"Little pay off at the end"
Are you shitting me, Joe?
Should've been a harsher review. I don't know why people would find much engagement in this movie beyond the fairly short fight sequences. And maybe a bit of Bryan Cranston.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;44849124]Should've been a harsher review. I don't know why people would find much engagement in this movie beyond the fairly short fight sequences. And maybe a bit of Bryan Cranston.[/QUOTE]
Maybe because...I don't know... ITS THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER MADE?!?!?!1111
ITS GORDZIRRA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and he was godzilla... I mean!!! GODZILLA
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;44849124]Should've been a harsher review. I don't know why people would find much engagement in this movie beyond the fairly short fight sequences. And maybe a bit of Bryan Cranston.[/QUOTE]
Are you seriously saying "Why do people find this fun" in a movie.
What the fuck.
-snip-
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;44849134]Are you seriously saying "Why do people find this fun" in a movie.
What the fuck.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I guess I'm kinda saying that. If you're lusting for Godzilla action there wasn't much, if you were lusting for a great plot and great acting, there are way better movies out there.
Like, I'm not opposed to people having fun with this movie, but I must say that I can't understand it when it could easily have been much better. What did you like about the movie?
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;44849161]Yeah, I guess I'm kinda saying that. If you're lusting for Godzilla action there wasn't much, if you were lusting for a great plot and great acting, there are way better movies out there.
Like, I'm not opposed to people having fun with this movie, but I must say that I can't understand it when it could easily have been much better. What did you like about the movie?[/QUOTE]
This movie had more Godzilla action than any other Godzilla movie, considering it all ???
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;44849161]What did you like about the movie?[/QUOTE]
It's a Godzilla movie. I've waited 10 years for one. It had a [sp]Brilliant payoff at the end of the film. I felt that the story was presented really well, and the special effects were amazing. The performances by Wantanabe and Cranston were top notch[/sp]
I liked it, because I liked it.
[editline]19th May 2014[/editline]
You might not understand it, but when it's been [B]10 years[/B] since the last one, it might be rose tinted glasses but goddamn if I didn't have a great time and absolutely love it.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;44849161]Yeah, I guess I'm kinda saying that. If you're lusting for Godzilla action there wasn't much, if you were lusting for a great plot and great acting, there are way better movies out there.
Like, I'm not opposed to people having fun with this movie, but I must say that I can't understand it when it could easily have been much better. What did you like about the movie?[/QUOTE]
and by "easily be better" in your eyes you're talking another million or so dollars put into the movie, a longer production time, and less acting.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;44849176]It's a Godzilla movie. I've waited 10 years for one. It had a [sp]Brilliant payoff at the end of the film. I felt that the story was presented really well, and the special effects were amazing. The performances by Wantanabe and Cranston were top notch[/sp]
I liked it, because I liked it.[/QUOTE]
I get that you've waited a long time for it, and while Ken Wantanabe and Cranston's performances might've been top notch, the whole script was a bunch of schlock.
[sp]I must admit that I like the Godzilla fight itself, and some of the shots were pretty cool - so were the special effects. But there was way too little actual "Godzilla-fight", and way too much mediocre acting and bad writing for my taste. If the script had been better, I would probably not care about the lack of Godzilla (considering I've never really watched this kind of film), but the film dragged on for way too long, with nothing much of substance actually happening. [/sp]
Have you waited so long that you might not care much about the quality of the film anyway? Because otherwise I would be very disappointed, if I were you.
[editline]19th May 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;44849186]and by "easily be better" in your eyes you're talking another million or so dollars put into the movie, a longer production time, and less acting.[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty certain that the budget was more than adequate - the film looks amazing.
I'm not asking for less acting, but when it's acting (and lines) of this quality, I'd much rather have the monster fight on-screen.
The [sp]atomic breath[/sp] scene was easily one of the greatest payoffs I've ever seen in a movie.
While I do agree that having Ken Watanabe and Bryan Cranston as the leads would have been better, people who were expecting constant monster fights and action sequences probably aren't really familiar with past Godzilla films.
I saw the movie high as fuck, so I thought it was great
Agreed. A lot of the older godzilla movies had normal scenes in between showing kaiju that felt like they lasted centuries. Even Final Wars wasn't non-stop monster action
I find it really annoying when people go "there's not much godzilla! they focus on the human characters too much!" and shit like that when [I]that applies to every fucking japanese godzilla movie ever made.[/I] I've watched two Godzilla movies that have Godzilla have less than half the screentime he gets in this movie and with much shorter fights.
Yeah, people are talking shit about how this Gojira movie is unfaithful...guys, this is exactly how every Japanese Gojira movie was, 95% boring human shit, and 5% Godzilla tearing through cardboard. This movie is a whole lot better due to the fact that there's less humans & more Godzilla and you slightly give a shit about the humans (Bryan Cranston & Kick-Ass)
[QUOTE=Dub!;44849274]I saw the movie[B] high as fuck[/B], so I thought it was great[/QUOTE]
Why the fuck do we need to know you were high when you saw the movie, what difference does it make?
In all honesty, [sp]there was less human development than the original 1954 Gojira, which in my opinion was a tad disappointing.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Mio Akiyama;44849449]Why the fuck do we need to know you were high when you saw the movie, what difference does it make?[/QUOTE]
he smokes weed lol, hehehehe, he's so cool
I saw this movie genuinely excited to see it.
It got really boring really fast for me. Every character was so dull and even Bryan Cranston could barely pull any weight with the lines given. It was pretty obvious he was a bait and switch to get people who otherwise wouldn't have gone to go like me.
My theater clapped twice for it..... Which blows my mind cause this film at best is average.
The whole time I wished I was watching Pacific Rim.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;44849124]Should've been a harsher review. I don't know why people would find much engagement in this movie beyond the fairly short fight sequences. And maybe a bit of Bryan Cranston.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Tudd;44849725]The whole time I wished I was watching Pacific Rim.[/QUOTE]
you see this is the kind of thing that disappoints me because expectation has ruined this film for some people and it shouldn't have
i think too many people, especially those in the nerdy forum communities, expected this film to be some epic action movie full of huge fightscenes and loads of action like pacific rim and therefore they were let down
thing is tho, pacific rim is a cult movie. it's fairly niche. most people don't want to watch ridiculous over-the-top tongue-in-cheek action scenes for 2 hours. the average movie-goer, whether they know it or not, likes human elements
for me i think godzilla did really well to nail that. it was very spielberg-esque. in jurassic park the dinosaurs probably have like 30 minutes total screentime and that's all they need - the film isn't about dinosaurs, it's about people overcoming adversity. in godzilla the adversity is much more and involves more people so there's more human elements to the film. also in general giant monsters just don't hold audiences that well because they're just not human enough - they're fucking huge on an unimaginable scale. because of that they're not very scary because they're so unrealistic. there's a reason why the raptors in jurassic park tend to be thought of as way scarier than the trex (hence why they get way more screentime) and why cloverfield has the lice in it. the way the trex is used so sparingly in jurassic park i think is another parallel to how sparingly the monsters are used in godzilla
that said, the filmmakers did really well to make godzilla very human, especially when compared to what most western audiences expect of godzilla because of that terrible giant dinosaur film where he wrecks new york city just to be a dick
the original ethos behind godzilla is a lot deeper than "a big action film with big monsters and fights" and some of that has been represented in this 2014 reimagining
if you want to watch loads of action scenes between giant monsters n stuff then that's fine but you should probably watch pacific rim. i get why you'd be disappointed by godzilla but i think it's pretty weak to be like "the film wasn't good because it wasn't what i wanted" - the filmmakers set out to make a modern spielbergian monster flick, not a niche b-movie homage, and they did that pretty well
Remember that Gojira was originally an anti-nuclear film.
He was the embodiment of atomic weaponry and the devastation that the bomb had on Hiroshima/Nagasaki. The classic image of him towering over the burning Tokyo skyline was recreated on firsthand accounts of survivors from the firebombing back in 1945.
Gojira wasn't just some sci-fi film. It was a political movie at heart. His screentime is actually LESS than the 2014 film. He was a monster, a threat, and one that PEOPLE had to overcome, not just military buff.
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;44849893]you see this is the kind of thing that disappoints me because expectation has ruined this film for some people and it shouldn't have
i think too many people, especially those in the nerdy forum communities, expected this film to be some epic action movie full of huge fightscenes and loads of action like pacific rim and therefore they were let down
thing is tho, pacific rim is a cult movie. it's fairly niche. most people don't want to watch ridiculous over-the-top tongue-in-cheek action scenes for 2 hours. the average movie-goer, whether they know it or not, likes human elements
for me i think godzilla did really well to nail that. it was very spielberg-esque. in jurassic park the dinosaurs probably have like 30 minutes total screentime and that's all they need - the film isn't about dinosaurs, it's about people overcoming adversity. in godzilla the adversity is much more and involves more people so there's more human elements to the film. also in general giant monsters just don't hold audiences that well because they're just not human enough - they're fucking huge on an unimaginable scale. because of that they're not very scary because they're so unrealistic. there's a reason why the raptors in jurassic park tend to be thought of as way scarier than the trex (hence why they get way more screentime) and why cloverfield has the lice in it. the way the trex is used so sparingly in jurassic park i think is another parallel to how sparingly the monsters are used in godzilla
that said, the filmmakers did really well to make godzilla very human, especially when compared to what most western audiences expect of godzilla because of that terrible giant dinosaur film where he wrecks new york city just to be a dick
the original ethos behind godzilla is a lot deeper than that and some of it has been represented in this 2014 reimagining
if you want to watch loads of action scenes between giant monsters n stuff then that's fine but you should probably watch pacific rim. i get why you'd be disappointed by godzilla but i think it's pretty weak to be like "the film wasn't good because it wasn't what i wanted" - the filmmakers set out to make a modern spielbergian monster flick, not a niche b-movie homage, and they did that pretty well[/QUOTE]
I hated the new Godzilla because it lacked good characters. I also thought the action scenes were fairly boring too, but they did their job for the most part.
I actually wanted a film that focused more on humans reacting to such events. Instead it was mostly horribly dull lines from actors who seemed to barely act.
[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;44849279]Agreed. A lot of the older godzilla movies had normal scenes in between showing kaiju that felt like they lasted centuries. Even Final Wars wasn't non-stop monster action[/QUOTE]
Exactly. We were watching quite a few Godzilla movies at work the past couple months. The actual battle scenes with Godzilla were fairly spread out, with tons of screen time devoted to human characters (or Godzuki).
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;44849893]you see this is the kind of thing that disappoints me because expectation has ruined this film for some people and it shouldn't have
i think too many people, especially those in the nerdy forum communities, expected this film to be some epic action movie full of huge fightscenes and loads of action like pacific rim and therefore they were let down
thing is tho, pacific rim is a cult movie. it's fairly niche. most people don't want to watch ridiculous over-the-top tongue-in-cheek action scenes for 2 hours. the average movie-goer, whether they know it or not, likes human elements
for me i think godzilla did really well to nail that. it was very spielberg-esque. in jurassic park the dinosaurs probably have like 30 minutes total screentime and that's all they need - the film isn't about dinosaurs, it's about people overcoming adversity. in godzilla the adversity is much more and involves more people so there's more human elements to the film. also in general giant monsters just don't hold audiences that well because they're just not human enough - they're fucking huge on an unimaginable scale. because of that they're not very scary because they're so unrealistic. there's a reason why the raptors in jurassic park tend to be thought of as way scarier than the trex (hence why they get way more screentime) and why cloverfield has the lice in it. the way the trex is used so sparingly in jurassic park i think is another parallel to how sparingly the monsters are used in godzilla
that said, the filmmakers did really well to make godzilla very human, especially when compared to what most western audiences expect of godzilla because of that terrible giant dinosaur film where he wrecks new york city just to be a dick
the original ethos behind godzilla is a lot deeper than "a big action film with big monsters and fights" and some of that has been represented in this 2014 reimagining
if you want to watch loads of action scenes between giant monsters n stuff then that's fine but you should probably watch pacific rim. i get why you'd be disappointed by godzilla but i think it's pretty weak to be like "the film wasn't good because it wasn't what i wanted" - the filmmakers set out to make a modern spielbergian monster flick, not a niche b-movie homage, and they did that pretty well[/QUOTE]
Couldn't have said it better myself. The movie was paced and balanced well. I believe with the segmented moster scenes, that built up for a much better payoff in the end. If you had a camera looking at my face in the theater, right when Godzilla used his atomic blast, the blue light illuminated my face and I was smiling hypnotically like a little kid again. It was like watching Godzilla again for the first time and I think that is what the director really wanted people to feel.
I didn't go see this for a Pacific Rim competitor, I wanted to see a fucking GODZILLA movie. I am happy to say that is exactly what I saw.
The movie was beautiful to me. I love the idea of mainly focusing on the people during a monster event rather than the monsters themselves, which is one of the reasons why I adore Cloverfield. And the times when it DOES focus on Godzilla, my fucking god. Hell yeah.
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;44849893]you see this is the kind of thing that disappoints me because expectation has ruined this film for some people and it shouldn't have
i think too many people, especially those in the nerdy forum communities, expected this film to be some epic action movie full of huge fightscenes and loads of action like pacific rim and therefore they were let down
thing is tho, pacific rim is a cult movie. it's fairly niche. most people don't want to watch ridiculous over-the-top tongue-in-cheek action scenes for 2 hours. the average movie-goer, whether they know it or not, likes human elements
for me i think godzilla did really well to nail that. it was very spielberg-esque. in jurassic park the dinosaurs probably have like 30 minutes total screentime and that's all they need - the film isn't about dinosaurs, it's about people overcoming adversity. in godzilla the adversity is much more and involves more people so there's more human elements to the film. also in general giant monsters just don't hold audiences that well because they're just not human enough - they're fucking huge on an unimaginable scale. because of that they're not very scary because they're so unrealistic. there's a reason why the raptors in jurassic park tend to be thought of as way scarier than the trex (hence why they get way more screentime) and why cloverfield has the lice in it. the way the trex is used so sparingly in jurassic park i think is another parallel to how sparingly the monsters are used in godzilla
that said, the filmmakers did really well to make godzilla very human, especially when compared to what most western audiences expect of godzilla because of that terrible giant dinosaur film where he wrecks new york city just to be a dick
the original ethos behind godzilla is a lot deeper than "a big action film with big monsters and fights" and some of that has been represented in this 2014 reimagining
if you want to watch loads of action scenes between giant monsters n stuff then that's fine but you should probably watch pacific rim. i get why you'd be disappointed by godzilla but i think it's pretty weak to be like "the film wasn't good because it wasn't what i wanted" - the filmmakers set out to make a modern spielbergian monster flick, not a niche b-movie homage, and they did that pretty well[/QUOTE]
Sorry, but I honestly had very, very few expectations going to the theater. I've never seen a Godzilla film, and my friend just kinda said "Hey, let's go see Godzilla". I watched the trailer, and Bryan Cranston was in it - he's a great actor, so obviously I expected him to do some acting.
I haven't seen Pacific Rim, and while I was expecting action, I in no way oppose human elements. The problem with this film wasn't that it had human elements, it was that they simply didn't work. The characters were not believable, the script wasn't very good, and overall I think the actors contributed very little to the film.
I like films with humans elements, and I'd rather have them than extreme action, but the acting and the lines in this movie simply weren't good enough to pull off the human element. I'd actually like to see some people feeling some kind of emotion in relation to the monster crisis going on, but there's no such scene to be found in the movie. Just having people in there isn't necessarily "human elements" - you need to actually portray people in order to have that.
Therefore, I'd rather see more Godzilla in this movie - or maybe they could've shortened it down a bit. I'm a sucker for extended editions, but this is one of those movies where I can honestly say that it felt its length.
Anyway, anyone remember that scene [sp]where the main character points his pistol at one of the Mutos while being cornered on the boat? Then Godzilla sweeps down and kills the monster? I was really reminded of that scene from Saving Private Ryan where Tom Hanks is shooting at the tank and then it's blown up by the airplane. [/sp]
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;44849176]It's a Godzilla movie. I've waited 10 years for one. It had a [sp]Brilliant payoff at the end of the film. I felt that the story was presented really well, and the special effects were amazing. The performances by Wantanabe and Cranston were top notch[/sp]
I liked it, because I liked it.
[editline]19th May 2014[/editline]
You might not understand it, but when it's been [B]10 years[/B] since the last one, it might be rose tinted glasses but goddamn if I didn't have a great time and absolutely love it.[/QUOTE]
I liked the film but you can't say Watanabe had a good performance.
He had the same expression on the entire film and did virtually nothing.
If you want to see a Godzilla fan's take on the pros and cons of the film, check out this video by Matt of Two Best Friends Play
[video=youtube;fpn0G0I5Za4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpn0G0I5Za4[/video]
and by James Rolfe: [url]http://cinemassacre.com/2014/05/17/godzilla-2014-thoughts/[/url]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;44850068]Anyway, anyone remember that scene [sp]where the main character points his pistol at one of the Mutos while being cornered on the boat? Then Godzilla sweeps down and kills the monster? I was really reminded of that scene from Saving Private Ryan where Tom Hanks is shooting at the tank and then it's blown up by the airplane. [/sp][/QUOTE]
yeh i thought that. like it was so reminiscent it almost seemed like a nod to that film
actually there you go there's yet another link to a spielberg film
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
