I'm sure the movie will be fine, I don't think any of us will hate it or anything.
It just kind of bothers me how the writer and the director have this "teasing" mind set that they will make you wait and wait for the monster reveal, that they will tease you until you cannot longer wait any more to show you the monster fight,
But they do that by having some average mediocre human story with some characters that you won't really care about. That's the thing I don't like, how they act like the humans will matter just as much as the actors will but in reality they won't because of how uninteresting they are.
seems kind of arrogant. Same thing with his other movie Monsters. sounds a little bit full of himself. I guess I'll have to wait.
I think you touched on something here. Why do all these movies need to have the build up of revealing the monster? Or how superhero films will build up to slowly show you the main villain? It may have started with Jaws or Aliens or something but it's become more and more common as well in the last decade or so. And, alot of times, it kind of fails now. Expectations beat up on the final product. If you don't nail that reveal, then it goes downhill quickly. Godzilla '98 comes to mind. Superhero-wise, think Venom in SM3.
As far as the characters go, they don't have to all be Vito Corleone's. Jaws had good characters that you did care about (though I think Brodie is the only one I'd take away as being an all-time great character imo but it's more than what most of these style of films usually have). That roundtable discussion about their scars and the drunken singing is just as memorable to me now as the shark attacks. This movie may get that from Cranston (I'm hoping Watanabe to because I like that guy in every role and he seems like a perfect fit for a Godzilla remake). But, it's different. With something as big and powerful as Godzilla, it's hard to have the three main heroes really have a major impact on the final showdown. Though, Serizawa did it in the first film.
Maybe it isn't important, but maybe it is. The Sci-Fi films that are considered to have great casts (Jaws, Jurassic Park, Alien, Predator) deal with creatures that are more personal and intimate to each one person. Alien and Predator were, generally speaking, a little bigger than a person. It's easier for the audience to treat them as a character. Jaws and Jurassic Park dealt with bigger creatures that were still picking off humans one at a time in hunt scenes (though the raptors being more human-sized were arguably the true threat of the film because they were easier to...humanize). So it still has that personal agenda feeling (hell, the Jaws series in particular clamps down on this becuase those sharks seem to have it out for this family and it's even discussed multiple times in part 4). I think that's something worth mentioning. In today's cinematic world, audiences can't see enormous creatures as true characters. And maybe it's because it's so hard for human characters and those giant creatures to truly come across as interactive. Iron Giant as a cartoon was able to, but I don't know if it's relevant to this.
Godzilla is impersonal (mostly). Sure, rarely he comes across a Shindo or something, but Godzilla kills people ruthlessly but without much effort. No hunting, no strategizing, no nothing. He's unstoppable and if you are in he proximity of a few square miles you are most likely toast.
It's got to be more challenging for a human character to have a more personal impact. Arnold got up close and personal with Predator. They can't do that here. Naomi Watts got such acclaim because of how she danced around the giant CGI gorilla in King Kong. I didn't think she did anything to spectacular, but being so dynamic with a character so large has to be very difficult for an actor/actress. So because she was relatively successful at doing so, she got recognized.