"King of the Monsters" is the sequel to "Godzilla", and it comes after a five-year wait. A lot can happen in five years and the sequel certainly carries a different vibe from the original. It attempts to fix the flaws of the first movie but along with it, sacrifices some of the positives of the original, resulting in a mixed bag in the end.
The most prominent problem with the 2014 film? "Godzilla" does not really have Godzilla himself. It was slow, and we never really encountered him in his entirety until the climax, preferring instead to offer glimpses through the characters that come near his presence. This made for a very slow pace and very little screen time of Godzilla, aside from witnessing him from secondary sources (TV, etc.). But the slowness wasn't all for naught; it provided build-up.
"King of the Monsters" scraps this notion of slow-pacing and delivers a lot of action and spectacle. It is unlikely that anyone coming out of this movie would complain that Godzilla's screen presence wasn't enough. There are a lot of action sequences in the movie among the beasts and they are epic, visually stunning, and fun to watch. Yet, I feel they don't feel as exciting as it was in the first movie. Granted, the first movie barely had action, but the glimpses of the monsters and slow-pacing allowed a building of anticipation for the ultimate climax. "King of the Monsters" had no such build-up leading to action sequences that ultimately don't really have weight.
It doesn't help either that the human story is boring, and the characters are forgettable. The only ones I remember: there's Millie Bobby Brown, a person who pronounces Godzilla's name correctly, and a character whose job is to say the new monsters' names. I understand that the sacrifice of a compelling story arc was to make way for action sequences, a major departure from the focus of the first film. But the characters had very questionable motives and sometimes, illogical reasoning for the actions they did that it's hard to really ignore the humans and just focus on Godzilla and friends. They tried to implement a family arc into the movie, but it wasn't even decent. I felt it was put there hardheartedly, and could have been scrapped, instead of being a nuisance. I guess this is the problem when making movies where the main attraction is non-human and it's hard to really go down a certain direction.
Ultimately, "King of the Monsters" is fun to watch but the human element feels boring and becomes a nuisance. They might very well be better off scrapping the whole human thing and make a movie with just the monsters, it could be more interesting. The humans in the movie do actions that seem to matter, but in the end, they barely make a dent. They're supposed be our eyes, whom we relate to but I couldn't care less. I cared more for the monsters. It's a cool monster fiesta flick, but nothing more.
The most prominent problem with the 2014 film? "Godzilla" does not really have Godzilla himself. It was slow, and we never really encountered him in his entirety until the climax, preferring instead to offer glimpses through the characters that come near his presence. This made for a very slow pace and very little screen time of Godzilla, aside from witnessing him from secondary sources (TV, etc.). But the slowness wasn't all for naught; it provided build-up.
"King of the Monsters" scraps this notion of slow-pacing and delivers a lot of action and spectacle. It is unlikely that anyone coming out of this movie would complain that Godzilla's screen presence wasn't enough. There are a lot of action sequences in the movie among the beasts and they are epic, visually stunning, and fun to watch. Yet, I feel they don't feel as exciting as it was in the first movie. Granted, the first movie barely had action, but the glimpses of the monsters and slow-pacing allowed a building of anticipation for the ultimate climax. "King of the Monsters" had no such build-up leading to action sequences that ultimately don't really have weight.
It doesn't help either that the human story is boring, and the characters are forgettable. The only ones I remember: there's Millie Bobby Brown, a person who pronounces Godzilla's name correctly, and a character whose job is to say the new monsters' names. I understand that the sacrifice of a compelling story arc was to make way for action sequences, a major departure from the focus of the first film. But the characters had very questionable motives and sometimes, illogical reasoning for the actions they did that it's hard to really ignore the humans and just focus on Godzilla and friends. They tried to implement a family arc into the movie, but it wasn't even decent. I felt it was put there hardheartedly, and could have been scrapped, instead of being a nuisance. I guess this is the problem when making movies where the main attraction is non-human and it's hard to really go down a certain direction.
Ultimately, "King of the Monsters" is fun to watch but the human element feels boring and becomes a nuisance. They might very well be better off scrapping the whole human thing and make a movie with just the monsters, it could be more interesting. The humans in the movie do actions that seem to matter, but in the end, they barely make a dent. They're supposed be our eyes, whom we relate to but I couldn't care less. I cared more for the monsters. It's a cool monster fiesta flick, but nothing more.