Godzilla, King of the Monsters

[Michael Hopcroft]

On 5/31/2019 at 6:39 AM, Pattern Ghost said:

Here's how I generally read RT scores:

 

Low Critics rating / High Audience score: Probably a fun popcorn flick.

High Critics rating / Low Audience score: Probably artsy or pretentious, might watch if the trailers grab me

Scores are about Even: Probably the fairest assessment. Anything that gets at least 70% on both might be worth watching if I liked the trailer.

 

 

You also have to deal with the racist/sexist trolls who clog the audience scores for movies they have no intention of seeing in hopes that they can discourage people from seeing or deter the making of future films of that type. We all know which films I'm talking about. RT is finally catching on to the idea that a large group of people are being dishonest with them.

[Michael Hopcroft]

And oddly enough my upthread comments describe the setup of this film (and the ideas it has) pretty well.

 

 

[Grailknight]

Saw it today and loved it. As long as you go in with the expectations of a Godzilla movie and aren't looking for Oscar caliber performances from the actors or writers, you'll get the picture. Top tier spectacle and monster action from start to finish will have you forgetting the long run time.

[Lord Liaden]

On 6/3/2019 at 11:28 PM, Michael Hopcroft said:

You also have to deal with the racist/sexist trolls who clog the audience scores for movies they have no intention of seeing in hopes that they can discourage people from seeing or deter the making of future films of that type. We all know which films I'm talking about. RT is finally catching on to the idea that a large group of people are being dishonest with them.

 

Rotten Tomatoes has taken a step to try to mitigate such campaigns, by requiring anyone who wants to submit an audience score for a movie to demonstrate that they bought a ticket to it from an online-verifiable vendor.

[slikmar]

saw it, sadly timing didn't work out for IMAX. enjoyed it, though I will say that, like the 2014 one, not a fan of the monster fights as seen by people running away style. Reminds me of Cloverleaf a little to much. Thought all the monsters done really well. Still trying to figure out the 17 and counting monsters (Godzilla, Ghidora, Kong, the Tyranos from Skull Island, Rodan, Mothra, Spidra, they mention Scylla in the after credits, the mammoth, the Muta, and I assume Angurus although maybe was Scylla was the one they never seem to quite show). I pretty much second the comments above, the human part was ok, but the monster battles were awesome. Loved at the end of the casting you had

Godzilla   Himself

Ghidora   Himself

Rodan     Herself

Mothra   Herself

Felt like someone was a not only a fan of the Kaiju films, but also Sinbad - "Destiny is a place where both good and evil wait, and yet their very equality that bates their power, for it is the deeds of weak and mortal men that may tip the scales one way or the other"

 

After ending credits, I wonder in the finale if won't be a variation of Emperor Ghidora (the 4 legged one).

[slikmar]

one other comment. anyone else notice that the central head seemed smarter, more in control and more resistant to everything else? I thought that was a thought out process. otherwise they would be trying to send the body different directions.

 

[Lord Liaden]

I picked up on that too. The central head seemed to be the dominant one in the "pack." Also the strongest, as it survived the longest against Burning Godzilla. Makes sense, if you have three brains but only one body to travel in. Someone has to call the shots.

[Michael Hopcroft]

 

20 hours ago, slikmar said:

one other comment. anyone else notice that the central head seemed smarter, more in control and more resistant to everything else? I thought that was a thought out process. otherwise they would be trying to send the body different directions.

 

 

16 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

I picked up on that too. The central head seemed to be the dominant one in the "pack." Also the strongest, as it survived the longest against Burning Godzilla. Makes sense, if you have three brains but only one body to travel in. Someone has to call the shots.

 

I wonder if the other heads are sensory/weapon platforms and only the central head actually has a brain (or at least a functional one). Not that it matters, of course, because "Monster Zero" is so alien (and the normal laws of physics don't apply to daikaiju anyway). It is also worth noting that while the other "Titans" seem to have the side effect of encouraging the development of other life in their wake, Gidorah is pure, unmitigated destruction and chaos. Godzilla leaves a world in bloom, while Gidorah leaves a lifeless rock.

[slikmar]

Ghidora appeared to be there to begin terraforming.

[Dr. MID-Nite]

My review on Facebook:

 

Movie review: Godzilla; King of the Monsters(2019). So it is finally here...the latest Godzilla film made in Hollywood. Does it live up to the hype of the admittedly awesome trailers. Well....yes and no. First off, let's get this out of the way. This movie does not surpass the Golden Era of kaiju movies(those made before 1975). They were a product of the time, place and circumstances in which they were made. They will never be duplicated. Okay Rob, but for us casual viewers, is it worth seeing? Sure. It generally has that fun popcorn movie feel and the movie for the most part entertains.

The Good:

The monsters all look great and are truly impressive on the big screen(especially in IMAX):

The soundtrack is appropriately epic and features some of the themes from the original Japanese kaiju movies:

Rodan's intro is the standout scene in the film and is truly spectacular.

The Bad:

The script is fairly weak as are the all the human characters. And before you get all in my face about how kaiju movies are all about the monsters...I'll simply answer by saying the best kaiju movies have both interesting humans and monsters. The script definitely feels like a "plot by committee".

I swear that Charles Dance was hired just so he can utter "Long Live the King". He's suitably menacing but his character is written so paper thin that it is hard for you care.

Not nearly enough Rodan and Mothra. It's truly a shame as the design work on both was great.

The Ugly:

As usual in Hollywood films these days, all the characters have to have quips and one liners. Also as usual, most of the time they're not very funny.

Rodan and Ghidorah don't have their original roars. Why use iconic monsters if you're not going to use the elements that made them iconic?

The monsters don't really wreck anything. You have a bunch of monsters and a huge Hollywood budget and we see no city destruction scenes. We get a background shot of a destroyed Washington DC(used in the trailer), but we see none of it happen. So you're going to deny us seeing King Ghidorah wipe out The White house? WTF? Even 1968's Destroy All Monsters...with its miniscule budget...treated us to world landmarks being destroyed and a great all out attack on Tokyo. Here....nothing. Unforgivable. It makes the film feel less epic than the script is trying to tell us it is.

Overall, worth seeing, but it won't change anyone's mind about monster films. Out of the 30 odd Godzilla films, this sits firmly in the middle. Nothing embarrassing and for the most part entertaining, but nothing to write home about either. Grade for monster fans: B- Everyone else: C

[Michael Hopcroft]

The upcoming Godzilla vs Kong is facing an apparent delay, perhaps owing to the near-disastrous box office performance of King of the Monsters.

 

I really want to see Shin Godzilla now. KOTM was entertaining, but I have this desire to see a Godzilla movie that really works as a movie. The way the original Gojira did 65 years ago, terrible effects and all.

[Grailknight]

If this movie was disappointing in one way, it was the lighting of the monster battles. It was far better than 2014 but the clouds and smoke, while natural consequences of the kaiju powers, did not add to anything. Let them fight in the light, it's all CGI anyway.

[Lord Liaden]

2 hours ago, Michael Hopcroft said:

The upcoming Godzilla vs Kong is facing an apparent delay, perhaps owing to the near-disastrous box office performance of King of the Monsters.

 

I really want to see Shin Godzilla now. KOTM was entertaining, but I have this desire to see a Godzilla movie that really works as a movie. The way the original Gojira did 65 years ago, terrible effects and all.

 

I hope Shin does that for you. It definitely aspires to be more than a giant monster movie, but I found it still more problematic as a movie than Gojira 1954.

[Dr. MID-Nite]

On ‎6‎/‎11‎/‎2019 at 11:17 AM, Michael Hopcroft said:

The upcoming Godzilla vs Kong is facing an apparent delay, perhaps owing to the near-disastrous box office performance of King of the Monsters.

 

I really want to see Shin Godzilla now. KOTM was entertaining, but I have this desire to see a Godzilla movie that really works as a movie. The way the original Gojira did 65 years ago, terrible effects and all.

 

Shin Gojira has the double problem of being boring and having an essentially lifeless Godzilla. I must protest your point on "terrible effects" comment. Do you truly expect a movie from 1954 to boast CGI? The effects were very comparable for other films of the time. The only films boasting better effects were those that had enough time and money in the budget for stop motion animation. This was not that common in the 50's.

[Spence]

On 6/11/2019 at 8:17 AM, Michael Hopcroft said:

The upcoming Godzilla vs Kong is facing an apparent delay, perhaps owing to the near-disastrous box office performance of King of the Monster

 

Disastrous? $366 million in 4 weeks is disastrous? Maybe not as much as hoped.  But hardly disastrous. 

 

Dumbo had the same reported budget and at 12 weeks is only at $351 million.  For a Disney property that is a disaster. 

 

For a kaiju movie, $366m in 4 weeks is respectable.

[slikmar]

On the special effects comments:

Someone I know was telling me their son saw the original Star Wars and was saying how terrible the CGI and stuff was and wondering why everyone thought they were so great. His dad had to explain to him that none of the stuff was CGI, that it was cutting edge green screen and modeling.

[ghost-angel]

Unless he saw the "original star wars" as reissued by Lucas a half dozen different times, then it does have CGI galore, for added effect (something something original vision); in which case it was also pretty cutting edge for the last iteration (late 90s IIRC?), but it does fall flat in the mixing of the original model based SFX and later CGI based SFX sort of... ruining it completely.

 

I mean, none of the original Kaiju movies are that good, beyond the pure jot of them being what they are within the medium. I suppose the real disappointment here is it's about as good as any other of the godzilla movies, but when you pour the GDP of a moderately sized country into it you're not supposed to come out with something that's "about as good as a movie made fifty years ago starring a rubber suit..."

[Lord Liaden]

58 minutes ago, Spence said:

Disastrous? $366 million in 4 weeks is disastrous? Maybe not as much as hoped.  But hardly disastrous. 

 

Dumbo had the same reported budget and at 12 weeks is only at $351 million.  For a Disney property that is a disaster. 

 

For a kaiju movie, $366m in 4 weeks is respectable.

 

Unfortunately, G:KOTM had a production budget of $170 million. With marketing, booking movie theater space, and other expenses, a modern movie needs to make back at least double its production budget just to break even. A further problem for this movie is that more than two-thirds of its box office take has been foreign; and theaters in other countries take a larger percentage of the gross than domestic theaters do. So G:KOTM is in danger of not even recouping its expenditures.

[Spence]

23 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Unfortunately, G:KOTM had a production budget of $170 million. With marketing, booking movie theater space, and other expenses, a modern movie needs to make back at least double its production budget just to break even. A further problem for this movie is that more than two-thirds of its box office take has been foreign; and theaters in other countries take a larger percentage of the gross than domestic theaters do. So G:KOTM is in danger of not even recouping its expenditures.

 

OK, I can't argue something I know relatively little about

 

But by that yard stick we have a LOT of dismal failures each year.

[Dr. MID-Nite]

1 hour ago, ghost-angel said:

Unless he saw the "original star wars" as reissued by Lucas a half dozen different times, then it does have CGI galore, for added effect (something something original vision); in which case it was also pretty cutting edge for the last iteration (late 90s IIRC?), but it does fall flat in the mixing of the original model based SFX and later CGI based SFX sort of... ruining it completely.

 

I mean, none of the original Kaiju movies are that good, beyond the pure jot of them being what they are within the medium. I suppose the real disappointment here is it's about as good as any other of the godzilla movies, but when you pour the GDP of a moderately sized country into it you're not supposed to come out with something that's "about as good as a movie made fifty years ago starring a rubber suit..."

I have to disagree here. I can name a number of kaiju movies that are good films. Mothra vs. Godzilla, Atragon, Matango, Rodan, The Mysterians, and Battle in Outer Space for starters. I mean...what do you consider a "good" film? All of these films boast excellent effects, casts, and scripts. These aren't elements of good films?

[Lord Liaden]

4 hours ago, Spence said:

 

OK, I can't argue something I know relatively little about

 

But by that yard stick we have a LOT of dismal failures each year.

 

For sure. Movie making is a gamble, and the bigger the investment the bigger the risk. Just keep in mind that most films released each year have a small fraction of the budget for a summer "blockbuster." Stephen King's IT was shot for $35 million, so even $100 million would have been a profitable final b.o. gross. But of course, that movie ended up making seven times that much.

[ghost-angel]

10 hours ago, Dr. MID-Nite said:

what do you consider a "good" film?

 

Nobody has good taste in movies. or books. or music. or anything subjective. Just like what you like and move on.

[Michael Hopcroft]

14 hours ago, Spence said:

 

OK, I can't argue something I know relatively little about

 

But by that yard stick we have a LOT of dismal failures each year.

Which is absolutely correct -- and the studios actually like it that way because writing off the losses means they don't have to pay as much in taxes, and it also reduces what they have to pay actors, directors, and other "Content creators". That said, the failures can be black eyes for studio chiefs, who frequently lose their jobs after a string of such failures, and may be a reason why there are now only three or four corporations controlling virtually all of Hollywood now.

[Michael Hopcroft]

2 hours ago, ghost-angel said:

 

Nobody has good taste in movies. or books. or music. or anything subjective. Just like what you like and move on.

There's an episode of Crash Course Philosophy devoted to that question that I highly recommend, which also asks about the aesthetic value of putting goldfish in electric blenders as part of an art installation.

 

[ghost-angel]

I didn't ask a question. I made a statement. I made a correct statement. Morality is not involved in the statement. It's a subjective statement on the concept of "good" art.