Under the lens takes a deep look at films by focusing in on one or two particular areas of the picture that helped to define it for better or for worse. Spoilers will be included in this review.
Godzilla: King of the Monsters is the second film in the rebooted Godzilla film series started in 2014, and the third film in Legendary’s “Monsterverse” that also includes Kong: Skull Island. The genre of kaiju films has never been a large one in the United States, with many of these types of films struggling, be they Pacific Rim, its sequel, Godzilla 98, or Cloverfield. American’s just don’t seem to be all in on this type of film yet.
While Godzilla: King of the Monsters, is clearly a starring vehicle for the picture’s protagonist, Godzilla, his Queen Mothra and arch-enemy Ghidorah, there is a large cast of human characters who all play some kind of role in the film’s plot. Much of the criticism surrounding the picture has revolved around these humans and the role they play. So let’s take a look under the lens to see if this criticism holds up.
Under The Lens: Human’s and Dialogue
Human’s: The main criticism of both the 2014 entry and Godzilla: King of the Monsters, was that the human story was lacking in some way. While I agree with this regarding the 2014 picture, in King of the Monsters, the humans while being rather a cookie-cutter, ie divorced family, absent father, computer geek and hard-nosed military commander etc. All fit rather well in the roles they are given. The broken family is given a reason for being broken, and each character is given a somewhat poetic ending. I liked how the character of Madison Russel played by Millie Bobby Brown while being young was given a good story and actually was instrumental in the film’s final act.
The theme of the human plot was consequences to actions, Dr. Emma Russell wakes the alien demon Ghidorah and is ultimately killed by him, Dr. Mark Russell broke from being unable to save his son from Godzilla in the first picture, leaves his family and is not around to stop his wife from going insane and releasing the Titans. Lastly, Monarch was forced to face the consequences of its own hubris thinking it could control nature.
Dialogue: The picture’s weakness is that of the dialogue, which is sometimes very poor and forces the actors to say some truly poor things. That being said the actors all clearly liked the roles that were playing as they SOLD that poor dialogue. Vera Farmiga sold her diatribe about the evils of mankind, and Kyle Chandler did well acting as the surrogate for the audience, questioning the naming of the monsters and the seemingly silly decisions made by Monarch.
Highlights
Godzilla charging into battle flanked by the U.S Air Force
The films rather gorgeous cinematography. Particularly Ghidorah on the exploding volcano framed by a cross.
The death of Ishiro Serizawa, a victim of Hiroshima, it was fitting that his life began in the fires of an atom bomb and ended in a nuclear blast that instead of ending, saved the world.
The films fights all took place in darkness and rain, I liked that the picture had an in-universe reason for this.
Something to think about
Was Godzilla a hero or just another monster like King Ghidorah seeking to control everything?
Conclusion
It’s important to rank and review pictures by the standard in which they exist. A film like Godzilla: King of the Monsters should not be judged in the same way as say A Beautiful Mind. Thus I feel that Godzilla: King of the Monsters was a good movie, it improved its human characters from the 2014 picture, and also gave us the monster action it promised.
