Godzilla (2014) Reviews/Discussion (1 Viewer)

[Radioman970]

Oh please. Godzilla laughs your puny human weapons. (Except for the Oxygen Destroyer - the only device in 60 years to be worth a damn against him)

I wish I had the action figures and accessories to test your theory. :p

These kinds of discussions take me back... awesome having Godzilla back and better than ever.

 

[Tino]

One little touch I enjoyed on my second viewing was when Cranston and lifeless went back to their house in the quarantine zone and in addition to the Mothra tank there was a shot of a caterpillar crawling over a toy tank. That made me laugh.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

come to think of it... JAWS sucked too because of that.

I guess you're alluding to the slow build to the reveal of the shark. That worked in "Jaws" much better than it does in "Godzilla" because everything else about "Jaws" was so good. The characters were interesting and the story was involving. If "Godzilla" had more interesting characters and story, there'd be many fewer complaints about the "slow reveal".

Brody, Hooper and Quint are all classic movie characters in their own right - "Godzilla" has no one like that...

 

[Tino]

Exactly. And please let's not put Godzilla in the same league as Jaws. Please. For heavens sake. No.

 

[Tino]

What's really amusing to me is considering all the hate the '98 version gets but in the end, it will probably gross more domestically than this new Godzilla. Ha. From boxoffice mojoGodzillaDomestic Total Adj. Gross: $231,356,500Distributor: Sony / Columbia Release Date: May 20, 1998Genre: Sci-Fi Action Runtime: 2 hrs. 20 min.MPAA Rating: PG-13 Production Budget: $130 million

 

[Tino]

Also another interesting article comparing the box-office of the two Godzilla's. http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2013/12/10/trailer-talk-can-godzilla-2014-top-godzilla-1998/From the article:Adjusted for inflation, those numbers would be about $230m domestic and $633m worldwide, and that’s not even accounting for fifteen years of overseas expansion and the 3D and IMAX bumps that of course didn’t exist in 1998. Pacific Rim barely crossed $400m worldwide on a $180m cost yet we may (possibly) get a second go-around there too, although I wouldn’t bet on it unless they can get a major star this time

 

[Brian Dobbs]

6/10

more godzilla, less humans next time

 

[Malcolm R]

I guess you're alluding to the slow build to the reveal of the shark. That worked in "Jaws" much better than it does in "Godzilla" because everything else about "Jaws" was so good.

It was also a happy accident that it happened that way in Jaws. The plan was to feature more of the shark, but when the mechanical shark malfunctioned most of the time, they had to try and figure out how to get by without it (hence why there are so many scenes with yellow barrels, or other stand-ins, rather than shark). Had the mechanics worked properly, the resulting Jaws might have been a very different film.

 

[Radioman970]

I was comparing the style of the 2 films. JAWS retains the high water mark for that style to say the least. However, I thought Godzilla's story was just fine. Not 100%, definite improvement needed. Of course, not all the Godzilla stories have been shining examples of screen play excellence. Erm, maybe none have. lol But it's a very good story that's interesting, gets the monsters in gear, the humans interacting with them... that's all that is needed for me to love it. I found myself anticipating more monster action but not because I wasn't liking the story being told. The '98 was like that much more. Independence Day had better storytelling with better characters than both these Godzilla films. And it also had more action from what I remember. The new Godzilla's was just about right... for me anyway.

It was also a happy accident that it happened that way in Jaws. The plan was to feature more of the shark, but when the mechanical shark malfunctioned most of the time, they had to try and figure out how to get by without it (hence why there are so many scenes with yellow barrels, or other stand-ins, rather than shark). Had the mechanics worked properly, the resulting Jaws might have been a very different film.

One of my most favorite movie facts. Imagine JAWS being more like DUEL.

 

[Corey II]

I really wanted this movie to be something special, but as it turns out, it was very mediocre. Action sequences in movies that take place in the dark and rain are so played out. As a matter of fact, it was never cool with me. I didn't like it in the Emmerich/Devlin Godzilla, didn't like it in Pacific Rim, didn't like it in Wong Kar Wai's The Grandmaster, and I definitely didn't like it in Godzilla 2014. Off the top of my head, the one director who got it right was Christopher McQuarrie with Jack Reacher.

I didn't mind the build up to the eventual reveal of Godzilla, but once he arrives, most of the attention (or focus) should be on Godzilla and not on Aaron Taylor-Johnson.

None of the creature fights were all that exciting. As a matter of fact, as the movie plodded along with each murky and hard to understand monster fight, I kept thinking about how vastly superior Peter Jackson's King Kong is to this recent version of Godzilla. There is not one fight scene in Godzilla 2014 that can hold a candle to the Kong vs the three Vastatosaurus fight sequence in the 2005 King Kong.

 

[Jack P]

This one left Jackson's vanity project in the dust completely. Jackson was out to show how much better he could do the 33 version on all levels, whereas this film just decided to tell its own story without any self-conscious references to the original. Given a choice, I'd rewatch the Godzilla one a dozen times before ever subjecting myself to Jackson and its wretched characters again.

 

[Tino]

IMO, Jackson's King Kong is a modern classic and towers over this Godzilla in every single way. Not even close. King Kong delivered. Godzilla promised. Again, I still kinda liked Godzilla, and I hope the sequel improves upon its positive aspects and potential.

 

[TravisR]

I liked Godzilla but I loved King Kong.

(Is this the new 'LOTR vs. Star Wars prequels'?)

 

[Johnny Angell]

None of the creature fights were all that exciting. As a matter of fact, as the movie plodded along with each murky and hard to understand monster fight, I kept thinking about how vastly superior Peter Jackson's King Kong is to this recent version of Godzilla. There is not one fight scene in Godzilla 2014 that can hold a candle to the Kong vs the three Vastatosaurus fight sequence in the 2005 King Kong.

You and I sure have different definitions of exciting. I thought the creature fights were fabulous and definitely exciting.

This one left Jackson's vanity project in the dust completely. Jackson was out to show how much better he could do the 33 version on all levels, whereas this film just decided to tell its own story without any self-conscious references to the original. Given a choice, I'd rewatch the Godzilla one a dozen times before ever subjecting myself to Jackson and its wretched characters again.

If I could only have PJ's KK or the 2014 Godzilla, I'd choose KK. I like this Godzilla, but really loved KK.

IMO, Jackson's King Kong is a modern classic and towers over this Godzilla in every single way. Not even close. King Kong delivered. Godzilla promised.Again, I still kinda liked Godzilla, and I hope the sequel improves upon its positive aspects and potential.

I liked Godzilla but I loved King Kong.

(Is this the new 'LOTR vs. Star Wars prequels'?)

Where was all this love for KK when it came out? When KK was in the theaters it was picked over mercilessly on the HTF (not by me). Maybe in 5 years this Godzilla will be a classic too?

 

[Tino]

I was raving about it back on 2005. I recall many others too. But as with every film the vocal minority out shouted the quieter majority.

 

[Johnny Angell]

This one left Jackson's vanity project in the dust completely. Jackson was out to show how much better he could do the 33 version on all levels, whereas this film just decided to tell its own story without any self-conscious references to the original. Given a choice, I'd rewatch the Godzilla one a dozen times before ever subjecting myself to Jackson and its wretched characters again.

When I read your comment again, I just had to reply to it. What you took as "self-conscious references" I took as homages to the original. It's no secret that PJ is a big fan of the original KK and was not trying to dethrone it from it's position in American cinema. You are critical because he's trying to improve on the original. I would hope a filmmaker doesn't set out to make a lesser version of a film. I applaud his bravery for doing of remake of an icon, and succeeding, IMHO.

You call it a vanity project. What an ego he must have! I would think that most film directors have an huge ego. You gotta have an ego if you believe you can guide hundreds of people in multiple disciplines to make a film. Every film is a vanity project.

There's a tendency to automatically criticize a filmmaker for doing a remake of a hallowed film. My favorite film of all time is "To Kill a Mockingbird". I would welcome another take on it. If it sucks, so what, we've got the original. If it succeeds than I've got two films to love.

I've got blu rays of both KK's and I watch them both.

I enjoyed the 2014 Godzilla, it's a good film, but PJ's KK is a much better film. All IMHO.

 

[Tino]

Great post Johnny

 

[Jack P]

When I read your comment again, I just had to reply to it. What you took as "self-conscious references" I took as homages to the original. It's no secret that PJ is a big fan of the original KK and was not trying to dethrone it from it's position in American cinema. You are critical because he's trying to improve on the original. I would hope a filmmaker doesn't set out to make a lesser version of a film. I applaud his bravery for doing of remake of an icon, and succeeding, IMHO.

You call it a vanity project. What an ego he must have! I would think that most film directors have an huge ego. You gotta have an ego if you believe you can guide hundreds of people in multiple disciplines to make a film. Every film is a vanity project.

There's a tendency to automatically criticize a filmmaker for doing a remake of a hallowed film. My favorite film of all time is "To Kill a Mockingbird". I would welcome another take on it. If it sucks, so what, we've got the original. If it succeeds than I've got two films to love.

I've got blu rays of both KK's and I watch them both.

I enjoyed the 2014 Godzilla, it's a good film, but PJ's KK is a much better film. All IMHO.

Sorry, but I stand 100% behind my comments. When a film decides its going to try to do the same plot and the same characters as the original but in a "let's top this" way, I don't call that a homage, I call that a case of a filmmaker who lacks the creativity to try and do something different, which at least the much maligned Kong '76 did. I saw F/X sequences that went on forever and ever and ended up boring me to death so much that by the time I knew it was time for the whole spider pit sequence, that was when I decided I could take my trip to the rest room since I knew the storyline wouldn't resume for at least another five minutes. When Kong '33 can tell the same story in far less time and in far more effective fashion, to me that reveals more the faults of the latter. On top of that, his characters are not engaging at all. The biggest mistake is Jack Black's sleazy Denham who doesn't have a single redeeming feature unlike Robert Armstrong's original, yet at the end Jackson decides to still give Denham the closing line and still have him alive? Heck, at least Kong '76 realized at the last minute they needed to give Charles Grodin his ultimate comeuppance. Black shouldn't be alive at the end and in the context of what unfolded his delivery of "Twas beauty that killed the beast" made no sense (yes, I know Jackson wanted to get Fay Wray to cameo to deliver the line but once that wasn't to be, he needed to make sure that having Denham do the line fit with the story which it didn't).

I do not believe in homages that are so overly bloated they only succeed in drawing attention to why the original shouldn't be made bigger and better etc. For Jackson it might have been his labor of love, but for me it was an exercise in excess and wasted hours of my life. That's my view, I make no apologies for it, and I'm sticking to it. I would rather watch Kong '76 again because at least it tries to be something different in its own right.

 

[Tino]

No one has asked you to do otherwise.

 

[Tino]

Back to Godzilla, I must say I'm surprised at how fast it's dropping. Word of mouth must really be hurting it. It may have trouble hitting $200 million. Despite what I thought if it, I really wanted it to be a huge boxoffice hit. Going by the three times rule, it would have to make close to $500 million just to break even. I think in the end it will globally but I was hoping for and expecting more.