Nu­clear mon­ster mash falls short

Dalby Herald - - LIFE WEEKENDER -

SEEMS not even a gi­ant, ra­dioac­tive rep­tile can carry a crea­ture fea­ture on his own any more.

Leg­endary En­ter­tain­ment has su­per-sized the se­quel to its 2014 hit with three “new” mon­sters, all of which orig­i­nated in the imag­i­na­tion of Godzilla cre­ator Toho.

There’s Ro­dan, a fly­ing fire de­mon; King Ghi­do­rah, a three-headed dragon; and, my per­sonal favourite, Mothra, a gi­gan­tic imago. Godzilla, too, is tur­bocharged in King of the Mon­sters, thanks to a well-tar­geted nu­clear ex­plo­sion.

Au­di­ences don’t go to a Godzilla movie for the sub­tleties of the sub­text, or the nu­ances of the hu­man char­ac­ter de­vel­op­ment.

Writer-direc­tor Michael Doughtery’s con­tri­bu­tion to the Leg­endary Mon­sterVerse gives plenty of bang for its buck – re­mem­ber, we’re in atom-split­ting ter­ri­tory here.

The plot, in­volv­ing a bunch of ex­treme ecoter­ror­ists, is as thin as

the Earth’s crust.

Their stated aim in re­leas­ing the mon­sters is to re­store the Earth’s nat­u­ral bal­ance.

But while the scene in which Godzilla belches ra­di­a­tion in his fi­nal show­down with Ghi­b­o­rah is a whole lot of fun, it doesn’t of­fer a lot of hope for Bos­ton’s post-apoc­a­lyp­tic re­gen­er­a­tion.

King of the Mon­sters is big, dumb and not nearly as much fun as the in­fin­itely su­pe­rior Kong: Skull Is­land.

And that doesn’t au­gur well for their clash in the Godzilla vs Kong.

PHOTO: WARNER BROS PIC­TURES

BANG FOR YOUR BUCK: A scene from the movie Godzilla: King of the Mon­sters.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.