[Mattopotamus]

There were colors in this movie that I didn't even know my display was capable for displaying. Simply jaw dropping visuals.

 

[Soccerdude]

The worst of Hollywood & it keeps coming at a scary rate.

 

[bobknavs]

100 points each HDR10/DV/Atmos.

And an idiotic script.

Damn. The purchase decision is gonna be tough.

 

[X4100]

Very good review, I'm wondering how DSU will handle this, any thoughts? Love your reviews, keep them coming

 

[Steve544]

Ralph...your review, as great as it is, clearly shows our age differences. Growing up in the 50s and 60s, we only had 3 channels. One channel showed the Movie of the Week where it would play the same film 4 or 5 times a day for an entire week. If the original King Kong, Mighty Joe Young, Godzilla or Rodan were the movie of the week, I watched it for almost every showing on and on again. Loved them. When they came out with the first King Kong vs Godzilla I just had to see it and took the bus up to White Plains, N.Y. to see it. I guess that was when I started to grow up. My mother asked how I liked it and I just said I thought it was pretty silly.

I enjoyed Peter Jackson's King Kong for its realistic appearance of Kong and the dinosaurs. As well, Kong: Skull Island, was fine even though Kong grew to sizes never expected, at least he looked like a real gorilla and there was a realism to the rest of the creatures and characters.

This new Godzilla vs Kong, which I watched on HBO Max, was as silly and unrealistic as the 1962 version. Kong looked nothing like a real ape...I kept looking for the suit's zipper. The characters were store mannequins, the action exciting but very short lived and not totally realistic and the story line as empty as the last beer I drank.

I absolutely love that the video scored 100% and, even more, love that the ATMOS audio was top notch since the audio of a film is the most important thing to me. However, I am glad I watched it on cable and did not buy it. Maybe if I were 10years old I would have loved this film, but as an adult, and a 71 year old one at that, I still demand some kind of character interest and realism.

 

[Mattopotamus]

Ralph...your review, as great as it is, clearly shows our age differences. Growing up in the 50s and 60s, we only had 3 channels. One channel showed the Movie of the Week where it would play the same film 4 or 5 times a day for an entire week. If the original King Kong, Mighty Joe Young, Godzilla or Rodan were the movie of the week, I watched it for almost every showing on and on again. Loved them. When they came out with the first King Kong vs Godzilla I just had to see it and took the bus up to White Plains, N.Y. to see it. I guess that was when I started to grow up. My mother asked how I liked it and I just said I thought it was pretty silly.

I enjoyed Peter Jackson's King Kong for its realistic appearance of Kong and the dinosaurs. As well, Kong: Skull Island, was fine even though Kong grew to sizes never expected, at least he looked like a real gorilla and there was a realism to the rest of the creatures and characters.

This new Godzilla vs Kong, which I watched on HBO Max, was as silly and unrealistic as the 1962 version. Kong looked nothing like a real ape...I kept looking for the suit's zipper. The characters were store mannequins, the action exciting but very short lived and not totally realistic and the story line as empty as the last beer I drank.

I absolutely love that the video scored 100% and, even more, love that the ATMOS audio was top notch since the audio of a film is the most important thing to me. However, I am glad I watched it on cable and did not buy it. Maybe if I were 10years old I would have loved this film, but as an adult, and a 71 year old one at that, I still demand some kind of character interest and realism.

It's a good demo disc, and for that reason it will earn a spot in my collection. As much as I watch movies, I also demo a lot of scenes for people.

 

[Ralph Potts]

Ralph...your review, as great as it is, clearly shows our age differences. Growing up in the 50s and 60s, we only had 3 channels. One channel showed the Movie of the Week where it would play the same film 4 or 5 times a day for an entire week. If the original King Kong, Mighty Joe Young, Godzilla or Rodan were the movie of the week, I watched it for almost every showing on and on again. Loved them. When they came out with the first King Kong vs Godzilla I just had to see it and took the bus up to White Plains, N.Y. to see it. I guess that was when I started to grow up. My mother asked how I liked it and I just said I thought it was pretty silly.

I enjoyed Peter Jackson's King Kong for its realistic appearance of Kong and the dinosaurs. As well, Kong: Skull Island, was fine even though Kong grew to sizes never expected, at least he looked like a real gorilla and there was a realism to the rest of the creatures and characters.

This new Godzilla vs Kong, which I watched on HBO Max, was as silly and unrealistic as the 1962 version. Kong looked nothing like a real ape...I kept looking for the suit's zipper. The characters were store mannequins, the action exciting but very short lived and not totally realistic and the story line as empty as the last beer I drank.

I absolutely love that the video scored 100% and, even more, love that the ATMOS audio was top notch since the audio of a film is the most important thing to me. However, I am glad I watched it on cable and did not buy it. Maybe if I were 10years old I would have loved this film, but as an adult, and a 71 year old one at that, I still demand some kind of character interest and realism.

Greetings,

I can absolutely appreciate your take on this @Steve544. For me, sometimes silly is okay and a welcomed relief from some of today's headlines.

Regards,

 

[Toe]

Movie was pretty bad IMO even for a shut your brain off type film and definitely my least favorite of these 4 movies, but I am happy to hear the audio is fixed or a different mix (whatever the case may be) was used vs the streaming audio which was flat out terrible IMO. I'll probably pick it up since I'm a sucker for killer A/V and to keep the collection complete. Appreciate the review as always Ralph!

 

[Dave Vaughn]

Great review Ralph. This is on the watch list for tonight and I'll be sure to leave my brain sitting at my computer so as not to disrupt any enjoyment of the audio and video

 

[Ralph Potts]

Great review Ralph. This is on the watch list for tonight and I'll be sure to leave my brain sitting at my computer so as not to disrupt any enjoyment of the audio and video

Greetings,



Sounds like a plan Dave. Looking forward to your thoughts buddy...


Regards,

 

[Technology3456]

Greetings,

I can absolutely appreciate your take on this @Steve544. For me, sometimes silly is okay and a welcomed relief from some of today's headlines.

Regards,

What would be a welcomed relief for me would be an engrossing movie with a meaningful story, depth, that is thought provoking, exciting, emotional, etc. When there is nothing better to watch, I agree with you that a bad silly movie with some good action can still provide something to take your attention off of other things, but I think even for that purpose, those movies are not that great at it, just something you watch because you want to watch something new and you're not aware of many good choices.

Probably everyone agrees that better movies are better, hah, but since we don't own the film studios all we can do as viewers and reviewers is to be less lenient in our appraisals of bad movies, especially sequels and franchises, and try to set the bar a little higher, and hope that has some impact on the films that get made. The more we support or excuse the same rehashed brainless movies getting made over and over in different clothes, the more they will get made, and the studios only release so many movies per year so at some point, which I think was reached years ago, it leaves very little room for anything else.

 

[Dave Vaughn]

Sadly, if we're lucky there will be 10 movies per year that fall into the "good" category. In some years its less than that.

 

[Cal1981]

I watched Godzilla v Kong when it dropped on HBO Max and thoroughly enjoyed it. The action was hot and heavy from the get go and the CG was outstanding. Of course Godzilla and Kong both had better acting chops than the humans but, hey, it was their movie anyway. 😄 The Dolby Vision picture on HBO Max was excellent and the audio, when taken up a few decibels, was very good. I'll probably pick up a copy of the 4K release tomorrow.

 

[Technology3456]

Sadly, if we're lucky there will be 10 movies per year that fall into the "good" category. In some years its less than that.

I agree, but maybe that would change if people were more vocal in their criticisms of most of today's movies. This movie has 76% on rottentomatoes, and 90% audience score (might be funny business going on with that number). But according to the scores as they are shown, since the studio just released a bonafide masterpiece with this movie, why would they do anything different? I'm exaggerating a little bit, 76% isn't quite "masterpiece," plus those percentages dont calculate how much people liked it, which is a flaw in the aggregation process, but, the avg of 76% and 90% is 83%, and I'm sure there are a number of genuine masterpieces with lower scores than that.

Actual aggregation scores and their flaws aside, I'm just saying, skewed scores impact the movies that get made. Audiences want to pay for at least a 7/10 or 8/10 movie, not a 3/10 movie. So when 3/10 movies are made, if you score them 3/10, no one will go see them, and that will force studios to make actual 7/10 or 8/10 movies in order to get audiences to watch their movies. But if every 3/10 movie gets scored 7/10 or 8/10, then why would studios bother making actual 7/10 or 8/10 films when they can get the same credit for doing half the job?

I remember video game scores were always the ones that were skewed like this. You would go to RT 10 years ago, and the average movie would be scored 3/10, while the average video game would be scored 7.5 on say IGN. But you go to RT now, and it's become IGN. It's hard not to think that is lowering the bar for cinema.

I mean look at the right side. 11 total scores, and 7 are 94% or higher. On the bottom left, four scores published, two are 100%, two are 75%. Top left, 10 total scores, 7 are positive, and four are 88% or higher. This is just random that I pulled up right now. It is like this every week I check it now.

10 years ago, it was the opposite, despite the average movie release back then being a lot better than now, in my opinion.

 

[Dave Vaughn]

I agree, but maybe that would change if people were more vocal in their criticisms of the not-good movies. This movie has 76% on rottentomatoes, and 90% audience score (might be funny business going on with that number). But according to the scores as they are shown, since the studio just released a bonafide masterpiece with this movie, why would they do anything different? I'm exaggerating a little bit, 76% isn't quite "masterpiece," plus those percentages dont calculate how much people liked it, which is a flaw in the aggregation process, but, the avg of 76% and 90% is 83%, and I'm sure there are a number of genuine masterpieces with lower scores than that.

Actual aggregation scores and their flaws aside, I'm just saying, skewed scores impact the movies that get made. Audiences want to pay for at least a 7/10 or 8/10 movie, not a 3/10 movie. So when 3/10 movies are made, if you score them 3/10, no one will go see them, and that will force studios to make actual 7/10 or 8/10 movies in order to get audiences to watch their movies. But if every 3/10 movie gets scored 7/10 or 8/10, then why would studios bother making actual 7/10 or 8/10 films when they can get the same credit for doing half the job?

I remember video game scores were always the ones that were skewed like this. You would go to RT 10 years ago, and the average movie would be scored 3/10, while the average video game would be scored 7.5. But you go to RT now, and it's become IGN. It's hard not to think that is lowering the bar for cinema.

View attachment 3144479

I mean look at the right side. 11 total scores, and 7 are 94% or higher. On the bottom left, four scores published, two are 100%, two are 75%. Top left, 10 total scores, 7 are positive, and four are 88% or higher. This is just random that I pulled up right now. It is like this every week I check it now.

10 years ago, it was the exact opposite, despite the average movie release back then being a lot better than now, in my opinion.

How's this for a conspiracy theory. Rottentomatores was bought by Fandango a few years ago and who is the parent company for Fandango? If you guessed Comcast, then you're the big winner in today's episode of "Conflict of Interest." (Actually, Comcast owns 70% and I believe Warner owns 30%. Regardless, it makes me wonder if they are cooking the ratings).

 

[djoberg]

My copy arrives on Wednesday. Ralph, your review has me SO PUMPED to watch this! I am one who can sit through "mindless drivel" if it has REFERENCE PQ/AQ (Transformers: The Last Knight comes to mind!). I will be watching it that night with the audio on my Denon close to "Reference" since my wife will be gone. I can't wait!!

 

[Cal1981]

My copy arrives on Wednesday. Ralph, your review has me SO PUMPED to watch this! I am one who can sit through "mindless drivel" if it has REFERENCE PQ/AQ (Transformers: The Last Knight comes to mind!). I will be watching it that night with the audio on my Denon close to "Reference" since my wife will be gone. I can't wait!!

Uh oh. Alert the neighbors. There be monsters bellowing on Wednesday night. 😄 If I tried to run this movie at reference three things would happen:

• My hearing would be reduced by another few notches
• My walls might collapse
• My neighbors would throw stones at my windows

 

[GalvatronType_R]

I watched this on HBO Max. I knew it would have great AV but a turrible script and it met my expectations. This was essentially two CGI pro wrestlers doing a scripted work with a few ancillary characters sprinkled in and an unexpected player who ran down the stage into the ring at the end to attack both wrestlers.

I‘m happy that unlike the mouse company, WB didn’t cheap out and this disk has outstanding AV but I’m way past buying awful cynical movies because they look and sound good. If you keep buying the same things, they will keep producing the same things. Why does Michael Bay still have a career with studios green lighting his contrived empty but extremely expensive movies? Because the sheep keep paying to see his ridiculous schlock. It needs to stop.

 

[djoberg]

Uh oh. Alert the neighbors. There be monsters bellowing on Wednesday night. 😄 If I tried to run this movie at reference three things would happen:

• My hearing would be reduced by another few notches
• My walls might collapse
• My neighbors would throw stones at my windows

So, you're saying this may be as loud as a movie like Tenet? If so, I will NOT be listening that close to "Reference." I listened to Tenet between -12 and -10 and my ears felt like they were bleeding!