What hurt KOTM worse: Critic reviews or the 5 year time gap between it and G2014?

[GodzillaFan1990's]

What the skreeonk is UglyDolls. You said How to Train Your Dragon which is a huge franchise.

I don't know why Pikachu didn't perform. But there are other factors at play with Godzilla that don't apply to Pikachu.

Well you did say children's movies always sold well and apparently UglyDolls didn't which counted as well. That's why I ask.

Anyways off-topic I'll stop where I am now.

[Shin Gabara]

Fewer folks can afford to see multiple films over a summer. A:EG took a lot of oxygen from the room.

[Maritonic]

What the skreeonk is UglyDolls. You said How to Train Your Dragon which is a huge franchise.

I don't know why Pikachu didn't perform. But there are other factors at play with Godzilla that don't apply to Pikachu.

Well you did say children's movies always sold well and apparently UglyDolls didn't which counted as well. That's why I ask.

Anyways off-topic I'll stop where I am now.

I forgot I need to be extremely specific.

Most "big name" franchises, such as How To Train Your Dragon, tend to sell very well because of their target demographic. They are advertised to kids. Kids bother the shit out of their parents. Parents take their kids, and their friends, to the movies. $$$.

This is the same for *MOST* children's films and franchises. Sure, not every single children's film ever made is going to break the box office mold and make bank. But, it's a pretty safe assumption that a sequel to How To Train Your Dragon, which was huge, was going to do well regardless of a time gap. Same for whatever sequels to follow. Is this ALWAYS the case? No. But it's a safe assumption.

As I said, Godzilla has other factors.

[JesstrK]

That is a children's movie. Children's movies always sell.

Fair enough though that doesn't also explain why Detective Pikachu didn't perform as well as it should had given Pokemon's popularity. UglyDolls was also a children's movie and that apparently didn't sell well either.

What the skreeonk is UglyDolls. You said How to Train Your Dragon which is a huge franchise.

I don't know why Pikachu didn't perform. But there are other factors at play with Godzilla that don't apply to Pikachu.

Honestly, for me personally, I skipped Detective Pikachu beacause I was hoping our first live action Pokemon movie would be based off either the anime or one of the main games, not an obscure (at the time) spin off. I had no interest,in fact I found the decision baffling and I suspect others might have felt the same.

[vibramrunner]

People keeps saying the five year gap yet How to Train Your Dragon went through the same thing with 2 and The Hidden World and that didn't hurt it...

I'm affirmed to think it was the critics.

That is a children's movie. Children's movies always sell.

Mmmmm, Lego 2 had a five year gap and didn't do well.

[Mr_Goji_and_Watch]

Reviews. Audiences won't mind the wait for a sequel to a fairly well received movie if it's good. They won't bother when it turns out to be garbage.

[GodzillaFan1990's]

Another thing I should point out. Some movies this year alone has strangely not been performing well. This film, Shazam!, Lego Movie 2, Hellboy (Though this was obvious), Missing Link, Detective Pikachu.

Something I thought I'd point out. Now it seems Dark Phoenix is performing poorly as well though that was a given just like Hellboy was.

Something to just think about.

[Maritonic]

Another thing I should point out. Some movies this year alone has strangely not been performing well. This film, Shazam!, Lego Movie 2, Hellboy (Though this was obvious), Missing Link, Detective Pikachu.

Something I thought I'd point out. Now it seems Dark Phoenix is performing poorly as well though that was a given just like Hellboy was.

Something to just think about.

Shazam! had a lot of people who refused to watch anything DC out of protest.

Hellboy looked like hot garbage. Missing Link looked like cold garbage.

Dark Phoenix looks like the little puddle of water that pools at the bottom of your garbage can after a full bag of garbage starts to leak.

[SoggyNoodles2016]

Another thing I should point out. Some movies this year alone has strangely not been performing well. This film, Shazam!, Lego Movie 2, Hellboy (Though this was obvious), Missing Link, Detective Pikachu.

Something I thought I'd point out. Now it seems Dark Phoenix is performing poorly as well though that was a given just like Hellboy was.

Something to just think about.

Shazam! had a lot of people who refused to watch anything DC out of protest.

Hellboy looked like hot garbage. Missing Link looked like cold garbage.

Dark Phoenix looks like the little puddle of water that pools at the bottom of your garbage can after a full bag of garbage starts to leak.

and Pikachu made the mistake of coming out in the middle of Endgame's theater time.

[GuardianGhido]

Yes, BO cannibalism or whatever the heck the term is probably did more damage than either of those. No movie seems to be doing especially well at the moment, not even Aladdin is doing as well as it's supposed to (It's a Disney movie). The 5 year gap also caused its fair share of problems though with people forgetting all about Goji.

[H-Man]

Shazam! had a lot of people who refused to watch anything DC out of protest.

Dark Phoenix looks like the little puddle of water that pools at the bottom of your garbage can after a full bag of garbage starts to leak.

I washed my hands of DC after watching Suicide Squad. I haven't seen any of their other films made post-DARK KNIGHT RISES.

I also washed my hands of the X-Men franchise after Apocalypse.

I'll probably stop watching MCU films after I finally get around to Endgame, unless SHANG CHI gets great word of mouth.

[KingKaiju]

I can't find the article, but I saw it posted on a Facebook group. Apparently this movie was skewed in the audience demographic, heavily favoring a male audience. I wonder if being able to broaden that approach could help. I don't know how much that affected the box office, because I don't know how diverse the demographic was for the first two films, but it makes me wonder if that played a role as well.

[Rhedosaurus]

Reviews. Audiences won't mind the wait for a sequel to a fairly well received movie if it's good. They won't bother when it turns out to be garbage.

Most of the sequels to Bayformers-the exceptions being T5 and Bumblebee say hello.

[Mr_Goji_and_Watch]

Most of the sequels to Bayformers-the exceptions being T5 and Bumblebee say hello.

A westernized franchise popular with youth and competent Michael Bay action is gonna get far more people into seats and for far longer than a badly reviewed sequel that uses cult movie ideas for a discount-Snyder CGI fest.

Even fans outside of the media illiterate think many of those ideas aren't even faithful to the franchise.

[MothraRocks]

Honestly, a mix of both. It would be silly to assume that poor reviews from critics have little to no effect because if that was the case, they would not have a job in the first place. Some people take it more seriously than others and would have decided to not see the movie because of it. The five-year gap though definitely did not help with this movie. I asked my dad if he was gonna come see the movie at some point and he replied no initially because he "didn't see the first one" and when I pointed out he did, he really struggled to remember what happened. Same thing happened with my friend, she was trying to describe to her boyfriend what happened in the first movie and she was also having trouble recalling details.

I think this can be applied to the GA; that while people may have come and seen the first Godzilla, and enjoyed it (I know there are plenty of criticisms), many of them are not going to recall the majority of the plot 5 years down the road aside from "Godzilla had to kill these big bug things". We as G-Fans obviously know about the MUTOs, and how Skull Island is part of the MV, and the different characters in the films and Monarch, XYZ, but to casual viewers, what motive do they have to see a sequel to a movie that they can *kinda* recall the plot of?

Hopefully, WOM does help pick this movie up a bit and GvsK does better when it comes out in ten months

[Pkmatrix]

You know, I've been wondering how much, if at all, it might've changed the box office result had they cast someone with greater name recognition in the lead role instead of Kyle Chandler. Like, Chandler is a good actor and all, but he's hardly a name most people recognize. You don't necessarily need an A-lister, just someone more recognizable - I'm sure at least a few of us have had the awkward conversation trying to hype up the movie to others only to get the question, "Well, who's in it?" And then you start listing off names and you don't get to somebody people recognize until MAYBE Millie Bobby Brown, Ken Watanabe, Sally Hawkins, and Charles Dance - all of whom are supporting actors, three of them with fairly small parts.

Like, the first guy who comes to mind is Kiefer Sutherland. Probably about the same level of actor as Chandler, but Sutherland's got a much more recognizable name - I doubt I'd have gotten a "Who?" from anybody if I said it was starring Sutherland, and I have no trouble imagining him playing the part. (Of course, even better would've been to just try harder to grab a lower-level A-lister, like how they nabbed Hiddleston for K:SI.)

Who knows.

[Xx_The_Masquerade_xX]

There are many factors that affected King of the Monsters

- 5 year gap
- Mixed Reviews on the first installment
- Poor release date
- Avengers Endgame ( IT effected every movie in there box office )
- Critic's killed whoever was on the fence about this film
- Severe Competition

[GodzillaFan1990's]

Missing Link looked like cold garbage.

*Triggered*

...






Ah that's fine mine. Different opinions yo.

- Avengers Endgame ( IT effected every movie in there box office )

That wouldn't surprise me in the slightest given what I had said a few comments above.

[Hokmuto]

You know, I've been wondering how much, if at all, it might've changed the box office result had they cast someone with greater name recognition in the lead role instead of Kyle Chandler. Like, Chandler is a good actor and all, but he's hardly a name most people recognize. You don't necessarily need an A-lister, just someone more recognizable - I'm sure at least a few of us have had the awkward conversation trying to hype up the movie to others only to get the question, "Well, who's in it?" And then you start listing off names and you don't get to somebody people recognize until MAYBE Millie Bobby Brown, Ken Watanabe, Sally Hawkins, and Charles Dance - all of whom are supporting actors, three of them with fairly small parts.

Like, the first guy who comes to mind is Kiefer Sutherland. Probably about the same level of actor as Chandler, but Sutherland's got a much more recognizable name - I doubt I'd have gotten a "Who?" from anybody if I said it was starring Sutherland, and I have no trouble imagining him playing the part. (Of course, even better would've been to just try harder to grab a lower-level A-lister, like how they nabbed Hiddleston for K:SI.)

Who knows.

I recognize his face (Sutherland) but definitely not his name. If I said his name to anyone, they would be as puzzled as me I would assume until I say what movies and roles he’s been in.

[BlankAccount]

I can't find the article, but I saw it posted on a Facebook group. Apparently this movie was skewed in the audience demographic, heavily favoring a male audience. I wonder if being able to broaden that approach could help. I don't know how much that affected the box office, because I don't know how diverse the demographic was for the first two films, but it makes me wonder if that played a role as well.

I don't think that was as much a factor here as the previous films, Mothra appeals to the female demographic and almost every women and girl whose seen this movie gushes over her.