What Critics Are Saying About Godzilla vs. Kong

It's 'stupid' but 'awe-inducing'

You'd think you could sum up the plot of Godzilla vs. Kong based on the title itself. But there's a lot more stuffed in to this sequel to 2017's Kong: Skull Island and 2019's Godzilla: King of the Monsters, from secrets held at the center of the planet to a plot by an evil corporation. It's enough for a 78% rating from critics on Rotten Tomatoes. Here's what they're saying:

  • It's "serviceable turn-your-brain-off fodder"—"heart-stoppingly stupid but sporadically entertaining," writes Bilge Ebiri at Vulture. He loved "the perfectly rendered computer-generated streams of water dripping off every one of the many millions of computer-generated hairs on Kong’s computer-generated body."
 

I just finished watching it! The snacks were awesome, I went all out! The movie, yes, stupid but as Robert quoted, awe-inducing. Don't let stupid stop you. A bunch of laughs in stupid. My one complaint, and it's a biggie for me, is the lame looking Godzilla, instead of the big, stands on two feet all the time original version of Godzilla, the one who loves Tokyo.

Godzilla 1954 in color by mackman999 on DeviantArt
 
Why do the Japanese make such phony, cheap monster flicks? I don't watch them since the originals of the 60s. They must have thought Star Wars was a documentary.
 
I don't much pay attention to critics, will occasionally come across Rotten Tomatoes ratings but don't always agree with their percentages either. One of the fun things we did as children was go to the local theater to see Godzilla movies, some with Mothra and Rodan. To this day, I'll sometimes get in the mood to see a Godzilla movie. The last movie I saw in a theater was Godzilla: King of The Monsters. I went with my son and two youngest grandchildren (who were teenagers). We thoroughly enjoyed it and knew by the ending there would be a sequel. I'd love to see the new one but doubt I'll be going to the theater. I'll wait until Netflix, Hulu or somebody gets it.
 
I loved the original Godzilla(1954); the 2014 Godzilla is IMO done well, all CGI I'm sure.View attachment 158181

View attachment 158182
Worst Godzilla ever was seen in 1998. The American film with Matthew Broderick. Godzilla looked like a raptor. It was horrible! You don't just redesign Godzilla! Aside from that atrocity, I thought Broderick's character was great. He was a perfect foil for Godzilla. Except it wasn't Godzilla, and for that, Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin should be ashamed of themselves. I'd have included Hollywood too, but that corporation has no shame.
 
Worst Godzilla ever was seen in 1998. The American film with Matthew Broderick. Godzilla looked like a raptor. It was horrible! You don't just redesign Godzilla! Aside from that atrocity, I thought Broderick's character was great. He was a perfect foil for Godzilla. Except it wasn't Godzilla, and for that, Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin should be ashamed of themselves. I'd have included Hollywood too, but that corporation has no shame.
I did like the Godzilla 1998 movie overall, and took the redesign in stride. I was glad that the raptor look didn't stick, and that Godzilla returned to a more traditional look.
 
I did like the Godzilla 1998 movie overall, and took the redesign in stride. I was glad that the raptor look didn't stick, and that Godzilla returned to a more traditional look.
I couldn't. I was a real fan of Godzilla movies, watched all the old ones with the kids (on VHS rentals...the good old days).

Overall the movie wasn't as bad as its Godzilla. But I expected Hollywood to totally blow away the Japanese versions with epic special effects and stuff. Instead, we got a big lizard. More precisely, a prehistoric chicken. Roland Emmerich and company didn't even seem to understand Godzilla's origin and journey. They made a decent monster movie, but for me, it wasn't a Godzilla movie.

Broderick's character was really enjoyable, though. He made the film tolerable.
 


Back
Top