Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019) - Part 1

[Ninjablade]

Haven't really read into any of the reviews yet, but I'm still somewhat excited to see this. I like Godzilla movies as some over the top crazy goofiness, though my preference has always leaned more towards the serious metaphorical approach. I think my enjoyment is really going to come down to how they package it.

 

[Joefixit]

Godzilla and Kong are totally teaming up don't worry.

That’s what I’m hoping for!! That would be my favorite movie of all time!!

 

[harlequinade]

Krampus had its moments but it was a mess, not surprising this one is not very good either

 

[redhawk23]

Krampus had its moments but it was a mess, not surprising this one is not very good either

Is it? Not to derail the thread but Krampus is pretty straight forward and pays off its character conflicts and arcs very well.

 

[carpenter82]

Just got out of this movie. It was everything I wanted it to be.

The theatre also had this awesome marketing stunt on top of the building.

 

[TheFuture]

Already seeing the "it's not supposed to win awards" defense...

Not really, people are just reacting to reviews and how personally it hasn't curtailed their enthusiasm for seeing the film.

But everything on here these days needs to be turned into some sort of Inquisition.

 

[Maximus 36]

Seems like this is the latter, and I’m honestly very ok with that. I’d honestly prefer it to the take 2014 film did where it tried to be more intelligent than it was. So...yeah if the human plot is B movie material, but it delivers on the Kaiju? I’m all in for that.

If you go in seeing this film with these expectations, you'll enjoy the hell out of it!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Krampus is a modern classic. Goes on the short list of legitimately funny horror comedies that are still real horror movies. A movie that deserves to be compared to Gremlins.

This is the one movie series where all of my high falutin film buffy nonsense breaks down. Godzilla is hardwired directly into who I was as a kid, damnit. If that Bear McCreary track is how the movie starts, that's it, I'm in!

It really, really, really doesn't. And I am not even saying I don't enjoy it. I do. But it has very little to it, and isn't scary in the least. Then again, Gremlins, as much as I love it, isn't a great flick either. The last horror comedy flick that was still a real horror movie I remember really working was Sweeney Todd.

 

[Marvolo]

I have no idea if I will enjoy this or not. But the idea that a movie's genre suddenly means it getting certain "types" of reviews is an a-okay thing is why a lot of studios give us crappy genre flicks and not John Wick. Why for so many years superhero flicks were more likely then not to be garbage. Why something like Sonic got signed off on.

It's not about genre. It's about priorities. With a film of this type I dont prioritize human characterization. It's awesome when its aces, but it's not a priority. I care about the vfx, the monsters, the action, and the plot making some sense. It's why I never gave Pacific Rim 1 too much grief for its human characters. Or even its questionable solution to the Kaiju problem.

One thing I read in a review for this is that it didnt know what it wanted to do and tries to do too much. And I'm not at all surprised by this. One of the things I said a while back was that with all that was being said about the scale of this film and what I was reading about the number of MUTOs involved and the human BS in the plot made me think it would need to be close to 3 hours to do everything justice and do it well. Otherwise things would be underdeveloped or messy. Then that 132 minute runtime was made public. So it's really what I was expecting. Maybe we'll get an extended cut on home video.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It's not about genre. It's about priorities. With a film of this type I dont prioritize human characterization. It's awesome when its aces, but it's not a priority. I care about the vfx, the monsters, the action, and the plot making some sense. It's why I never gave Pacific Rim 1 too much grief for its human characters. Or even its questionable solution to the Kaiju problem.

One thing I read in a review for this is that it didnt know what it wanted to do and tries to do too much. And I'm not at all surprised by this. One of the things I said a while back was that with all that was being said about the scale of this film and what I was reading about the number of MUTOs involved and the human BS in the plot made me think it would need to be close to 3 hours to do everything justice and do it well. Otherwise things would be underdeveloped or messy. Then that 132 minute runtime was made public. So it's really what I was expecting. Maybe we'll get an extended cut on home video.

There no need to be priorities though. Great films, no matter the genre, don't do that. You can have it all, especially when you are already going to have the humans there. It isn't like they were forced to add them. They wrote them, they put them in the movie, at a cost. Also these priorities seem rather genre based, so how is it not a genre thing?

I am not saying this isn't going to be a great time. I ****ing adore Pacific Rim, and all its campy glory. But I always do find it strange when reviews start coming out and it isn't looking like John Wick, Logan, TDK, etc. that it goes to, "well as long as the monsters hit each other". That just feels strange. Like would people be saying that if this was in the 90s, and people were talking about how well crafted it is? If Endgame was under 60% and superheroes were still smacking each other around, would that be enough?

I think the human characters are important. Especially as you do end up spending the vast majority of the time with the human characters. But more importantly they are the conduit to the beast. What they mean.

 

[Mysteryman]

There no need not be priorities though. Great films, no matter the genre, don't do that. But these priorities seem rather genre based, so how is it not a genre thing?

I am not saying this isn't going to be a great time. I ****ing adore Pacific Rim, and all its campy glory. But I always do find it strange when reviews start coming out and it isn't looking like John Wick, Logan, TDK, etc. that it goes to, "well as long as the monsters hit each other". That just feels strange. Like would people be saying that if this was in the 90s, and people were talking about how well crafted it is? If Endgame was under 60% and superheroes were still smacking each other around, would that be enough?

I think the human characters are important. Especially as you do end up spending the vast majority of the time with the human characters. But more importantly they are the conduit to the beast. What they mean.

Fingers crossed that you enjoy it!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Fingers crossed that you enjoy it!

This kind of took the winds out of my sails. I am not sure if I am going to see it in theaters now. I am going to go see John Wick again tomorrow. There is very little chance I see Dark Phoenix in theaters, and there is a bit of a gap until MIB, which I am probably seeing just for the leads. I want to see the general reaction here and online. I really don't want to wait, as this feels like a theater experience (one of my favorites is seeing Pacific Rim at a Thursday showing), but if it is another annoying to watch experience (a lot of darkness obscuring stuff, utter dumbness), I don't know if I want to pay for that.

 

[harlequinade]

There no need to be priorities though. Great films, no matter the genre, don't do that. You can have it all, especially when you are already going to have the humans there. It isn't like they were forced to add them. They wrote them, they put them in the movie, at a cost. Also these priorities seem rather genre based, so how is it not a genre thing?

I am not saying this isn't going to be a great time. I ****ing adore Pacific Rim, and all its campy glory. But I always do find it strange when reviews start coming out and it isn't looking like John Wick, Logan, TDK, etc. that it goes to, "well as long as the monsters hit each other". That just feels strange. Like would people be saying that if this was in the 90s, and people were talking about how well crafted it is? If Endgame was under 60% and superheroes were still smacking each other around, would that be enough?

I think the human characters are important. Especially as you do end up spending the vast majority of the time with the human characters. But more importantly they are the conduit to the beast. What they mean.

There's no excuse for bad characters, no matter the genre. You have to have a connection to someone while watching or at least be entertained/interested by the character. Hell, even in Fast & Furious they have few that are fun to watch. And it's especially funny remark - "oh it's not about people" here because there are so many damn characters in this movie

 

[Spider-Fan]

This is all good. But I don't think that then translates into the critics are wrong just because 2 hours of noise surrounding a few monster fights doesn't agree with them. Especially as it seems we have been given another film where it is hard to see a lot of it.

I am guessing this was in reply to points made by other people, because I never made the argument that critics are wrong. My argument is simply I am likely going to like the movie based on my past experience with Godzilla films.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I see other people mentioning Pacific Rim in here. I am going to be honest: GDT is likely one of my top 5-10 favorite filmmakers. I love the man's work. But that said, I would actually say I enjoyed 2014 Godzilla more than Pacific Rim. I've never thought Pacific Rim was a particularly strong film. I like the monster action, the lighting, etc. But it doesn't really offer me much else. 2014 Godzilla at least had Cranston and I think it worked better for what it was going for stylistically.

I am sure many will argue with me on this opinion, but it is my opinion.

 

[MadVillainy]

Not really, people are just reacting to reviews and how personally it hasn't curtailed their enthusiasm for seeing the film.

But everything on here these days needs to be turned into some sort of Inquisition.

Yes really. I've seen it with my own 2 eyes.
I didn't say everyone is doing it, didn't even say a lot of people, but I already seen that excuse.

Not on here though. Just out in the internet/twittersphere.

 

[Spider-Fan]

56%

Critics Consensus

Godzilla: King of the Monsters delivers spectacular kaiju action -- and reaffirms that cutting-edge effects are still no substitute for a good story.

• Average Rating: 5.61/10
• Total Count: 48
• Fresh: 27
• Rotten: 21

 

[harlequinade]

Well I am looking forward to Bradley Whitford playing another *****ebag (I don't even know if he does I just assume) and Charles Dance reading his lines with much more class and charisma than the movie he is in deserves

 

[samsnee]

Reviews are about what I expected and yet somehow I’m still disappointed.

 

[Broseph44]

I’m excited for massive destruction and monster action. Beautiful cinematography and a kickass score. I’m just here to have a good time with this one

 

[Spider-Fan]

52%

• Average Rating: 5.48/10
• Total Count: 51
• Fresh: 27
• Rotten: 24
• The percentage of Approve

Flirting with a sub 50% score

 

[Deck Rickard]

Shame about the reviews. But... John Wick 3 has almost a 90% on RT. And I’m sorry, that movie barely had a story, and while the characters were fun, they were also paper thin. Wick himself barely has a personality in this one; he’s basically just a blunt instrument who can’t die. And I guess that’s okay but unless Godzilla KOTM is just straight-up garbage in the story and character department, I wonder if maybe some of these critics are being too hard on this movie when they’re giving other weak action films a pass. Just an observation though; I need to see the film before I can accurately make this assessment.

 

[MovieSlave]

I see other people mentioning Pacific Rim in here. I am going to be honest: GDT is likely one of my top 5-10 favorite filmmakers. I love the man's work. But that said, I would actually say I enjoyed 2014 Godzilla more than Pacific Rim. I've never thought Pacific Rim was a particularly strong film. I like the monster action, the lighting, etc. But it doesn't really offer me much else. 2014 Godzilla at least had Cranston and I think it worked better for what it was going for stylistically.

I am sure many will argue with me on this opinion, but it is my opinion.

I'm with you on that. I've watched the 2014 Godzilla numerous times and have only watched Pacific Rim maybe three. That includes the first time in the theater.

 

[MahvelBaby!]

I just hope this isn't pacific rim 2 bad

 

[Loden Greatstorm]

Today is the day....