The Star Wars Thread

[J Harker]

Originally Posted by Stephen@Cult Labs

And I still haven't forgiven him (and Warner) for duping us all into thinking Bryan Cranston was the main star of Godzilla.

Hey he's in it more than bloody Godzilla was!

[Stephen@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by J Harker

Hey he's in it more than bloody Godzilla was!

This is very true!

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Is it that bad?

It really doesn't sound great.

I'll stick to the Broderick film then.

[hivemind]

I'll stick to the 1954 Godzilla. I'm all for dodgy effects and a man in a suit throwing a wobbly with toy cars. Beat that Roland Emmerich and Gareth Edwards. Who needs multi-millions when you can have a Godzilla on a budget of £1.50. And japanese actors badly dubbed with American actors to boot. Pure cinematic gold.

[J Harker]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

Is it that bad?

It really doesn't sound great.

I'll stick to the Broderick film then.

The Roland Emmerich version is great in my opinion.

Originally Posted by hivemind

I'll stick to the 1954 Godzilla. I'm all for dodgy effects and a man in a suit throwing a wobbly with toy cars. Beat that Roland Emmerich and Gareth Edwards. Who needs multi-millions when you can have a Godzilla on a budget of £1.50. And japanese actors badly dubbed with American actors to boot. Pure cinematic gold.

Have to admit i don't think much of the '54 film either. Again just not enough actual Godzilla, and to much ficus on trying too get a message across.

[keirarts]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

Is it that bad?

It really doesn't sound great.

I'll stick to the Broderick film then.

Emmerich's version is fun, just not Godzilla.

The design of the new Godzialla in the edwards one is terrific, the main problem is he's barely shown and a peripheral character in his own film. Get the Criterion release of the original and that should do you.

[hivemind]

Originally Posted by keirarts

Emmerich's version is fun, just not Godzilla.

The design of the new Godzialla in the edwards one is terrific, the main problem is he's barely shown and a peripheral character in his own film. Get the Criterion release of the original and that should do you.

Yeah. I suppose it's Edward's trying to be a clever dick director by not showing Godzilla that much. I remember an interview where he tried to justify his decision by using Steven Spielberg's Jaws. Saying that Spielberg didn't show the Great White Shark until mid-way through the picture, but only head shots of the shark above and below the water, and less of the body. Emmerich's version is overly long and the film need's trimming down. There's some decent CGI shots in there, but it's just too looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong. If I was a Sony excecutive at the time of it's release, I would of told him to lose half the picture, and it needed re-editing too. It's longer than Ten Commandments. Lol.

[hivemind]

Originally Posted by J Harker

The Roland Emmerich version is great in my opinion.

Have to admit i don't think much of the '54 film either. Again just not enough actual Godzilla, and to much ficus on trying to get a message across.

Poor Godzilla always looked obese to me. Small head, and one hell of a big arse and gut. In some ways you can understand why they didn't show Godzilla that much. In the Emmerich version, they went for a sort of dinosaur look, totally out of character to the original concept. While the Warner version did keep to the original concept of the beast. But the 1998 version isn't too bad. It's more of a guilty pleasure than anything else.

[J Harker]

Originally Posted by keirarts

Emmerich's version is fun, just not Godzilla.

Thats good enough for me. Its certainly more than can be said for the Japanese original or Gareth Edwards remake.

[J Harker]

Originally Posted by hivemind

Yeah. I suppose it's Edward's trying to be a clever dick director by not showing Godzilla that much. I remember an interview where he tried to justify his decision by using Steven Spielberg's Jaws. Saying that Spielberg didn't show the Great White Shark until mid-way through the picture, but only head shots of the shark above and below the water, and less of the body.

Have you seen Monsters hivemind? From what I've read Gareth Edwards got the Godzilla gig directly of the back of it. Producers liked the idea of a monster flick that barely showed the titular monsters and focused on the human drama with the creatures in the backgrund. While the film is rubbish (because the human characters are so dull and uninteresting and generally unlikeable) i kind of get the idea, but applying that to a Godzilla movie is kind of missing the point. It would be like a Jurassic Park movie that doesn't show the dinosaurs.