David Strathairn

Zootopia 2 (2025): Zoo Fast, Zoo Furriest

Posted on by Jack Drees

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

“Zootopia 2” is directed by Jared Bush and Byron Howard, both of whom had their share of credits on the original movie. This film stars Ginnifer Goodwin (Big Love, Once Upon a Time), Jason Bateman (Game Night, Ozark), Ke Huy Quan (Love Hurts, Everything Everywhere All at Once), Fortune Feimster (Bless the Harts, The Mindy Project), Andy Samberg (Saturday Night Live, Hotel Transylvania), David Strathairn (The Bourne Ultimatum, Godzilla), Shakira (The Voice, Jennifer Lopez: Halftime), Idris Elba (Pacific Rim, The Suicide Squad), Patrick Warburton (Family Guy, The Emperor’s New Groove), Quinta Brunson (A Black Lady Sketch Show, Abbott Elementary), Danny Trejo (Machete, Storks), Alan Tudyk (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, Wreck-it Ralph), Nate Torrence (She’s Out of My League, Hello Ladies), Don Lake (Watching Ellie, Space Force), Bonnie Hunt (The Bonnie Hunt Show, Cheaper by the Dozen), and Jenny Slate (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Big Mouth). This film once again centers around its main bunny and fox duo Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde as they take on a new case and pursue Gary Da’Snake, the first reptile widely seen in Zootopia in ages.

“Zootopia” released on March 4th, 2016. That is just days after I launched Scene Before. Based on this information, it is possible that I could have made the film my first ever review. Unfortunately, that never happened. Instead, I decided to a make singularly paragraphed and grammatically unsound post on why I was not a fan of the “Ghostbusters” reboot trailer. I am proud of my blog over the years, but if I could go back in time, part of me wishes I could have done a “Zootopia” review as my first ever post, because that would have meant I could have spent time talking about something that gave me joy, rather than something that triggered my apprehension.

If I did not make myself clear, I thought “Zootopia” was a load of fun. Like a lot of animated fare aimed towards families, it packs in a lesson, and I thought it was nicely implemented. “Zootopia” has fantastic commentary on racism, the importance of inclusion, and like a lot of Disney films, it also tells people to follow their dreams. Judy Hopps is an admirable protagonist and a great role model for children. A lot of these ideas were reinforced upon my recent rewatch of the film.

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

As for this sequel, I was quite excited to see where things could go. Much like the first film, the tone definitely felt kid-friendly, but it also looked like something that adults could watch without feeling like they wasted their time and brain cells. Thankfully, that is what I got with “Zootopia 2.” Does this film match the quality of the original? In some ways, yes. In others, not so much.

The biggest standout for this film to me is the humor. “Zootopia 2” sort of plays out like a late night talk show. If you watch a late night talk show like “The Tonight Show” or “Jimmy Kimmel Live!”, you will notice that there are often several attempts at humor every minute. Not every single one lands, but every once in a while either the host or the sidekick or even one of the guests will deliver something that will have the audience rolling out of their chairs. This is most definitely the case for me with “Zootopia 2.” The film has an endless supply of jokes. Some had me laughing out loud. Others had me chuckling. Others had me silent. And others had me almost rolling my eyes. Comedy is subjective, however, so chances are the jokes could someone laugh nonstop from start to finish. That said, to me, a lot of the jokes work, but there are quite a few that miss the mark and if it were not for this film’s handle on the commentary, which we will get to later, this would probably knock my score down a few points.

One of my favorite jokes, surprisingly, has to do with the song “What Does the Fox Say?”. I have never understood how that song ever became popular, but for whatever reason, there was a moment where someone references the song and it gave me arguably my biggest laugh of the film. I have no idea how that joke is going to land with others, but for whatever reason, it worked for me.

The film includes a fair amount of movie references too. Of course, there are tie-ins to other notable Disney-owned properties, including some under the 20th Century banner like “Alien.” If you pay very close attention, there is a clever cameo from Michael J. Fox that pays tribute to one of his most popular projects. There is a joke that pokes fun at the state of Hollywood and Disney’s ambition to make endless sequels and remakes. …Even though this is, after all, a sequel… The film even inserted a reference in the climax that felt totally out of left field, the children watching will likely not get it, but I think a lot of the adults will. Out of all the movies I thought “Zootopia” could reference as part of an elaborate visual gag, I was not expecting “The Shining.” But here we are.

Is there anything in this film as genuinely gutbusting as the DMV scene? No. Although that is a bit unfair to say because that scene achieves a level of comedic genius greater than God. I rewatched the film a day prior to checking this new one out, and I laughed just as hard, if not harder than I did during my initial watch of the movie in theaters.

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

“Zootopia 2,” like its predecessor, provides some excellent commentary that could not be more fittingly timed. I do not like to talk about politics on Scene Before, but the film sort of reminds me about how some people are feeling about the current position of the United States. I will not go into specific detail as I will probably spoil the movie, but there is a key part of the story that taps into the importance of history. This is something that you would have to watch the movie to see come to fruition because me saying more would diminish the commentary’s impact. If you know your history, or are living in a certain state of awareness right now, “Zootopia 2” might stick with you upon leaving the theater. The film also showcases the importance of working together while also serving as a reminder that people might not always be on the same page with their partner. Part of working together sometimes means compromise and this film heavily leans into that idea.

The film does not break new ground story-wise, but delivers familiar beats in an entertaining way. If you watched the first film, you would know that the story mainly revolves around a bunny and a fox, an unlikely duo. While that film taps into how unlikely such a duo is, this sequel heavily expands upon that idea to the point where it allows both characters to grow. Parts of the film are rather predictable, but there are moments where we see the tension growing in Judy and Nick’s partnership that hit me. There is one moment on a mountain involving a particular object that felt earned at the exact moment it happened.

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Like the first film, which features “Try Everything,” “Zootopia 2” has an original song from Shakira called “Zoo.” Frankly, I am not as big of a fan of this song as I am of “Try Everything.” The song, while by no means incompetent, has a lot less personality than “Try Everything.” Sure, in context of the movie, one could say it is used in conjunction with celebrating 100 years of Zootopia. Although if that were the case, I wish the song would have a had more of an oomph for such a momentous occasion. It lacks splendor and diversity in its beat. Again, the song is not the worst I have ever heard, but I thought it could have been better. I have not gone back to listen to “Try Everything” since “Zootopia” came out. The song, like this one, is a bit too poppy for my taste. But I think the song is perfectly used in the film and the lyrics could not be a better match for what the story was trying to shoot for. The lyrics in this song are okay, but I found “Try Everything” to be inspiring whereas “Zoo” did not leave much of an impact. That said, the day after seeing the film, I was at another cinema waiting for my screening of “Wake Up Dead Man,” only to see a mother and son walking out of their “Zootopia 2” screening, at which point the mother starts singing the lyrics of the song, so what do I know? It’s catchy, perhaps.

“Zootopia 2” features plenty of returning characters, but the film also makes room for new cast members, including Ke Huy Quan as Gary Da’Snake, Generic name aside, the character is likable. While Ke Huy Quan is an incredible action star as seen through films like “Everything Everywhere All at Once,” his high-pitch voice makes it very easy to sympathize with his character. Da’Snake often evokes a friendly presence and ends up playing a notable part throughout the film, which unlike the original, has reptiles.

The film also features the great Patrick Warburton as Mayor Winddancer. It is funny how Warburton can use the same voice for every character and yet carry so much personality each time. It is kind of like Brad Garrett, his normal voice is sometimes the best voice for the role. Even though I think J.K. Simmons is the slightly better performer, I think Warburton’s Mayor character is a slight step up from the original movie’s Lionheart. I liked getting to know about Winddancer’s background as a movie star. If anything, Winddancer is perhaps Zootopia’s closest comparison to Arnold Schwarzenegger, who many know as the Terminator, but he also spent years serving as the Governor of California.

Also, I know not everyone is eager to stay for the end of a Disney animation, but if you have time, you may want to stay for the credits. If you pay close attention at the end, you will notice something of importance.

Disney/Disney – © 2025 Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

In the end, “Zootopia 2” may not match the quality of its predecessor, but it is a fun, entertaining, and gorgeous-looking sequel. It does a great job at showcasing the continued journeys of its core characters we have come to know while solidly expanding the universe. Ke Huy Quan is a great addition to the cast, and so is Patrick Warburton. Those two actors in particular stand out. There is a lot of humor in “Zootopia 2,” which does lead to a lot of laughs, but it does not mean that there are no duds in the mix. I will give the writers an A for effort though. It seems like the team had a lot of fun coming up with the jokes. The film is a blast for kids and adults alike. I am going to give “Zootopia 2” a 7/10.

“Zootopia 2” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Wake Up Dead Man: A Knives Out Mystery.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Jay Kelly,” “Bugonia,” “No Other Choice,” and “Fackham Hall.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Zootopia 2?” What did you think about it? Or, which of the two “Zootopia” movies do you like better? For me, the original gave me one of my all time biggest laughs as a moviegoer with the DMV scene, so I have to pick that one. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Luckiest Man in America (2024): A Decent Adaptation of Arguably the Most Exciting Game Show Episodes of All Time

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Luckiest Man in America” is directed by Samir Oliveros (Bad Lucky Goat, Cactus Blossom) and stars Paul Walter Hauser (Inside Out 2, Cobra Kai), Walton Goggins (Justified, The Shield), Shamier Anderson (Wyonna Earp, John Wick: Chapter 4), Brian Geraghty (Chicago P.D., Boardwalk Empire), Patti Harrison (Shrill, Together Together), Haley Bennett (The Girl on the Train, Hillbilly Elegy), Damian Young, (Amateur, Ozark), Lilli Kay (Your Honor, Yellowstone), James Wolk (Mad Men, Zoo), Shaunette Renée Wilson (Billions, The Resident), David Rysdahl (Nine Days, Fargo), Ricky Russert (I, Tonya, Banshee), David Strathairn (The Bourne Ultimatum, Good Night, and Good Luck), Johnny Knoxville (Jackass, Action Point), and Maisie Williams (Game of Thrones, Doctor Who). This film is inspired by true events and centers around a “Press Your Luck” contestant who has figured out the secret to winning as much money as possible.

I have had a habit of balancing several random hobbies and interests, no matter how atypical. Of course, with this being a movie blog, it would come as no surprise that I love movies. Ever since I was a kid, I loved riding elevators for fun. I still do. So you have a “normal” hobby, and a “less normal” hobby. I also have another interest that I would personally put in between those two when it comes to normalcy, specifically game shows.

As someone who loves movies and game shows, part of me thought for years that the subject matter for “The Luckiest Man in America” would make for a compelling film. For those not aware, the story is based on Michael Larson’s two-episode appearance on “Press Your Luck” in 1984, at which point he broke the record as the biggest winner in game show history. It also took the “luck” out of “Press Your Luck,” as those working on the show came to realize Larson figured out the board’s predetermined patterns and used his knowledge to win a six figure total.

I was really looking forward to this film. My excitement for this project was similar to how I would feel going into a project from one of my favorite directors like Steven Spielberg. I am happy to confirm the film is quite enjoyable, but if you want the best version of the story, this movie is not it. It is good, but not great.

This is not to say you should avoid this movie. In fact, if it is playing near you, which it absolutely likely is not as of this publication, I recommend you give it a shot. By itself, this is a fascinating story and I think it has the potential of winning a lot of viewers over. I think you will have a good time. But just know that there are better options out there regarding the same subject matter that I would more highly recommend.

If you remember my review for “80 for Brady,” which is set during Super Bowl 51, I said the football game by itself is far more compelling than the movie that features it. Similarly, I highly recommend you check out Michael Larson’s “Press Your Luck” episodes on your own time. They are available on YouTube, or they might eventually air as a rerun on BUZZR or something. There is also a solid documentary on the matter called “Big Bucks: The Press Your Luck Scandal.” It does a great job at diving into Larson’s tendencies during the game, as well as his relationships with people on set and his loved ones.

“The Luckiest Man in America” bridges a weird gap to the point where parts of it come off as played up and Hollywoodized. Yet at the same time, the film spends a lot of time on a Hollywood game show set, specifically the one for “Press Your Luck,” that seems to lack the electricity of the original show in the 80s. I remember watching the broadcasts these movies are based on and the crowd was somtimes unhinged, literally losing their minds like animals. It was like Black Friday except in this case the crowd of people was rooting for a stranger to get their hands on a big TV before they did.

Although as someone who has been in live audiences for various TV programs, including two game shows, I did enjoy how hard the film leaned into the list of instructions the audience was given during their visit to the set. They are cued on when to clap, when to boo, as well as when to laugh. If you have ever been in a live audience for a TV show it is a lot of fun, but sometimes you realize that some of what you end up doing is part of a script. The movie even shows a moment where they have to redo a key moment of the game because Michael ended up swearing on camera.

The film is based on real events, but it ends up changing a surprising amount of what has been televised. Some of these include small changes like sounding off the “Price is Right” fail horn whenever someone hits a Whammy or the order in which the contestants answer the trivia questions. There is also a more sizable change involving the Home Player Spin, which was a special event featured in the actual taping in which Larson appeared, but they changed it to play more to the drama of the film and the characters involved.

I have no problem with adapting something for the screen and changing the source material. In fact, one of my problems with the 2019 remake of “The Lion King” is that the film is too similar to the 1994 original. Although a lot of the changes brought to “The Luckiest Man in America” felt out of left field considering this production is based in reality. This is not based on a book, not a video game, nor a TV show. …Okay, well it is kind of based on a TV show. But the point is, I would be down for these changes if they made the story better, but some of the drama added to the film felt forced and fabricated. The film eventually spirals into hints of ridiculousness. Sometimes it is entertaining, but it is still ridiculous. “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” proves that you can change something that is true and still have it be great. Unfortunately, “The Luckiest Man in America” is not quite on that level.

The film does have a lot to rave about though. The Press Your Luck set, while not entirely the same as the original from the 80s, is about as dead of a ringer as you can get. Props to the design team. The set came out fantastic. At times, the film definitely feels small, but when it is on the “Press Your Luck” set, it is larger than life.

My compliments on the film’s look also extends to the characters. Their fashion choices match the ones we see on the show’s episodes. Paul Walter Hauser looks a lot like Michael Larson himself. I thought the hair and makeup department did a good job at styling him to fully resemble the infamous contestant. If I had any knocks when it comes to the looks, I would say the biggest one would be towards the star of “Press Your Luck,” Peter Tomarkan. For the record, this is not a diss towards Walton Goggins. He did a fine job in his role and I thought he was a solid choice to play the host. But the way his hair was styled looked incredibly artificial. I know on-screen talent like game show hosts are often dolled up to look a certain way on camera, but Goggins looked like an action figure at times. His look was a bit overdone.

Although going back to Paul Walter Hauser, his transformation into Michael is immaculate. If you watch the real Michael Larson, chances are you could find him eccentric at times. He has the personality of a curious, young boy in the body of a grown man. He is expressive and oftentimes giddy. The film clearly paints Larson as a dreamer and does an effective job at representing him as an overzealous “Press Your Luck” fan.

In fact, Larson’s competitors, Ed and Janie are also fun to watch. They also match their real counterparts in terms of their delivery and style. Ed (Brian Geragthy) is over the top and full of enthusiasm. On the other hand, Janie (Patti Harrison) is a little more reserved, but will occasionally pipe up every once in a while. In service to the film’s narrative, Ed sometimes becomes Michael’s voice of encouragement, while Janie channels the heebie jeebies. She is sometimes annoyed by Michael, although the movie makes it clear he means no harm towards her or anyone else in his path. The film even tries to go for the emotions regarding Michael’s family, particularly his spouse and daughter.

I will also compliment John Carroll Kirby’s score. It is very wacky, very 80s. Sometimes it gets a little overly obnoxious, though not to the annoying degree that I experienced watching “Challengers.” That said, I did watch this film alongside my grandparents, and my grandmother in particular thought the score could have been turned down a notch or two at a certain point.

In the end, I do recommend “The Luckiest Man in America,” but again, if you want a better version of this story, just go watch the actual “Press Your Luck” episodes or “Big Bucks: The Press Your Luck Scandal.” They are both available on YouTube. The film runs at a breakneck pace and provides a unique spin on a true story. It is chock full of solid acting, especially from Paul Walter Hauser. Even if you are not familiar with the material featured in this movie, I would say it is still a decent watch. I am going to give “The Luckiest Man in America” a 7/10.

On a sidenote, I never reviewed this, but I try to endorse this project whenever possible… If you want a great piece of media based on a true game show scandal, go watch the miniseries “Quiz.” It is based on Charles Ingram’s fraudulent run to the top prize on the British version of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire,” as well as select events that play out before and after. I give it the highest of recommendations. I would say you should even phone your friends about it.

As of this writing, “The Luckiest Man in America” is not playing in theaters, nor is it available on any streaming platforms.

Thanks for reading this review! If you want to hear me talk a little bit more about game shows, please check out my recent post I did regarding how unexcited I am for the upcoming season of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?“. It is not often that I have a chance to talk about television. But when it comes to this subject matter, I had to get this off my chest. This post involves topics I have been thinking about for quite some time so I had to scribble those topics down and discuss them. As for upcoming reviews, you can soon see my thoughts on “The Penguin Lessons,” “Novocaine,” “The Ballad of Wallis Island,” “Secret Mall Apartment,” “A Minecraft Movie,” “Sinners,” and “Thunderbolts*.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Luckiest Man in America?” What did you think about it? Or, have you ever watched “Press Your Luck?” What do you think of the program? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Nomadland (2020): Chloe Zhao May Be the Next Big Director to Watch

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Nomadland” is directed by Chloe Zhao (The Rider, Songs My Brothers Taught Me) and stars Frances McDormand (Fargo, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri), David Strathairn, Linda May, and Charlene Swankie in a film where a woman journeys through the American west and lives her life as a van-dwelling nomad after losing everything during the Great Recession. It is also based on the book, “Nomadland: Surviving America in the Twenty-First Century,” written by Jessica Bruder.

“Nomadland” is a film that I have been looking forward to for a long time. My first memory of the film, or more specifically its title, is during the 2020 Venice Film Festival, one of the few things that actually happened that year when it comes to movies, because the film won multiple awards there, including the Golden Lion, which is basically that festival’s equivalent to Best Picture. But that’s not all the praise the film got. The film won the honors of Best Picture through the National Society of Film Critics, the Gotham Awards, Boston Society of Film Critics, Chicago Film Critics Association, and it seems “Nomadland” is only going to continue its hot streak. “Nomadland” was recently nominated for 4 Golden Globes, including Best Picture- Drama. And Frances McDormand was even nominated for a SAG Award for Outstanding Actress.

Statistically speaking, “Nomadland” is impressive, and I think that is part of why it is getting an exclusive IMAX run. Having seen the film myself, “Nomadland” is not the traditional style of film that one would expect to get an IMAX run. The film was made for somewhere around $4 to $6 million, way less than the traditional blockbuster that would usually meet the criteria. I feel like if it were not for the endless critical acclaim before the film came out, it would not have gotten this release in the first place. In fact, as of writing this review, that is all where it is playing. “Nomadland” is out everywhere on February 19th, plus Hulu, but as of right now, you can only see it in certain IMAX theaters. So as a fan of the brand and as one who wanted to see “Nomadland” as soon as possible, I took advantage of the opportunity.

Having walked out of the theater, I must address the hype surrounding the film. If I had to make a guess, I think most people would say that “Nomadland” has the highest chance of winning Best Picture at the Oscars this year as of now. Granted, this is coming from someone who was not the biggest fan of “Mank,” so I may be biased.

Oh my lord, “Mank” could have been ten times better.

“Nomadland” is a good movie, but to call it the masterpiece of our time is a bit excessive, at least to me. What do I like about it? When it comes to recent film, I think “Nomadland” stands out as one of the best displays of one’s slice of life. I was around in the late 2000s, when the Great Recession started, but I was still a kid. I barely had a concept of money so I did not have a full understanding of everything that was going on at the time. Nevertheless, “Nomadland” presents Fern as one of 2020’s most relatable characters, even though I never knew anybody precisely like her. Yes, I know people who have vans, I know people go around the country in vans. But to my knowledge, I never knew anyone who spent a great portion of their time living in a van. This film presents a character with unique traits, but they utilize her uniqueness to harken towards concepts that relate to a lot of people. Fern is a likable woman. She is a hustler, she is patient, she is kind, but she is not afraid to go after what she wants.

One of the best things I can suggest about an actor is when they give a performance that makes me say “I cannot imagine anybody else playing that character.” In the case of “Nomadland,” that statement is true when it comes to Frances McDormand, who already has two Oscars under her belt, and it is difficult to determine whether “Nomadland” will earn her a third, but her performance is certainly a contender. Not only does McDormand have an ideal look for her specific character, but her mannerisms are perfect at times. Her performance feels raw, kind of like the rest of the movie. The way this movie is done kind of feels like a vlog if it were completed in a cinematic style and if it was highly enhanced in the editing process.

Not only does Frances McDormand nail the look of her character, but Chloe Zhao and her crew also nail the look of “Nomadland” itself. “Nomadland” shines with some of the best framing of the year, and a filmmaking style that feels cinematic, although nearly documentary-like. I mentioned just a moment ago that this feels like a vlog. And I mean that, because even though vlogs are completely different from movies, they do a really good job at showing a slice of one’s life. “Nomadland” is not my favorite film of the year, but when it comes to 2020’s slices of life, it stands out. And I would also say that they managed to release this film at the right time because we are in the middle of a pandemic where the future is uncertain, not only in terms of our social lives, but the economy as a whole.

If I had to point out the best part of “Nomadland,” it would have to be the locations. Whoever decided on the locations that went into the final cut has my eternal respect, as they are an integral part as to what makes the framing extremely likable. And as much as I would hate to make a COVID-19 comparison, I have to. The way I would describe “Nomadland” is this… Imagine that I test positive for COVID-19. I lose my sense of taste. But I can still walk, I can still breathe. I don’t have any problems internally. I just need to isolate for 14 days or until whenever it goes away. “Nomadland” is a somewhat unfortunate, nearly depressing film at times, but it also trails along in good spirits. There is nothing in this film that is excruciatingly painful to watch. Nothing tear-jerking, nothing over the top emotionally charging, almost nothing that comes off as an eyesore. There are one or two moments that help the movie earn its R rating, but other than that, nothing really disturbing. “Nomadland” is a film that I feel is core viewing during the current awards season for many reasons, and you should definitely check it out when it gets a wider release.

In the end, “Nomadland” is a film that takes you places. Aside from taking you to an Amazon Distribution Center, a desert, the inside of a van, etc., it takes you to a world full of likable, quirky characters. The film has some memorable dialogue, including one line towards the end of the film that will stick with me when it comes to the 2020 cinematic slate. Frances McDormand gives a solid performance as the main character of Fern, and I think she could be a contender at the Oscars. As for the director, Chloe Zhao, I cannot wait to see what she does with “Eternals,” and this movie gives me hope that she can crank out a killer blockbuster. I am going to give “Nomadland” a high 7/10.

“Nomadland” is playing in select IMAX theatres wherever they are open. If you are interested in watching the film somewhere else, it is getting a wider release on February 19th, where it opens up in more theaters with a simultaneous debut on Hulu.

Thanks for reading this review! Last night, I just saw “Minari” starring Steven Yeun, so I will be sure to have a review up for that as soon as possible. Be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account, and also check out the Facebook page so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Nomadland?” What did you think about it? Or, what do you think is the biggest awards season contender this year? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019): For Godzilla’s Sake, Please Stop!

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bogfjywnkmtmtmtg1zc00y2i4ltg0ztytn2zlmzi4mgqwnzg4xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtkxnjuynq4040._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Godzilla: King of the Monsters” is directed Michael Dougherty (Krampus, Trick ‘r Treat) and stars Kyle Chandler (Game Night, Homefront), Vera Farmiga (The Conjuring, The Judge), Millie Bobby Brown (Stranger Things, Intruders), Bradley Whitford (The West Wing, Get Out), Sally Hawkins (Blue Jasmine, Happy-Go-Lucky), Charles Dance (Alien 3, Game of Thrones), Thomas Middleditch (Silicon Valley, Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie), Aisha Hinds (9-1-1, If I Stay), O’Shea Jackson Jr. (Straight Outta Compton, Long Shot), David Strathairn (The Spiderwick Chronicles, Good Night, and Good Luck), Ken Watanabe (Inception, The Last Samurai), and Zhang Ziyi (Rush Hour 2, Memoirs of a Geisha). This film is the sequel to 2014’s “Godzilla,” where the title character wreaks havoc over the city of San Francisco. 5 years later, this film tries to go bigger. More monsters, more destruction, more big cities, yada yada yada. And we also get emphasis towards Monarch, an organization overseeing these monsters we come across during the film.

The 2014 “Godzilla” film was an interesting experience. The trailers leading up to it were some of the best I have seen in my life. In fact, one of them might actually be my all time favorite trailer for a movie. Then I went to see it on opening weekend at a sold out IMAX theater. I was born ready. This is coming from a guy who up until that point, never sat down to watch a “Godzilla” flick from start to finish. In fact, I knew this going in, they changed the IMAX countdown before the movie to have sound effects from the trailers and Godzilla roaring at the end. It set the mood with ease. The movie was good for a theater experience, and I did manage to check it out once more when it hit premium channels. I also own a DVD copy of it that I once got for Christmas. It’s not the best movie I’ve ever seen, but it’s a good time.

20190601_123452_HDR

As for this sequel, I had a similar relationship going into it. I went into the same theater as I did for 2014’s “Godzilla.” I was a bit excited, not to mention a little bit scared because I managed to hear about some of the film’s reviews before going into it. It was ultimately a mix for critics, but for some reason audiences seem to be loving this thing. And before even entering the cinema, I remember seeing the San Diego Comic-Con trailer and I thought it was one of the best trailers of 2018. And judging by earlier impressions, this movie did manage to market itself pretty well if you ask me. But again, that’s just marketing. Upon watching “Godzilla: King of the Monsters,” I wanted to perhaps die. In fact, as I write this, I almost don’t have words that I could possibly put into a sentence to describe this movie. And the sad part is, compared to a lot of other bad movies that I’ve witnessed, I have a tendency to go into them and not expect much. “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” is a movie that I was actually really excited for. It looked great, it looked like an epic theater experience (part of it was, but it didn’t make up for tons of weaknesses), and I was just hoping for at the very least, a good popcorn flick. I am not one who would traditionally expect an Oscar-winning script from a movie like this, but I would at least want something where it feels like the writers are trying!

In fact, one thing that I really find to be weird about this movie is that despite how much I went out of it thinking it was a disaster, there were a couple moments that I could end up appreciating. The battle sequences are occasionally fun and look great on the big screen. The CGI monsters were all well designed for the film at hand. And as I would expect, the sound editors and mixers involved with this movie all deserve pats on the back. There are compliments to give, but these compliments are surrounded by tons of negativity.

As for how this movie’s written, I don’t know if someone secretly injected drugs inside of me for the first movie, because while Godzilla wasn’t on screen for that long,  I thought the human characters such as those played by Bryan Cranston and Aaron Taylor-Johnson were at least tolerable. Here, we got a bunch of new characters that we never met in the first movie, and they feel so dumb that they would all need a dictionary to research the definition of the word “dumb.” Yes, there are a lot of big name actors in this movie. You’ve got actors like Millie Bobby Brown, Charles Dance, Kyle Chandler, and my first impression of them wasn’t anything that had to do with hating them, but that certainly changed as this movie went on. At first, these characters were believable and I could at least go along for the ride with them. Then during that ride, everyone is infected by a virus, making them go insane, and I am the only person who can BARELY keep himself in control. In fact, despite having all of these well-known actors in this movie, a lot of these characters feel like they could easily be played by someone else. The writing feels stale, robotic, and at times, it almost feels as if this movie does not know what it wants to be.

As much as I liked the first couple of trailers for this movie, specifically the one that was shown at San Diego Comic-Con and another one which came out in December. I still remember watching them and as I look back, they kind of differ in tone. The first trailer was slow, dramatic, majestic, and somewhat serious. Its follow-up manages to be faster in pace, and while there is some serious s*it happening, it lacks the same tone that I managed to get in the first trailer. This movie is like those two trailers, and I probably should have seen that coming. I do have respect for the film not lying about how it is going to present itself, but this is one painful truth to bear. Because the reality is, “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” just can’t stick to being one thing. At one moment, it’s about saving the planet, not mention sacrificing what we as humans have created overtime. At another moment, it’s your typical, goofy popcorn flick with cheesy one-liners that are kind of hit or miss. I can imagine myself finding this movie on TV one day, perhaps on HBO or something, maybe watching it if I want to destroy my brain cells, clicking the info button and the description would be “Time to die.”

The only human characters I really ended up liking in the movie are Millie Bobby Brown and Charles Dance, but it has nothing really to do with caring about their actions or their background stories. Millie Bobby Brown just manages to, out of everyone, including the hundreds of adults surrounding her, deliver the best performance in the movie. And Charles Dance just has a spark about him that would make him look good on screen no matter what he’s doing. He’s almost like JK Simmons. Even if he’s wasted, kind of like he was in a movie like “The Accountant,” there is still an appreciable screen presence that he can give. As for everyone else, there’s nothing… truly revolting I guess… But it doesn’t all add up to be masterful. Ken Watanabe’s back? Not enough. Maybe his story stands out, but it does not add up to make a good movie. Somehow, these characters are more forgettable than most of Apple’s terms & services agreement!

As for the monsters, I mentioned they do look cool, and they serve their purpose. One of the small perks that “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” has compared to its predecessor is that Godzilla actually receives more screentime. Unfortunately however, it kind of hits the tipping point. When the movie first starts, we get bits and pieces of Godzilla, but as it goes on, it’s almost like we get an overload of Godzilla. It almost makes me look like a hypocrite since the lack of Godzilla was a major problem of mine with the last movie, but at least what we got tended to work. As soon as we reach the climax of the movie where everything comes together, I’m admiring all of the eye candy present, but then it extends to a point that feels like it overstays its welcome. It’s almost like the movie does not really know when it wants to end.

Even with the presence of spectacular beasts like Rodan, Mothra, and King Ghidorah, it just makes me want to punch myself in the face for fun. They look great for a movie like this, and I want to give an enormous shoutout to the VFX artists doing a spectacular job on creating them. I have to say, if I were rating “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” based on technical aspects, it would be a positive grade. Granted, not perfect, because the cinematography is a little off and on. But visual effects do not have to do with the story, which is what matters most when it comes to just about any movie imaginable.

Sticking with compliments however, one of the highlights of the movie is when the camera can show off all of the monsters in full scale. In fact, based on what I’ve seen in trailers, that is an aspect of the movie that didn’t surprise me once I saw the final product on the big screen. There’s an extreme wide showcasing the true monstrosity of Godzilla and King Ghidorah as they gaze upon each other. It almost sends chills down my spine as I think about it. But during the battles, while what I was seeing was cool, it didn’t entirely flow because the camera would just be in a certain angle that was uncomfortable or it would just keep moving. The best way I can describe it is messy. This movie may have a sense of style, at least it is trying to display that, but it can’t always do so in the best possible way.

The first “Godzilla” movie from 2014 is 2 hours and 3 minutes long. It ended up feeling like a movie that would be around that runtime, perhaps less. This one however is 2 hours and 11 minutes long. It honestly felt like 2 and a half hours long, maybe even longer. In other words, I was watching “The Favourite” all over again!

Also, as I was watching this piece of garbage, here’s what I thought to myself. “Holy s*it. Now I see why everyone hates the ‘Transformers’ movies.” While I will consider a few of the Michael Bay-directed “Transformers” movies to be less than satisfactory, I don’t particularly hate the franchise as much as other people. I enjoyed the first film, then again I grew up with it so I could be biased. And I almost enjoy the third film even more! But this movie reminds me of those. The movie is called “Transformers,” we have all of these cool fighting robots, but let’s make the movie about the human characters! Underwhelming scripts for the win! Here, we have a movie called “Godzilla,” and now we have to deal with a s*itty script that may have to do with Godzilla, but it collides with the plethora of human characters that may as just be there to pass time. If I were ten years old and I went to see this movie, I think part of me would be bored!

I know a lot of people will read this review and think about telling me in the comments section, “Hey, Jackass! Godzilla movies are not about brilliant scripts! They’re about the monsters!” Look, guys. If that’s the case, then you can make the same argument for a movie like “Fifty Shades of Grey.” Don’t go in wanting good characters! Go in for the kinky sex! Or what about “Sharknado?” Don’t go in begging for a justifiable plot! Embrace the silly! Listen guys, unless you’re creating some real-life event or there is some other special situation, no movie can exist without a screenplay. Some will be good, and some will be bad. This one was ugly. Is it cheesy? Yes. Some people may expect “Godzilla” movies to have some cheesy lines here and there. But it’s also met with a clashing serious tone. This clash between tones may be a bigger and more brutal fight as opposed to any of the monster action scenes presented on screen! When you treat your movie’s humans as if they are the core characters of the movie and you can’t get me to care about them, and I barely care about the monsters, you’ve done goof. As an aspiring filmmaker and in this case I’ll give a specification, screenwriter, I may be biased, but my case stands. This is especially important when you consider that this movie is in a cinematic universe. The next movie in this lineup is “Godzilla vs. Kong” and part of me is worried for that movie now because the excuse for both monsters to eventually interact could potentially be bulls*it. It could ultimately ruin the entire movie.

Please help me.

And one sad thing about this movie is this. While I probably hate this movie more than any other this year that I’ve witnessed so far. It’s almost an enigma because for one thing, I’m able to find positives, but they are heavily outweighed by a plethora of negatives. Surprisingly, there’s not a moment where I can remember conceptualizing a personal need for Anger Management classes. But based on this movie’s script and my memory of said script, I almost can’t remember feeling any emotion whatsoever, which may almost be worse than getting angry about a movie or its characters. I didn’t care about anyone enough to decide how I truly feel about them. When your movie makes me a robot, even though I cannot process information like a robot, you know your movie is a special kind of crap.

Now I know that I said this movie is surround sound Heaven, but I cannot help but think of a quote one wise man said back in the day.

“What can we do, to encourage people to have more quiet in their lives, more silence? Real revelation comes through silence.” -Fred Rogers

The answer, simple. Show everyone “Godzilla: King of the Monsters.” That’s all this movie is. S*it and noise. Nothing more.

In the end, “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” broke me. It made me dumber, it made me sum up better ideas for a monster movie script with a friend of mine, and it almost killed all hopes I have for this MonsterVerse Warner Brothers seems to be planning. I know a lot of people had no hope for the DCEU for some time. This is how I feel about this MonsterVerse. And as a sequel to 2014’s “Godzilla,” it tries to go bigger, but the reality is, bigger doesn’t always mean better. It’s like watching “Independence Day: Resurgence” three years later! With lackluster characters, unlikable plot elements, and beyond awful screenwriting, this movie, unlike its titled character, is most certainly no king. Will I go see “Godzilla vs. Kong” when it comes out? Sure, but whatever hype I’ve had for that movie before watching “King of the Monsters” has perhaps dwindled to a level lower than an underground subway tunnel in New York City. Let’s hope my life does not become more miserable than it already is! I’m going to give “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” a 1/10. Yes, there are positives, but again, they are heavily outweighed by tons of crap, and the fact that my brain literally could not function upon leaving the theater. I could probably never watch “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” ever again. If the MonsterVerse becomes as big as the MCU one day and there’s a big movie marathon at a theater, chances are I might end up buying a ticket, but I’d feel fine ditching “Godzilla: King of the Monsters.” I’ll probably use that time for a fresh air break or something. Who knows? But the fact is, this movie is a freaking monster. Also, first 1/10 of the year! It had to happen at some point! Thanks for reading this review! I just want to let everyone know that on June 11th I have plans to see “Men In Black: International” as part of an advance screening held a couple days before the film hits theaters. Be sure to look forward to that review! Also be sure to follow Scene Before with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Godzilla: King of the Monsters?” What do you think about it? Or, when you see a movie like the one I’m talking about, does the script matter to you? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!