Disappointing, but better than Broderick ...

Rating: 3/10 (5 September 2015)

So disappointing in so many ways, even though Godzilla looked awesome!
OK, so right off the bat we get the Bryan Cranston bait-and-switch -- he was in the trailer about as long as he was in the film.
Why follow an interesting actor/character through a film when we can follow Cranston's son who just happens to be a member of the U.S. military because OF COURSE HE IS ... Please, enough with the one- dimensional U.S. military heroes in films. I'm so tired of 1980s franchise fights the U.S. military. It's almost like Transformers vs. the U.S. Military, but it's Godzilla vs. the U.S. military. At least it's better than 1998's Godzilla where Matthew Broderick for some reason can dial a cell phone and call in an air strike by the U.S. military. At least Cranston's son, you know, what's-his-face, runs around in U.S. military gear for the whole movie looking all heroic and U.S. military- esque. U.S. military!!!
I'm alright with the U.S. Military, just get out of our films already, please!
As far as the plot, watch "Everything Wrong with Godzilla" on youtube for a rundown of the stupidity running rampant in this script.
My favorite Godzilla was Godzilla 1985, which stars Raymond Burr as a journalist who survived Godzilla's initial attack in 1956 and now, as Godzilla strikes again in 1985, Burr follows the story, keeps us viewers up-to-date and waxes philosophical on the nature of the monster. They think of a clever way to kill Godzilla, and you actually feel sympathy for an incredible creature that is just too dangerous to exist.
This film lacks creativity, substance and any redeeming human characters, which stinks when Godzilla is largely absent from his own film. A big swing and a miss here. I gave it a 3 just because Godzilla didn't asexually give birth to velociraptors in this film, which is a good start toward making a decent Godzilla movie. It doesn't seem like it should be that difficult.