Robert Pattinson’s Casting As Batman Was Reportedly Super Quick

Robert Pattinson’s Casting As Batman Was Reportedly Super Quick
Robert Pattinson in a suit and tie

The DC live-action universe has had a fascinating tenure in theaters, and continues to surprise the generations of fans out there. While Warner Bros.' shared universe has hit its stride with blockbusters like Aquaman and Shazam!, there's been some interesting developments when it comes to the handling of the Caped Crusader.


Ben Affleck has officially retired from playing Bruce Wayne/ Batman, and Twilight alum Robert Pattinson recently landed the role for Matt Reeves' The Batman. It's a casting decision that has resulted in the full gamut of emotions from DC fans, but it appears that the casting process was actually quite quick-- especially for such an iconic superhero role.


According to THR, who has an insider on production for The Batman, Robert Pattinson's audition and eventual landing of the role was much quicker than usual. This makes a great deal of sense, as there's a ton of pressure in casting superheroes for the big screen. Marvel Studios famously saw tons of actors for Spider-Man, before landing on Tom Holland as the iconic web crawler.




Since Batman is perhaps the most popular DC character in history, one would expect Warner Bros. and The Batman's Matt Reeves to take their time finding the right actor to don the cape and cowl. But rumors about Robert Pattinson were followed quickly with an official confirmation by the director, so it seems like a pretty brief process from the outside. And this new report confirms that Gotham's Knight was found quickly.


Conversation about who might replace Ben Affleck as Batman in the DCEU began before he even dropped out of the role. After he backed away from both directing and starring in The Batman, it was clear that Matt Reeves was going to need to find new talent to make the developing blockbuster a reality. And Robert Pattinson reportedly wasn't the only actor considered for the role.


Related: Why Now Is The Best Time For Robert Pattinson's Batman




After the first rumors about Robert Pattinson's possible tenure as Batman hit the internet, it was also reported that X-Men actor Nicholas Hoult was Pattinson's main competition. They both reportedly tested for the role, with the Twilight alum winning out, and officially replacing Ben Affleck as the next live-action Bruce Wayne.


This breakneck pace might be in an attempt to get The Batman out in theaters at its current release date. The movie has been developing for quite some time, and it's set to arrive in theaters on June 25th, 2021. Matt Reeves will need to start assembling the cast and crew in order to make this a reality, as the script has been the main focus of the film's long gestation period.


With Robert Pattinson officially attached as Batman, it should be interesting to see what other actors join him. Quite a few performers have been campaigning to play some of Batman's rogues, including Josh Gad and Vanessa Hudgens. We'll just have to see if the movie ends up being the villain-heavy ensemble project that was rumored months sago.




The Batman will arrive in theaters on June 25th, 2021. The next installment in the DCEU is Birds of Prey on February 7th 2020. In the meantime, check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.


John Wick: Chapter 4 Just Got Some Major Opening Weekend Competition

John Wick: Chapter 4 Just Got Some Major Opening Weekend Competition
John wick 3 and Akira

After only a week at the box office, John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum has already surpassed the earnings of the first film’s entire theatrical run. It was also the first film to dethrone Avengers: Endgame for the #1 weekend rank after almost a month. So it wasn’t a huge surprise when it was announced Keanu Reeves would soon be returning for a fourth chapter in 2021.


But John Wick 4 may now need to watch its back because Taika Waititi’s live-action Akira movie has just nabbed the same release date for May 21, 2021. The long-awaited manga adaptation helmed by the Thor: Ragnarok director could certainly be hefty competition for the assassin, considering how beloved Katsuhiro Otomo’s cyberpunk series is to fans.


Warner Bros announced the release date on Friday, per THR, mere days after pushing DC Super Pets away from that date to May 22, 2022. While Super Pets and John Wick 4 target two different audiences, but Akira runs over Wick’s violent action elements, placing them in direct competition.




Taika Waititi’s upcoming project is a story set in post-apocalyptic Tokyo about a teenage boy named Tetsuo who obtains terrifying and dangerous psychic powers. His childhood friend Kaneda must rise up with his bike gang to stop his threats to the world. It was previously adapted into an anime film in 1988, which had a huge influence on the genre’s appeal to American culture.


Since Taika Waititi revitalized the Thor franchise with Ragnarok in 2017, and has since climbed up among Marvel fans’ favorites in the MCU (CinemaBlend readers ranked it #5), there will be high anticipation regarding this project. The director has said the film had a huge impact on his own life, but he will be drawing heavily from the source material for his version of Akira.


While many Hollywood manga adaptations have gained flack for white-washing their characters, Taika Waititi has said he will be aiming to hire Asian actors in the roles -- likely unknown untapped young talents. Marco Ramirez -- who has penned episodes for Sons of Anarchy, Daredevil, The Defenders, and The Twilight Zone reboot -- is reportedly writing the script, with Leonardo DiCaprio as a producer.




Taika Waititi has been attached to the project for two years, though he’s been busy working on his dramady Jojo Rabbit, coming in October and on the Disney+ series The Mandalorian. Now with his schedule clearing up a bit, he’ll need to make room for Akira to get ready for its release two years from now.


Warner Bros has been trying to make a live-action Akira for over a decade, once with Garrett Hedlund attached to a version back in 2012 before it was dropped. Considering the film now has a release date and a promising director attached, the film looks to be moving swiftly forward toward that 2021 release date next to John Wick 4.


Avengers: Endgame Writers Say The Runtime Is Perfect

Avengers: Endgame Writers Say The Runtime Is Perfect
Iron Man new suit extension in Avengers: Endgame

It was very clear well before we knew what the runtime for Avengers: Endgame would be, and well before we even knew what the official title would be, that it would be a long movie. It is going to be a long movie, but it’s one screenwriter Stephen McFeeley feels is “exactly as long as it needs to be.”


First and foremost, Avengers: Endgame isn’t going to be long, it’s going to be hella long, clocking in at 3 hours and 1 minute in length. AKA 181 minutes. A movie which you could also think of as "not short."


That’s the sort of length of time that’s comparable to hobbits traveling away from the Shire for the first time or the length of time it takes for scientists to explore Pandora’s biosphere and mess with the environment in the process.




Per Stephen McFeeley, however, the movie’s lengthy runtime works and he's happy to talk about why it works, saying,



It's exactly as long as it needs to be. Any shorter and it would have felt like we weren't honoring all the threads and franchises that are feeding into this climax. Twenty-two movies in, not only has the movie earned its length, but people deserve a movie of that substance.



He also revealed why, noting it’s very important that each of the individual franchises are highlighted in this final movie focusing on the original Avengers. In total, the movie will feel as if it has weight and substance, according to the writer. (Although he did write it, so I’d hope he didn’t have the opinion he was just putting fluff out into the universe.)




Related: Why Avengers Endgame Should Be Exactly As Long As It Needs To Be


However, if you are worried that three hours will drag on and on and on, Stephen McFeeley also claimed in his interview with Vulture that the time will fly.



I swear to God, it sounds like a paradox to say this, but it's a lean three hours.





In fact, we’ve already heard this super long movie is extremely tight and that every single scene will matter to the whole (along with hopefully being fun, funny and epic). Unlike some of those early episodes of Game of Thrones, there really won’t be much filler, to the point where Marvel's Kevin Feige basically stated there won’t be a good time to get up and use the bathroom in the middle of the movie. The flick, in fact, was designed that way.



We are fans of movies that you wish didn’t end. Movies that you want to see again as soon as it’s over. And movies that you just don’t ever find a good time to run out to the bathroom. That’s when a movie’s working. And if a movie doesn’t feel like that to us we continue to trim, we continue to shape, we continue to bring that time down. That happened to a certain extent on this movie. But we got to a point where it feels very exciting and goes by very quickly and in the end is the perfect length.



Spoiler alert: I still plan to get up and use the bathroom in the middle of the movie. Someone probably should have worked a bathroom break in there, because I’m 100% positive I’m going to miss at least two minutes of this movie. I just have to hope I won’t miss something super important.




To that point, this movie is so long there has been some chatter online that we should get a bathroom break in the form of an intermission.


Our own Mike Reyes would argue against the inclusion of an intermission, and he has some valid reasons for why he’s opposed to that sort of addition; however, I do have fond memories of getting up in the middle of a special showing of Gone with the Wind as a kid and grabbing more popcorn. So, intermissions could theoretically work for modern audiences.


Either way, we aren’t getting an intermission with Avengers: Endgame, so this sort of argument is rather moot. What’s not moot is figuring out how to hold your bladder for three hours if you are hyper invested in this superhero and space story.




If not, we already have seen a small chunk of Avengers: Endgame in the form of footage revealing the plan to take on Thanos. Unfortunately, given the context of the scene, even if you've seen that entire segment already, it's likely to come closer to the beginning of the movie rather than the middle, which means it may not be a great opportunity for you to get up and stretch your legs.


At the end of the day, Avengers: Endgame's other writer Christopher Markus also defends the length of Endgame because a shorter movie would not be capable of wrapping up the entire Phase Three of the MCU (and possibly all the phases that came before it). After all, Thanos not only has to be defeated but a slew of character arcs also have to be tied up! A lot needs to happen. He said:



If we told you the entire universe got snapped out and we were gonna wrap it up in a tight 85, you’d have issues.





I mean, 85 minutes at this point is short for even an animated movie, but I take his point. At least everyone is guaranteed to get bang for their buck with this movie, as well. It's the longest movie in the MCU so far, competing only against its predecessor Avengers: Infinity War, a movie that is a whopping 32 minutes shorter.


Get prepared for the long and arduous journey your bladder is about to go on, because Avengers: Endgame is finally out next week. At that point we'll find out whether this arduous movie works or you'll likely start seeing headlines akin to "Should this have been a trilogy?" Either way, I'm pumped to see how it all pans out.


Catch it starting on April 26, 2019. Be sure to also check out what we know about Phase Four if you haven’t already. Best of luck avoiding spoilers on the Internet for the next few days. We're in the endgame now.




Dumbo: Everything We Know About Disney's Live Action Remake

Dumbo: Everything We Know About Disney's Live Action Remake
drunk Dumbo

2019 is going to be a big year for Disney's live-action remakes of their famous animated films. There will be no fewer than three of them coming this year, including Aladdin and The Lion King both coming as big summer releases. The first entry of the year, however, will be the reinvention of Disney's flying elephant, Dumbo. It feels like something of an unusual choice for a remake, but based on the cast and the crew that is making the new Dumbo a reality, it does seem that the right people are involved to make this one something special.


While many of Disney's remakes have been fairly true retellings of the original story, Dumbo is different in that it will be creating a lot of brand new material to complete the tale of the misfit elephant. The basic premise is all still there, but there's a lot more involved. Here's everything we know about Disney's upcoming live-action remake of Dumbo.


What Have We Seen From Dumbo?


Luckily, we no longer have to wonder what the eponymous elephant will look like in this re-imagining of the classic Disney tale. A teaser trailer for Dumbo dropped in mid-June 2018, followed by a full trailer in November giving us some good looks at the cute little guy, along with many of his human co-stars. And, from what we've seen it certainly looks like it could stack up to be a wonderfully magical story.




What Is Dumbo Rated?


Dumbo has been rated PG by the MPAA. This puts the film on par with all four of Disney's most recent, live-action remakes, Maleficent, Cinderella, The Jungle Book, and Beauty and the Beast have ended up with PG ratings. While the original Dumbo was a G-rated affair, it seems quite difficult to secure that rating these days. Although, the live-action 101 Dalmatians remake from 1996 did manage it. It's hard to imagine what could be added to Dumbo that might make it unsuitable for young kids, though the original movie did include an elephant getting drunk, which probably gets you at least a PG-rating today.


What Is Dumbo's Release Date?


Dumbo will be Disney's second major release for 2019. On March 8 Marvel will open things with Captain Marvel and Dumbo will follow close behind on March 29, 2019. It releases the week after Godzilla sequel Godzilla: King of the Monsters and the week before DC comics movie Shazam. There are also a number of potential competitors for the family movie dollar being released around the same time, with the long-awaited How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World opening in February. While Dumbo is opening outside of the "summer movie season" it's opening in the same window that the Beauty and the Beast remake did, so major box office success is certainly possible.


What Is Dumbo About?


The original Dumbo was Disney's fourth animated feature, and its story is fairly simple, as shown by the film's 64-minute runtime. Dumbo is born, is mistreated by the other animals due to his abnormally large ears, and is befriended by a mouse who then helps him discover his talent for flight which the ears provide. This makes Dumbo a circus star. There isn't a lot more there, which explains why the new film will be adding a lot to the story, primarily through new human characters.




This version of Dumbo will primarily focus on a character named Holt Ferrier, a former circus star who is now a different man having returned from war. He is hired by circus owner Max Medici to take care of Dumbo, a newborn elephant who is a circus laughing stock largely due to his oversized ears. However, after Holt's children discover that Dumbo can fly, entrepreneur V.A. Vandevere and aerialist Colette Marchant insert themselves as they see star potential, and money, in Dumbo.


The Director


Dumbo promises to be a unique film and Disney has certainly succeeded in getting a unique director to bring it to life. Tim Burton is behind the camera on the new remake which promises to make Dumbo a little weird in a very special way. Burton is no stranger to working with Disney. He got his start in film working with Disney animation on films like The Fox and the Hound and The Black Cauldron. He then returned to the House of Mouse to make movies such as his feature-length Frankenweenie and one of Disney's most successful live-action remakes, Alice in Wonderland. While Burton isn't necessarily known for it, films like Big Fish show that he is perfectly capable of the sort of movie that warms your heart, which we can expect Dumbo will ultimately be.


The Writer


The screenplay for this new version of Dumbo comes from Ehren Kruger. Kruger may not be a household name but he's responsible for some of the biggest movies ever made. He wrote or co-wrote three of the Transformers sequels but may be better known to horror movie fans as the writer of Scream 3 and the first two of The Ring movies among others. He's also written fan favorites like The Brothers Grimm, Reindeer Games and Arlington Road and movies that weren't necessarily favorites, like the recent Ghost in the Shell remake with Scarlett Johansson. There really isn't anything on his resume that looks anything like what we expect Dumbo to be, which could indicate a very different sort of movie or it could indicate Kruger is taking his first shot at something very different for him.




Will There Be Music In Dumbo?


Following the smash hit that was the Beauty and the Beast remake, one always has to wonder how Disney's classic music might be handled by the remake. The original Dumbo isn't a musical in the traditional sense, as most of the music isn't actually sung by the characters. Still, there are a few well-known songs from Dumbo including "Baby Mine," "When I See an Elephant Fly" and "Casey Jr." That last song is especially noteworthy as a promotional picture of director Tim Burton (see above) shows him on board the film's circus train which is very clearly labeled as being Casey Jr.


However, Dumbo won't be a musical. Like Cinderella and Maleficent, we'd expect to hear modern covers of the film's most famous songs, likely included over the end credits rather than part of the story proper. The film's trailer does include a version of "Baby Mine," the movie's tear-jearker, which could very likely be played at the same point in the new film.


Dumbo


Of all the characters in the new Dumbo, the one we seem to know the least about is the title character. In the original Dumbo, the elephant is completely mute, and that appears to be the case here as well. Dumbo is being brought to life via the same computer animation that made the animals of The Jungle Book look real. It seems like Dumbo may end up being more of a secondary character in his own story, with the focus being on the humans that surround him and how they treat him.




Holt Farrier


The part of Holt Farrier, the war vet who becomes Dumbo's caretaker will be played by Colin Farrell. Farrell most recently worked with Disney on Saving Mr. Banks, the story of the making of Mary Poppins, where he played the father of P.L. Travers in the flashback sequences. From everything that we know about the plot, it sounds like, if Dumbo isn't really our main character, Farrier is. He'll likely be the one fighting to keep Dumbo safe while others attempt to take advantage of him once it is discovered what he can do. At one point it was rumored that Will Smith was attached to Dumbo, and it's likely this is the role Smith would have played. Instead, Will Smith will appear in another Disney remake a couple months after Dumbo comes out, as the Genie in Aladdin.


Max Medici


The role of circus owner Max Medici will be played by Danny DeVito. DeVito previously voiced the trainer of heroes Philoctetes (aka Phil) in Disney's animated Hercules. He also previously worked with director Tim Burton in Batman Returns as the Penguin. There is a Ringmaster character in the original animated Dumbo who is likely the basis for this character, but he doesn't have much impact on the story. Whether he is a benevolent circus owner who loves his animals, or a cruel one who mistreats them, is not clear. DeVito is certainly capable of taking the character in either direction. Though he probably isn't the main villain of the movie, as that role appears to be played by somebody else.


V.A. Vandevere


Michael Keaton will play the role of entrepreneur V. A. Vandevere. Keaton hasn't done a major production for Walt Disney Pictures before, though he has provided voices for Pixar in both the Toy Story and Cars franchise in years past. Like Danny DeVito, he worked with Tim Burton on the Batman movies, in the title role back in the late '80s and early '90s. We know from the official plot synopsis that Vandevere will see the potential for money in Dumbo's ability to fly and look to cash in on this. The trailer makes it pretty clear that this is our villain of the piece. Dumbo will be exploited by the unscrupulous businessman, while those that helped raise the little elephant will try to protect him.




Tom Hanks was originally rumored to be in the running to play the villain of Dumbo and while that didn't pan out, Michael Keaton brings a lot of the same stature to the role. Although, seeing Tom Hanks play a bad guy would have been a shocking thing. Michael Keaton in the same role is a lot easier to buy.


Colette Marchant


Eva Green will play what appears to be the major female role in Dumbo as an aerialist named Colette Marchant. She's an associate of V.A. Vandevere and it sounds like the two may be business partners in addition to Marchant being a circus performer herself. This likely means that Green will be a villain as well, assuming that she knows everything that her colleague is up to. This will be Eva Green's third production with Tim Burton following the recent Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children and 2012's Dark Shadows.


J. Griffin Remington


The last character of note is named J. Griffen Remington and will be played by Oscar winner Alan Arkin. We know very little about the character beyond the fact that he's a "Wall Street tycoon." If I were to guess, he's probably a potential money source for Michael Keaton's character, who will need money in order to make Dumbo the massive attraction he envisions. That's all speculation, however. The character has only been seen briefly, in a short sneak peek video that was released in February, and it's not revealed how the character will fit into the plot. With Arkin in the role we can be fairly confident the part is important, but since the character doesn't get a mention in the official plot synopsis, it's hard to guess how he'll fit into the story.




Other Dumbo Characters And References


The most conspicuous absences here are all the characters that we actually remember from the animated version of Dumbo. Timothy Q. Mouse, an actual mouse who befriends Dumbo, was the major speaking role in the animated movie. We briefly see a mouse in ringmaster garb in the trailer, implying that we'll get a few references to the animated movie in places where the story has changed.


We also see a black feather that Dumbo plays with in the trailer. This is a clear reference to the "magic feather" that Dumbo receives, which he believes is the thing that allows him to fly. This likely means he won't be receiving it from a flock of crows, which, if you remember the original animated film, is a good thing.


Disney's live-action remakes have been largely successful with audiences in recent years. However, the additions to Dumbo will make this the first movie since Maleficent to tell a significantly different story than the animated movie that inspired it. The question is, just how open is the audience to seeing a very different story of Dumbo? We don't have much longer to wait until we find out.




See What Sebastian Stan Could Look Like As DC’s Riddler

See What Sebastian Stan Could Look Like As DC’s Riddler
Avengers: Endgame Bucky Barnes standing in front of a purple glow

While he’s been known as Marvel’s Winter Soldier for almost a decade and has a new spin-off show with that same character debuting at some point next year, some folks are really hung up on the idea of actor Sebastian Stan playing The Riddler in Matt Reeves’ new Batman movie.


And whenever a particularly inspired piece of casting crops up on the internet, you can count on corresponding fan art to help everyone get a picture of what that variation of a famous character could look like. With that in mind, please enjoy the following fan rendering of what Stan could look like as Edward “The Riddler” Nygma:


Looking at this particular visual representation of The Riddler, it does maintain a dorky element of the character’s psyche. But there’s also a seedy, alpha male sort of style at work as well, seeing Sebastian Stan perfectly occupy a crossroads between someone threatening and someone you could kind of laugh at on the streets of The Batman’s Gotham City. Knowing the character’s history of outbursts when his superiority is challenged, it might be best if you just nod respectfully and walk along, before he really does something to your mind you can’t come back from.




Naturally, this wasn’t unprompted, as recently Sebastian Stan has gone on record as stating that he’d love to play the purveyor of perplexing and pernicious puzzles in the universe that feels like it’s on the cusp of confirming Robert Pattinson as the man playing the latest version of the Dark Knight himself. But now, with the right art suggesting what this possibility would look like, it’s easier to approve of such a move.


While Matt Reeves’ The Batman has been reported to have its first two villains already sewn up, with both The Penguin and Catwoman taking those initial slots, there’s always room for more villains to be set up and deployed for future films. It certainly wouldn’t hurt to have a baddie as iconic as The Riddler in the franchise’s back pocket, especially when The Joker would be an option that’s too familiar to bring into the fold just yet.


So leave it to an eager fan on Instagram to make the best case for Sebastian Stan to be the latest Marvel star to defect over to the side of DC, in the name of creative re-casting. It’d certainly be an awesome draw to this new potential series of Batman films, especially with Stan’s fans from his days as Bucky Barnes being part of the contingent that made Avengers: Endgame such a huge box office hit.




As such, this isn’t exactly a confirmed casting, but it’d be a surprise if this item hasn’t already been circulated through Warner Bros’ internal email servers. So if Stan finds himself suiting up in the infamous green question mark suit we know and love, this could be the very moment that made it all happen.


Sebastian Stan can currently be seen in Avengers: Endgame, as well as the Shirley Jackson adaptation We Have Always Lived In The Castle. But if you’re looking for something else at the movies, take a look at our 2019 release schedule to see what else is in your realm of interest.


No, Disney's Controversial Song Of The South Won't Be Available On Disney+

No, Disney's Controversial Song Of The South Won't Be Available On Disney+
Song of the South

Do you remember when we heard that Disney was opening up its vault and would put its entire motion picture library on its upcoming Disney+ streaming service? Yeah, about that... It turns out that there will be one notable, obvious and predictable omission from the digital home of all things Disney: the controversial film Song of the South won’t be available on Disney+.


Despite Disney letting its other titles out of the vault for good, the 1946 film Song of the South will remain locked away. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Disney has no plans to make the title available alongside the rest of the company’s offerings on Disney+.


Song of the South won an Oscar for Best Original Song for “Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah,” and actor James Baskett won an honorary Oscar for his portrayal of Uncle Remus. Despite that initial acclaim, Song of the South is very controversial viewed from a modern lens, in particular for its portrayal of African-Americans.




For those reasons, it has never been released on home video in the U.S.; not on DVD, not on VHS, nothing. In 2011, Bob Iger indicated that bringing the movie back wouldn’t be in the best interests of the company’s shareholders. Therefore, Song of the South not making the jump to Disney+ should come as no surprise as Disney is just carrying over its previous policy regarding the film to the company’s new platform.


So unless you want to source an old copy of the film from overseas, the closest you’ll get to seeing Song of the South anytime soon is riding Splash Mountain at Walt Disney World, which takes its inspiration from the film’s animated sequences.


Song of the South won’t be the only omission from Disney’s catalog on Disney+. The 1941 Disney film Dumbo, which recently got a live-action remake, will be on Disney+, but it will not include the controversial crow scene. The scene features a crow named Jim Crow, which is a reference to the name of the blackface character that was later appropriated as a term for laws that enforced segregation after Reconstruction. Tim Burton’s Dumbo obviously didn’t include this scene.




Even if you want to see Song of the South get some type of modern release, either on Blu-ray or be made available for streaming or digital purchase/rental, you can understand why Disney doesn’t want it on Disney+. Disney’s streaming service is being positioned as a family-friendly offering in keeping with the brand’s reputation, and having Song of the South and Dumbo’s Jim Crow scene don’t exactly comport with that.


We’ll keep you updated on all the latest Disney+ news as we approach its November 12 launch date. In the meantime, check out our 2019 Release Schedule to see everything headed to theaters this summer.


Godzilla: King Of The Monsters Reviews Are In, Here’s What The Critics Are Saying

Godzilla: King Of The Monsters Reviews Are In, Here’s What The Critics Are Saying
Godzilla in King of the Monsters

It’s been five years since Godzilla kicked off the MonsterVerse, and while we rewound the clock back in 2017 to delve into King Kong’s origins in Kong: Skull Island, Godzilla is finally back in action this weekend for Godzilla: King of the Monsters. This time around, the giant reptile is colliding with Rodan, Mothra and King Ghidorah, and these Titans vying for supremacy will leave humanity’s existence hanging in the balance.


The public is still a few days away from getting to see Godzilla: King of the Monsters, but reviews from critics are now being published, and it’s looking like this sequel improves upon its predecessor in some ways, but is still a mixed affair.


CinemaBlend's own Mack Rawden gave the film 3 stars on our official review, citing major problem with the film's pacing. While praising the film's visuals, Rawden revealed:





In fact, the pacing is so strange that after about the twenty minute-mark, I had no concept whatsoever of how far into the film’s runtime we were. I’m usually pretty good at timing out a movie in my head and estimating what percentage we’ve completed. Not here. Not even close. There’s no slow burn or escalating momentum. The whole movie is in the deep end. Godzilla: King Of The Monsters is just a relentless haze of destruction throughout, a creative decision that obviously brings with it an enormous amount of pros and cons.



On the more positive end of the spectrum, William Bibbiani from Bloody Disgusting gave Godzilla: King of the Monsters a 4 out of 5 score, declaring that it felt like Warner Bros heard the collective complaints about how the 2014 Godzilla movie didn’t have enough monster action and “unloaded three sequels worth of monster fights into one follow-up.” That being said, King of the Monsters is filled with a lot of one-note characters, and if you treat blockbusters “like any other movie,” you’ll be disappointed with how this blockbuster fails to properly utilize its ensemble.



Godzilla: King of the Monsters is a big, kinda silly, but otherwise exciting blockbuster. It’s gorgeous, it’s epic in the extreme, and it features some of the most impressive monster fights you’ve ever seen. Maybe someday Americans will make a Godzilla movie that isn’t just ‘badass,’ but which also works on another level and resonates in a meaningful way.





Conversely, The AV Club’s Katie Rife wasn’t pleased with Godzilla: King of the Monsters, stamping it with a C- grade. Rife acknowledged that the look of the movie’s Titans and their fights are cool, but the rest of the King of the Monsters suffers as a result, with the human characters failing to impress. The family drama that occurs between the members of the Russell clan (Millie Bobby Brown’s Madison, Vera Farmiga’s Emma and Kyle Chandler’s Mark) is described as the “least successful flavor.”



Of course the monsters should be the stars of a Godzilla movie. But until blockbuster filmmaking goes entirely non-narrative, some attention should be paid to the rest of it as well.



James Whitbrook from io9 took a middle ground stance in his review of Godzilla: King of the Monsters, calling it “big, dumb and beautiful.” The sequel functions excellently as a love letter to the history of these cinematic beasts and the set pieces are “gorgeously rendered,” but the storyline is weak, there’s an inconsistent tone and there’s no proper exploration of the moral debate it sets up early on.





If you’re fine with some incredibly stupid people playing second fiddle to glorious kaiju moments, King of the Monsters will provide one of the best popcorn blockbusters of the summer. But if you wanted a Godzilla movie that had something, anything to say about its destruction? Then you’ll be definitely looking for something meatier than Ghidorah flank to chew on.



Empire’s Ben Travis did not enjoy Godzilla: King of the Monsters, giving it just one star out of five. In Travis’ opinion, the “staggeringly poor script” has the characters doing nothing but standing around or explaining the plot and their personal motivations with cliched dialogue. Making matters worse, the action sequences are also disappointing, with the final clash between Godzilla and King Ghidroah being described as “an overload of repetitive, joyless destruction that mistakes volume and demolition for actual excitement.”



Globe-trotting but not adventurous, action-packed but not remotely exciting, utterly overstuffed and completely paper-thin. Nuke it from orbit.





Finally, Scott Collura from IGN awarded Godzilla: King of the Monsters a 7.8 out of 10, observing, like many other critics, that the human characters get the short end of the proverbial stick, but the explosive monster action helps even the scales. Although the script is convoluted, King of the Monsters ultimately succeeds in delivering a lot of excellent battles and nerdy Easter eggs.



Godzilla returns in King of the Monsters, focusing on monster spectacle first and foremost. Which is as it should be!



These are just some of the Godzilla: King of the Monsters reviews that are now available, so feel free to look for others if you’d like more viewpoints. It is interesting, though, how one of the main complaints of the 2014 Godzilla movie was that there wasn’t enough monster action and too much focus on the humans, and now for King of the Monsters, the criticisms have been reversed. Talk about difficulty finding middle ground.




You can judge Godzilla: King of the Monsters for yourself when it arrives in theaters this Friday, May 31. Don’t forget to look through our 2019 release schedule to learn what movies are coming out later in the year.