a somewhat better film, but that never happened.

The camera footage often looked fogged up or messy and haphazardly jumps from one sloppy shot to the next. Half the time he spends being carried by Queen Kong, Askwith is obviously in front of a projector screen with a background so blurry, you can't even make it out.

The God-awful 70's rock song in the opening credits had some of the most hilariously bad and cringeworthy lyrics I've ever heard. "Queenie for my weenie?" Oh brother... "Liberated Lady" was only slightly more bearable to listen to. There's even this cheesy disco music playing as Queen Kong chases the group through the jungle that made it feel like a Scooby-Doo skit.

The cast gave an unsurprisingly corny and lazy performance. Lenska looks and sounds absolutely miserable throughout the whole movie and Askwith was either boring or irritating to watch. Both of them were humiliated to have starred in this mess, and who can blame them?

I can't even describe this as so bad, it's good. More like, it's so bad, it's horrible and almost unwatchable so don't waste your time.

This was a scene-for-scene parody of the original King Kong, with a merry but uncomprehending wink at the women's liberation movement. The better you know the original, the more you'll enjoy the in-jokes.

This gender bent spoof of King Kong was hard to see until the advent of DVD. Thats a shame because its better than the film that producers of the remake of King Kong unleashed on the unsuspecting world. Having not pretense at being anything other than a send up this film lets it all go in what is mostly a good but really dumb comedy. The problem with the film is that even at a running time of around 80 minutes this movie is way too long. There is only enough material to sustain a 20 minute short and its stretched to fill a feature. The lack of material leaves many dead spots and allows for some really bad material to creep in. Had this been shorter it would have been better (say as a sketch on SNL), but as it stands now its a very interesting side note to the debacle that was the 1976 King Kong remake.