THE SON OF BLOB

US, 1972, 91 minutes, Colour.
Robert Walker Jr, Gwynne Gilford, Gerrit Graham, Dick Van Patten.
Directed by Larry Hagman.

An unnecessary sequel to The Blob, capitalising on the shock style of that original film but with a rather banal script. For connoisseurs of this kind of eccentric American horror film. Direction is by, of all people, Larry Hagman.

1. The comic irony of the title and its tone? The original American title was Beware the Blob. The comparison of science fiction in the 50s and the 70s? The sophistication in film making? The criticism compared with the original? The irony of watching the original film on television while the real Blob was in the house?

2. The value of the production in having so many guest stars to be devoured by the Blob? How similar was the film to the original Blob? What do audiences expect in science fiction films? A portrayal of reality, a tantalising about danger, being scared? Enjoyably scared? How enjoyably scary was this film?

3. It you have seen the original, how similar was the plot? The details of the plot?

4. The importance of the city? The same as the original, the teenagers, the people in the town, the destruction of the Blob, in the houses etc? The atmosphere of the town?

5. How well drawn were the characters? Is this necessary for a film like this? Were they just drawn enough for the events? Anything more?

6. How well portrayed was the Blob itself? In comparison with the original? Its redness and glutinous nature? The way that it spread? How plausible was it?

7. Consider the sequences of the Blob's destructive power. How cruel were they, how fear-making? How effective in the house, with the people at the party. finally in the rink?

8. How interesting was the presentation of the Blob's final destruction at the skating rink - mass fear, danger?

9. How much optimism was there in the destruction of the Blob? The irony of its oozing away to safety for further destruction? The T.V. atmosphere of the film and people congratulating themselves in optimistic destruction?

11. Was this good science fiction or merely a commercial film illustrating the values of science fiction mocking itself in the mid-70s?