Godzilla vs. Kong (The Monsterverse)

[Reznor2112]

I agree with everything you said, but I still liked it.

But yea, as I sat and watched the movie and they cut away from the first battle I was questioning why.

Because Gareth didn't want to Michael Bay the fuck out of this film. To be honest…the whole switch to news reel footage over giving the audience a huge flashy hollywood fight scene was genius. Hitchcock would've done that. It made the few times you see the fights that much more fun. Ever seen Transformers? That shit got boring real fast. This was actually fun because the didn't give into the audience demands. Props to Edwards.

If you watch Jaws or The Birds, they are supporting roles. This was not meant to be a straight action explosion movie but a suspensuful sic fi flick and it achieved that.

Hell, The Birds had no score, an hour of just human drama and the birds didn't become the main focus until the last 3rd of the film and its a classic.

[Wretchedest]

Wow, do not compare this to hitchcock. Im a live and let live kind of guy but Hitchcock? Hitchcock had characters that were a joy to watch. Fascinating people with interesting, mysterious lives. Never this one dimensional empty bullshit. News reel footage isnt genius: its a fucking cop out. Its the cheapest form of exposition afforded to any movie, and this movie milked it.

You come to movie like this to see some Michael Bay shit, anyway. I wanted to see monsters smash each other into buildings, and here the director ALWAYS cuts away right when it gets interesting. The pot would have been sweetened with a good plot and interesting characters. Instead i got the exact opposite. The flattest, stupidest fucking characters and the movie constantly and ineptly revolves arohnd them. AT LEAST ferris bueler had a personality back in '98.

This not The Birds, this is not Jaws. This movie did not understand tension and release. This movie did not know why I paid to see it.

[cahernandez]

Wow, do not compare this to hitchcock. Im a live and let live kind of guy but Hitchcock? Hitchcock had characters that were a joy to watch. Fascinating people with interesting, mysterious lives. Never this one dimensional empty bullshit. News reel footage isnt genius: its a fucking cop out. Its the cheapest form of exposition afforded to any movie, and this movie milked it.

You come to movie like this to see some Michael Bay shit, anyway. I wanted to see monsters smash each other into buildings, and here the director ALWAYS cuts away right when it gets interesting. The pot would have been sweetened with a good plot and interesting characters. Instead i got the exact opposite. The flattest, stupidest fucking characters and the movie constantly and ineptly revolves arohnd them. AT LEAST ferris bueler had a personality back in '98.

This not The Birds, this is not Jaws. This movie did not understand tension and release. This movie did not know why I paid to see it.

Definitely do not agree with "I come to a movie like Godzilla to see Michael Bay-type shit". Completely do not agree. Michael Bay is everything that's wrong with Hollywood, as he had made people want to only see stuff being thrown around, explosions, big fights, etc, one-dimensional action/story-telling. There's people that want some more depth to action/big-budget to Hollywood movies and I think this movie accomplished this really well.

You mention that the movie did not understand tension, I actually thought that the movie had some really nice ebbs and flows. During the last fight scene in SF, there were parts where the movie was following the human characters, and you knew that the monsters were in the vicinity, fighting each other BUT you didn't hear noises or screaming, it was an eerie silence (an example of this is when the soldiers jump out of the plane, you see Godzilla but you don't hear a sound except for the soldier's breathing, then while they are on the ground, looking for the nest, you still don't hear the roars of the monsters). This was a great way to build up tension in my opinion, it made me think "what the hell is happening out there with the monsters?". And then you also have the scene in the railway bridge, the fog, the lack of score music, the sound of the owls, and then the MUTO coming out of the pitch-black background, that was also quite tense and very elaborate for me.

[allegro]

This not The Birds, this is not Jaws. This movie did not understand tension and release. This movie did not know why I paid to see it.

Dude, this isn't horror; it's sci-fi. And, it's a remake of classic Japanese sci-fi.

HERE'S A REAL FILM CRITIC'S REVIEW, he gives it a B+.

[Wretchedest]

Dude, this isn't horror; it's sci-fi. And, it's a remake of classic Japanese sci-fi.

HERE'S A REAL FILM CRITIC'S REVIEW, he gives it a B+.

annnnd http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critic...ci_cinema_lane
there's one that validates what I said about it... :P

Also: Not a remake, a reboot.

THe movie has it's very few shining moments. It never lets itself really take off, but when it does IT TAKES OFF. that last 20 minutes was absolutely perfect. It's chief crime was making me endure it's useless empty characters. For all the little time I spent with the monsters, I cared about them so much more then "Wife" and "Japanese Scientist" and "Woman who agrees with Japanese scientist" and "Soldier?"

The story of two enormous endangered MUTO crossing the sea to bang and nest in San Fransisco, only to have their nest destroyed and have there asses kicked by a much bigger lizard. MUCH more compelling than these faceless, vanilla people they show brooding at nothing for 4/5 of a movie.

They tactlessly kill Bryan Cranston off screen, and it's good half hour before I realized that he is ACTUALLY dead. Because in spite of giving so much attention to developing and expositing his character, they never take the time to mourn him.

My concerns and my expectations here have nothing to do with whether it was a sci-fi movie or a horror movie or a romantic comedy. Dealing with this movies characters for as long as I did was a punishment. And that they set up some awesome monster fights and didn't have them actually tae place on screen added insult to injury.

[allegro]

You are right, not a 100% remake because there is a LOT of stuff in here that was not in the original flick.

HOWEVER, the original Japanese flick was hacked by the U.S. studio which added Raymond Burr and other unnecessary smarmy crap and, to this day, a lot of Americans have NO idea that they are NOT viewing the original version when they are watching the Raymond Burr 1954 flick but, instead, are watching a hacked-up American version of the original Japanese flick. A "remake" does not have to be 100% true to the original version, but the original release doesn't have to be 100% true in the U.S., either, as we saw with the original release in the U.S.

There was an interview with this Godzilla 2014 director in the Chicago Trib the other day (his name is escaping me and I'm leaving for a doctor appt) and he said he liked some movie called "The Haunting" and how you didn't really SEE what was actually haunting people, so he didn't have a problem with the absence of Godzilla.

But, didn't he ever SEE the original Japanese Godzilla movies? They're ALL ABOUT Godzilla! Godzilla is eating TRAINS! He's swatting fighter planes that are shooting at him. These aren't psychological thrillers, these are monster sci-fi flicks! GODZILLA is Godzilla, you go there to SEE GODZILLA.

[Wretchedest]

But, didn't he ever SEE the original Japanese Godzilla movies? They're ALL ABOUT Godzilla! Godzilla is eating TRAINS! He's swatting fighter planes that are shooting at him. These aren't psychological thrillers, these are monster sci-fi flicks! GODZILLA is Godzilla, you go there to SEE GODZILLA.

Yes, I OWN many Godzilla movies, including two different editions of the original.

But this also sums up my point. Most of the older godzilla movies reveled in his destruction, and rightfully so. That's what you come to the table for. This movie makes a point to avoid it. When it finally gets there its great. but in the meantime the stuff we do have to watch is a huge drag. I would have been fine with an off screen approach, i understand it's merits, but if we're watching something else, that something has to be REALLY interesting, and it wasn't.

[allegro]

Well now I kinda don't want to see this :-(

[Wretchedest]

Well now I kinda don't want to see this :-(

It IS worth seeing, there ARE perfect moments. I just wish I could fast forward through almost all of it. Don't let me obsessive need to criticize things ruin it for you! The LOOK of the thing is fantastic.

[cahernandez]

Well now I kinda don't want to see this :-(

I don't know, I thought it was awesome. Different take on Godzilla. Godzilla meets Cloverfield. Definitely worth your money. This is how a Godzilla movie should/would look like in this day and age.

[allegro]

Godzilla meets Cloverfield! That's what I was thinking!

[Reznor2112]

Jeez Im just imaging the original Jurassic park being released in 2014…"Too much damn talking…not enough dinos doing bad shit!" "Right as the guy was about to be eaten, they cut to the outside of a damn Jeep shaking…TOTAL COP OUT! Show that shit bro!"

[Wretchedest]

Jurassic Park had interesting realtable characters that you can care about. When the Jeep shakes, you care about who is in the car because you know what kind of people they are and how they interact. That scene ocurs relatively early and that scene PAYS OFF. When the T-Rex away you don't feel like the scene was stolen from you. We are witness to all that the T-Rex does before he goes away, from a variety of perspective.

Theyre not cutting to a shaking jeep, they're cutting to a safe command center across the world. And then they don't cut back.

Godzilla repeatedly denies it's audience that kind of catharsis. It's all blue balls and the characters are bricks.

[Reznor2112]

When the Jeep shakes, you care about who is in the car because you know what kind of people they are and how they interact. That scene ocurs relatively early and that scene PAYS OFF.

Theyre not cutting to a shaking jeep, they're cutting to a safe command center across the world. And then they don't cut back.

Godzilla repeatedly denies it's audience that kind of catharsis. It's all blue balls and the characters are bricks.

Never once gave a fuck about Nedry…and after the jeep shakes the scene is over…no pay off. No gruesome discovery of Nedrys body. But I can see you are going to maintain your opinion and so will I. We can agree to disagree.

[marodi]

You guys are talking about different Jeeps I think. Wretchedest is talking about the T-Rex attack on Grant and the kids while Reznor2112 is talking about Nedry being eaten by the Jurassic chicken.

Gojira doesn't care about Jeeps; he's a train guy.

[Wretchedest]

Jurrassic Park has almost as many jeeps as it does dinosaurs when you think about it.

[Corvus T. Cosmonaut]

Jeez Im just imaging the original Jurassic park being released in 2014…"Too much damn talking…not enough dinos doing bad shit!" "Right as the guy was about to be eaten, they cut to the outside of a damn Jeep shaking…TOTAL COP OUT! Show that shit bro!"

That was in fact a real criticism of Jurassic Park upon its original release, albeit a minor one. Along with very similar complaints about lame human characters. Thing is, though, after another 20 years of indulging the audience's worst impulses since JP's release, things like careful reveals only frustrate the audience desire for instant gratification. They want what they want and they want it now. Or at least Wretchedest and those of like mind do.

Well now I kinda don't want to see this :-(

It's great, go see it, and then read this excellent take on it: http://thedissolve.com/features/expo...n-blockbuster/

[niggo]

I was really disappointed with this movie. And I loved Jurassic Park (don't know how the comparison came up).

I think it's a great idea to let the story have some time to establish its characters and not give everything from the start away. Those are all things I'm very happy to see in a blockbuster flick. BUT, the film simply didn't use the time it was given. I felt incredibly bored after the first 45 minutes because they didn't manage to make me feel for the characters involved. It was all just so random. Like Ken Watanabe's character for example, he really didn't have any purpose except for simply being the japenese guy - even Bryan Cranston's character knew more about the monsters and what was going to happen.

You know, I'd rather have a bad story with interesting characters than a great story with boring characters. But this film was both to me, with all the usual plot points of your generic Roland Emmerich-type disaster film. Bad story (because there is nothing happening really, except for monsters attacking and another monster defending) and bad characters (with Bryan Cranston being the most interesting from all of them).

[screwdriver]

I had some minor quibbles with the tone of the ending, but otherwise I fucking loved this.

I think my biggest beef comes from having just watched the restored, original (Japanese cut) Godzilla, and really being floored at the sense of tragedy in it. That was missing here. But damn, what a hell of a ride.

[Reznor2112]

It's great, go see it, and then read this excellent take on it: http://thedissolve.com/features/expo...n-blockbuster/

Absolutely fantastic review! Love the last line.

[marodi]

It's great, go see it, and then read this excellent take on it: http://thedissolve.com/features/expo...n-blockbuster/

The 1954 Godzilla ends with a scientist killing the titular beast, but by the closing credits of Edwards’ edition, Godzilla hardly even knows we exist. The King of Monsters was born into global culture as a reckoning, but in the ongoing aftermath of the Fukushima disaster, the worst fears of Honda’s film have been confirmed, and Godzilla is less of a mythological threat than he is a daily part of our ecosystem. We’ve become a far more destructive species over the course of the last 60 years, but Godzilla’s invincibility in the face of our growing power confirms that our stewardship is a temporary charge, and not a birthright. If Honda’s film was a desperate plea for reason, Edwards’ is a plea for perspective. We used to be the villains in this story, but now we’re just in the way.

Absolutely spot on.

[Wretchedest]

That was in fact a real criticism of Jurassic Park upon its original release, albeit a minor one. Along with very similar complaints about lame human characters. Thing is, though, after another 20 years of indulging the audience's worst impulses since JP's release, things like careful reveals only frustrate the audience desire for instant gratification. They want what they want and they want it now. Or at least Wretchedest and those of like mind do.


It's great, go see it, and then read this excellent take on it: http://thedissolve.com/features/expo...n-blockbuster/

OK, I really wanted to leave this alone but my argument is being HUGELY mischaracterized so I'm going to give this one more shot!

The issue is not at all a delay in gratification. I watch a lot of very slow paced movies with no issue at all. The issue is the script. If an action movie wants to delay my gratification, that's fine, but give me something interesting in the mean time: characters, dialogue.... anything! The script was TRASH. None of the characters are interesting at all. They are not deep, they do not have personalities. They are worse than many characters in Michael Bay movies, period. At least characters that are boiled down to stereotypes and cliches have some kind of personality. In a second to worst case scenario like that, the failure of it is entertaining.

In the scene with Dennis Nedry in Jurrassic park, there are numerous things setting it apart from any scene in Godzilla. First of all we know quite a bit about Dennis Nedry, and we can describe him without using his physical features, employment status, or familial roles. He's this sleezey, obnoxious perverted guy. He's super self interested and short sighted and he's a bit of a joker. He's a colorful interesting character! And there's more stake in Dennis Nedry because he is singlehandedly responsible for the malfunctioning of the park. And he is also trying to leave with the DNA to potentially create another park.

So we have this stake in Dennis Nedry. Second, the spitter dinosaur shows up and it isn't designed as a pay off like in "Godzilla" the movie isn't called "Spitter Dinosaur." We haven't been waiting for this moment for the entire movie. And when the Spitter eats Nedry it's pretty conclusive. The scene wasn't building to "Spitter vs. Nedry" the scene is "Spitter kicks Nedry's ass" Nedry's fate is sealed when the spitter goes in for the kill, there's nothing more to watch in that scene at all.

Let's compare to the tram scene in Gozilla. The principal characters in this scene are: Our main character (Brody?), and Asian kid that we JUST met and have no real stake in at all. We have no reason to care more about Brody than anyone else on that train, he's that kind of empty and bland The scene and the movie at large have been building up to this point, to this reveal of Godzilla and his conflict with the MUTO. When the scene cuts, it is completely unresolved. Brody and the child are still threatened, and the fight between Godzilla and MUTO as anyone's game. The movie cuts to a GAG, a fucking GAG. What is the purpose of this scene? That Brody's cardboard wife and child are unaware of the danger he faces? Did that need to be spoken? In a barely visible offscreen shot, Godzilla and the MUTO leave the scene for reasons that are totally unclear, and then we cut to the Military Command center AGAIN. As if what the audience really wanted was to watch people spout meaningless military babble for 2 hours.

Godzilla is relegated to a cameo in this movie.

Playing with gratification and subtlety and timing is does not make a great film on it's own. It has to be done well and it has to be done in a way that makes the audience give a fuck. I could watch "The Lower Depths" or "Days of Heaven" or "Tokyo Story" all day, because even though don't feature giant monsters or explosions....ever and two of those movies don't even have any real pay off, they have deep compelling, relatable characters.

Godzilla COULD have gone the easy route and focused largely on monster battles and mass destruction. It takes a risk and decides to focus on it's human characters instead. Unfortunately that risk fails because the characters are godawful and the pacing does not work. And it's just that much more of a shame because those action sequences are some of the best out there. There was no shame in the easy route. No one was expecting "Tokyo Story" from Godzilla. They were expecting so see a fire breathing lizard smash shit.

[screwdriver]

Let's compare to the tram scene in Gozilla. The principal characters in this scene are: Our main character (Brody?), and Asian kid that we JUST met and have no real stake in at all.

I find it sort of odd that you need backstory(?) to have stake in the well being of a child. I mean, yeah, its a movie, but... he got separated from his parents (sad), likes action figures (cool!), and is adorable. And he's innocent and his life is threatened.

Maybe I'm easy to please but I don't need to know his date of birth and that that his mother comes from a long family of laborers and her and his father had a great romance and that he is just trying to get back to school so he can kiss a girl who hes been crushing on, or ... whatever. Some base level of empathy kept me engaged enough.

I don't really typically find problems when movies don't give me a 'stake' in a character. It's more often that the characters ring totally hollow or actively annoy me. These characters didn't ring hollow, they just weren't filled in. Big difference.

[Findus]

I can't remember seeing a movie in the theater that I wanted it to be over so early on. I, too, wanted to just skip through all of the drivel and get to the payoff. Then, finally, the payoff wasn't really all that great. I would watch it again if it were edited down to about 15-20 minutes.

[Wretchedest]

I find it sort of odd that you need backstory(?) to have stake in the well being of a child. I mean, yeah, its a movie, but... he got separated from his parents (sad), likes action figures (cool!), and is adorable. And he's innocent and his life is threatened.

The characters ring hollow for me. and this thing with the child is a case in point, it's far too dumb and simple and unentertaining to justify in the place of sidelining the title character that every one paid to see. And I was using this criticism to illustrate a larger point anyway: The problem isn't just the general absence of Godzilla and the MUTOs and the action, it's that what we get in the mean time is too weak to enjoy the rest of the movie.

[Rdm]

The movie was very entertaining. I also enjoyed the story and the characters.

[cahernandez]

I can't remember seeing a movie in the theater that I wanted it to be over so early on. I, too, wanted to just skip through all of the drivel and get to the payoff. Then, finally, the payoff wasn't really all that great. I would watch it again if it were edited down to about 15-20 minutes.

No payoff? What about the awesome atomic breath at the end? It reminded me of a Mortal Kombat fatality to be honest. If that doesn't satisfy you, well, I don't know what to say to you. That scene was completely fan-service, and it was great.

And that article that @Corvus T. Cosmonaut posted refutes some of @Wretchedest points...this is a post-human movie. The emphasis is somewhere else, the humans drive the first part of the movie (and it didn't feel that long to me, 45 minutes without showing Godzilla, I think the MUTOs in the first act made up for lack of Godzilla). In fact, I think that the scene with the first MUTO hatching was super satisfying and very well executed, the way you see the legs first, the way you see the cage give way. Now that we're talking about JP, this scene reminded me when the T. Rex escapes of its enclosure, you see the fence also give way, wire by wire. The reveal of the MUTO also reminded me of Cloverfield, how you are slowly shown the monster.

Going back to that excellent article: I won't reiterate the points made by the author, but I think it serves as a great explanation as to why the human characters aren't developed at length during the film. In Cloverfield, the characters were also not that greatly developed, in that movie you were just a witness to an event, it didn't make the audience an "omniprescent" audience, you were only allowed to see what the guy was filming. Although this Godzilla is not completely this way (the first act is not), at least the third act felt this way (not an omnipresent POV), and it worked wonders. You are a mere bystander in the destruction of San Francisco, with a larger than life feel. We're only but a small part in this world, and you have this big-ass creature that has arrived to "restore balance" (quoting Watanabe). I hope Gareth Edwards comes back for a second film.

[screwdriver]

The characters ring hollow for me. and this thing with the child is a case in point, it's far too dumb and simple and unentertaining to justify in the place of sidelining the title character that every one paid to see. And I was using this criticism to illustrate a larger point anyway: The problem isn't just the general absence of Godzilla and the MUTOs and the action, it's that what we get in the mean time is too weak to enjoy the rest of the movie.

I'm always interested when I discuss movies with other people ... is there another contemporary movie in the genre that you think did it well? EG did you like pacific rim? transformers? what do you think are its peers and what do you think did it right?

[Wretchedest]

I'm always interested when I discuss movies with other people ... is there another contemporary movie in the genre that you think did it well? EG did you like pacific rim? transformers? what do you think are its peers and what do you think did it right?

I think it's nearest peers, off the top of my head, are probably Pacific Rim and Batman Begins, both of which are superior, in my opinion.

Near to Pacific Rim because of genre, obviously. Pacific Rim had a slightly different pacing issue, where it's predictability made its plot sequences a bit of a grind. But at least those characters were entertaining to watch. Both movies are trying to build some kind of mythology, but the direction, set design, and characters make it's mythology much more interesting. Godzilla shows little concern for this mythology... it's a bit of an after thought. In Pacific Rim it's a mystery! Pacific Rim also chooses a slow build approach to it's big action sequences, but where Godzilla turns away at the last minute, Pacific Rim never fails to execute. You come away from those scenes wanting more, but not unsatisfied. Godzilla is one case of blue balls after another.

Batman Begins is a peer as a reboot that tries to place an emphasis on characters and slow rolling. Even though it is some time before Bruce Wayne dawns a mask or encounters another costumed character, We are engaged by his intriguing personality and the way he interacts with the characters around him. He is relatable, describable and has some depth. Batman Begins is also light on the action, but at no point in Nolan's Batman does the movie cut away from him in the middle of a fight with Scarecrow or Joker or Bane, and then settle on Gordon for 20 minutes before coming back to Batman. Imagine that: Batman is showing down with Bane, and instead of Bane conclusively ending the fight, the movie cuts and we here over the radio that Bane broke Batman's back. That never happens in anything I've seen before. All of those sequences resolve before the audiences eyes. In Godzilla, the most interesting character is killed within the first hour, so unceremoniously that we might not even realize he's dead! Crazy! None of Batman's major exposition takes place in a news cast, either.

[exilajei]

Sorry, but how do you not realize Bryan Cranston's character is dead? It shows a body bag being zipped shut right over his face!

Really enjoyed this movie, even though it wasn't perfect. It was essentially the big budget Godzilla movie I've been dreaming about since I was a child.

Very similar in structure and pacing to the original, which was fine by me. However, I can definitely sympathize with people saying that Edwards teased us a bit too much, especially when it cuts away from Godzilla fighting one of the MUTOs for the first time... but in all honestly, I wasn't really too bothered by it. The positive aspects of the movie far outweigh any minor qualms I had.