Do you like well-paced plots or fulfilling story arcs? What about nuanced allegory woven into intelligently written dialogue and character development? How do you feel about giant monstrosities destroying whole cities and committing indiscriminate mass murder in the process? Can you guess which of these complexities is the only one explored in Godzilla vs. Kong?
Movies like Godzilla vs. Kong don’t have to be masterpieces. In fact, it might be kind of weird if they were. But, what all movies do have to be is reasonably coherent – at least so within the rules they’ve laid out for themselves. What I mean is that the script and the director (in this case Adam Wingard) have a certain obligation to get us from point A to point B within the parameters of logic their world demands. When that logic is disrupted or disregarded, our suspension of disbelief begins to erode. In this regard, Godzilla vs. Kong is so thinly codified that, within the first twenty minutes, I began to wonder, “Does this really have to make sense?” The answer is, of course, “Well, yes, it really should,” but it was only after I’d given up the idea that there might be any quantified logic or reason in the story to come that I was able to enjoy the film in any sense of the word. It was also at this point when I began to see the film for what it truly is: a big dumb mess that makes me wish Mystery Science Theater 3000 was still around.
I’m no expert on the Kaiju genre (or even a very big fan, for that matter), but I do recognize the immense opportunities it creates for comment on any number of societal issues that face our global community. The original classic (1954’s Godzilla, or Gojira to the purists) is a zany ride through post-war Japan’s grief and continued fear of atomic warfare. It isn’t deep, or even very refined, but it resonates with audiences because it at least says something. Godzilla vs. Kong, on the other hand, runs face-first into several issues worth examination (climate crisis, the military-industrial complex, privatization of government, and even toxic masculinity), and then does absolutely nothing with them. I am by no means advocating that Godzilla vs. Kong should be an “issue” film by any stretch of the imagination, but even with the groundwork laid for it to say something (anything), it opts instead to remain inert and say nothing at all.
The plot is quite frankly absurd, and so full of holes that any number of Kaiju could fit through it (not to mention, I’m still not exactly sure why a human cast – one that includes Millie Bobby Brown, Alexander Skarsgård, Rebecca Hall, Julian Dennison, and Bryan Tyree Henry – is even necessary). However, (and this is a big however) if you’re able to turn your brain off for 113 minutes, there is fun to be had. Yes, it’s ridiculous, half-assed, and cobbled together, but if you’ve made the decision to watch Godzilla vs. Kong, I suspect there’s only one thing you’re after anyway – and it isn’t scientific realism or level-headed decision-making. For all its faults (terrible dialogue, weak plotting, missed opportunities, etc.), Godzilla vs. Kong, admittedly, delivers when and where it counts for this type of movie. Is it enough to make it a worthwhile experience? In my opinion, no it isn’t. But, I’d have a hard time faulting anyone for enjoying a harmless escape into the world of behemoth-caused property destruction.
James is a writer, record collector, wrestling nerd, and tabletop gamer living with his family in Asheville, North Carolina. He is a member of the Southeastern Film Critics Association, the North Carolina Film Critics Association, and contributes to The Daily Orca, Razorcake Magazine, Mountain Xpress, and Asheville Movies.