MovieChat Forums > The Land That Time Forgot (1975) Discussion > Why does Hollywood end movies featuring ...

Why does Hollywood end movies featuring modern dinosaurs with disasters?

posted 9 years ago by GreatWhiteApeofBarsoom
4 replies | jump to latest

This and Son of Kong both end with mini apocalypses that really feel out of joint with the narratives. Skull Island and Caspak (only referred to as Caprona in the movie) are fascinating worlds that deserve better than the Apocalypse.

Yes, I'm aware The People That Time Forgot revisits Caspak, but most of the charm is lost in the resulting film.

Oh, well.

At least Caspak lives on as a rich, fascinating world in ERB's original novel.

Requiescat in pace, Krystle Papile. I'll always miss you.

[–] glenmusher 9 years ago

I do love this movie for the most part, even the dodgy dinosaurs.

Must say though, was not a fan of the ending. I suppose the need to ''end'' these lost worlds lies in the perceived need to explain them as not existing within the modern world within the present time frame, thus placing them in the recent past and providing an explantion for their vanishing from the map.

Not that this actually makes sense in this case as Caprona (It's never referred to as Caspak in either film, likely so as not to confuse the audience with 2 different names for the same land-mass.) is still there for the following film. Albeit all but two of the U-33 Crew perish.

'The Land Unknown' from 1957, which this film has much in common with, also ended with an apocalyptic volcano eruption. (incidently, in another Burroughs connection, it starred two-time screen Tarzan Jock Mahoney.)

Everything will be OK in the end, if it aint OK,it aint the end.

[–] raf-33 8 years ago

Why are all movies in the English language attributed to Hollywood?

Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived. -Isaac Asimov

[–] GreatWhiteApeofBarsoom 8 years ago

Here in the US, Hollywood is sometimes used as a catchall term for the major film industry. I know Amicus was a British filmmaker, but even despite my terminology, the point I was making should have been clear.

Requiescat in pace, Krystle Papile. I'll always miss you.

[–] glenmusher 8 years ago

Amicus and Hammer, though ''British'', frequently needed to seek US funding, in the case of Hammer, often Universal or Warner, thus still technically ''Hollywood''

Amicus was likely a bit more of an indie studio, though they did undertake many projects with American Internatinal Pictures of Samuel Z. Arkoff. Hence LTTF and ATEC had Doung McCLure as star, popular tv star from The Virginian, greater marketability of the movies Stateside.

That's just the way it goes, funding is everything.

Everything will be OK in the end, if it aint OK,it aint the end.