Godzilla 2014?

[Serfontein]

So this new Godzilla movie is out in May of this year, the marketing hasn't really started yet so I'd assume most people haven't heard of it unless they've been looking for it.

At the minute fans seem to love this trailer released earlier today, but I'd like to hear what people think who aren't diehard fans.

2nd trailer:

[Guest Atlya]

*facepalm*

[Heart and Mind]

*facepalm*

That's part of the problem of these days, i guess. Ideas run low so they suck the old ones until they fall off.

Anyway, i'm not very into remakes. Let's see how this one turns out.

[Guest Atlya]

That's part of the problem of these days, i guess. Ideas run low so they suck the old ones until they fall off.

Anyway, i'm not very into remakes. Let's see how this one turns out.

Hell-ooooo?!

http://theworstmovie.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/jean-reno-matthew-broderick-godzilla-1998-review.jpg

Thy have ALREADY made a remake of that movie, which already got sucked out of any possible political meanings/satire... WHY make another?! We KNOW that american cinema SUCKS, why add to it?!

[Heart and Mind]

Hell-ooooo?!

Thy have ALREADY made a remake of that movie, which already got sucked out of any possible political meanings/satire... WHY make another?! We KNOW that american cinema SUCKS, why add to it?!

Someone's gotta please the concept of "Pew, Pew! 'Murica".

[Serfontein]

Guys, If you're talking about the 1998 movie.. it was shit and was ruined by the Americans. There are around 30 Godzilla movies made in Japan from 1954 onwards. The original was very dark and was one of the first movies made in Japan after the 2nd world war.

It was the first movie depicting the struggle and human loss after a nuclear strike and due to heavy censorship at the time it was 'concealed' as a monster movie.

I'm trying to illustrate the point that Godzilla runs a lot deeper and has a lot more meaning than what the Americans afforded that 1998 rendition. This newer movie is going back to those roots and should not be compared to or seen in anyway as a counterpart of the 1998 movie.

I don't know if the new movie is good or not I haven't seen it obviously. Just trying to give a better base for opinions to form, however it's good information that the stigma from the last American attempt still runs strong.

Edit: quote from Heart & Mind

"That's part of the problem of these days, i guess. Ideas run low so they suck the old ones until they fall off."

It's an interesting point, but it's actually not the main reason why we get reboots and remakes. Studios are afraid to fail. The Ideas are out there but they are very unwilling to try anything new, they like to stick to franchises that already have a fan group rather than hoping something will do well.

If you look at all the movies that have been remade over the last 10-15 years it's not the movies with interesting ideas and good plots that maybe didn't do so well at the box office and were maybe released at the wrong time. It's the movies that are already proven in the market that are remade and updated for new audiences.

[kastemel]

I am extremely excited for this and all of the buzz around it indicates that they have the right idea. Godzilla represents 2 things to me, the dark horror of the first movie and the campy rockem sockem goofiness of the tokusatsu movies where guys in rubber suits wrestle each other. Pacific Rim scratched the itch for fun goofiness, I'm counting on this new Godzilla to cater to the dark disaster movie side of things. I am fully prepared to take this movie 100% seriously

[Queen Victoria]

It's hard to have a truly original idea. Most good ideas... like, for example, Star Wars, are just a unique assembly of old ideas arranged into something fresh and interesting. The Lord of the Rings is another 'old made new' concept. Tolkien created hobbits, yes, but almost everything else about his world (rings, elves, dwarves, goblins, wizards, etc.) was borrowed from older lore. He just mixed it into something refreshing and different. Much of the best 'great, new' ideas in history fall into this category of the old made new.

The problem is, most people aren't even trying to go that far anymore -- they're content to recycle concepts essentially beat for beat with very little variation. As far as most television and film producers, book publishers, magazine printers, etc. are concerned, as long as a certain amount of time has passed, the very old and worn out can be repackaged, refurbished and resold just so long as it's a bit flashier.

This is bad for our society for two reasons. First, obviously, it's tantamount to a royal screw job for consumers, who have to suckle the bitter teat of this fail machine no matter what it craps out. Second, and more dangerous, is that truly new ideas (actually new, or just 'new' in of as much as Star Wars and LOTR) are systematically muscled out of the picture by 'safe,' reused ideas. I shudder to think of the number of markedly interesting books and films that we will literally never see because Hollywood and big publishing houses are too busy raping pop culture for a cheap buck.

I am extremely excited for this and all of the buzz around it indicates that they have the right idea. Godzilla represents 2 things to me, the dark horror of the first movie and the campy rockem sockem goofiness of the tokusatsu movies where guys in rubber suits wrestle each other. Pacific Rim scratched the itch for fun goofiness, I'm counting on this new Godzilla to cater to the dark disaster movie side of things. I am fully prepared to take this movie 100% seriously

As if I needed more reasons not to like you.

[Jay Rock]

This newest trailer does look intriguing.

What's interesting, and it's something you can kind-of see in a few shots of this trailer, is that Godzilla actually isn't the only monster/kaiju in the movie. He's actually fighting a whole bunch of them, including a flying creature and some sort of spider-like monster, with humanity caught in the middle of the crossfire.

I think that, much like the original '58 movie was about the horrors that could arise from nuclear power, it feels like this one will be about perpetual war alongside normal life, if that makes any sense.

[kastemel]

As if I needed more reasons not to like you.

[The Z]

man this movie needs less Heisenberg, more Ferris Bueller.

[DDSantos]

Honestly? I like the originals and it looks like it could be fun!

that said I'll suspend judgement till I see it

[Duke Nukem]

man this movie needs less Heisenberg, more Ferris Bueller.

....said nobody else, ever.

[Jay Rock]

....said nobody else, ever.

In his defense, that WAS a lot of fish.

[A Saucerful Of Harry]

If you look at the history of Godzilla it's something that has been re-made/rebooted many times so I don't see the big deal in someone wanting to have a serious take on it. I can enjoy a movie that isn't all that original as long as it's made well and this looks like it has been made very well, the cast looks good, Godzilla looks good(from little we see of him), over all this doesn't look that bad.

[Serfontein]

Here, have some facts;

It's actually only been rebooted twice in 60 years; in 1984 and 1999. In Japan there are 3 distinct series Showa, Heisei and the Millennium series. Each series uses the original 1954 movie as it's base, this original has never been remade in Japan. And in that 60 years they made 29 movies.

The 1998 American movie was basically them just doing their own thing with the license and didn't have anything to do with the Japanese productions.

This new 2014 movie is distancing itself from the 1998 movie and is much more like the Japanese movies and I think it still uses the 1954 movie as a base; not sure yet as details haven't been released on that point.

[Batman]

I'm just glad this one is bumping that piece of shit '98 Zilla out of the "mainstream". I hated that movie.

Also, I heard fans were complaining about his roar not being powerful enough in this movie. Really?

[Batman]

It's hard to have a truly original idea. Most good ideas... like, for example, Star Wars, are just a unique assembly of old ideas arranged into something fresh and interesting. The Lord of the Rings is another 'old made new' concept. Tolkien created hobbits, yes, but almost everything else about his world (rings, elves, dwarves, goblins, wizards, etc.) was borrowed from older lore. He just mixed it into something refreshing and different. Much of the best 'great, new' ideas in history fall into this category of the old made new.

The problem is, most people aren't even trying to go that far anymore -- they're content to recycle concepts essentially beat for beat with very little variation. As far as most television and film producers, book publishers, magazine printers, etc. are concerned, as long as a certain amount of time has passed, the very old and worn out can be repackaged, refurbished and resold just so long as it's a bit flashier.

This is bad for our society for two reasons. First, obviously, it's tantamount to a royal screw job for consumers, who have to suckle the bitter teat of this fail machine no matter what it craps out. Second, and more dangerous, is that truly new ideas (actually new, or just 'new' in of as much as Star Wars and LOTR) are systematically muscled out of the picture by 'safe,' reused ideas. I shudder to think of the number of markedly interesting books and films that we will literally never see because Hollywood and big publishing houses are too busy raping pop culture for a cheap buck.

As if I needed more reasons not to like you.

The problem is most "new" ideas don't turn out well, especially money-wise. Old stories have always been recycled. Just look at Greek mythology or Gilgamesh -> Noah's Arc.

I don't have a problem with a reboot if the series usually allows for it and if the previous version could be done better. (The Donner Superman universe comes to mind).

[SayHelloToMyLittleFriend]

I very rarely like remakes, and I have no particular love of this franchise, but I can see it being it a pretty enjoyable film. Far more solid than most Hollywood films.

[caps0rock]

Hey. I hear the dad from Malcolm in the middle :-)

*

But yeah. It looks solid. Looking forward to seeing it.

[A Saucerful Of Harry]

The problem is most "new" ideas don't turn out well, especially money-wise. Old stories have always been recycled. Just look at Greek mythology or Gilgamesh -> Noah's Arc.

I don't have a problem with a reboot if the series usually allows for it and if the previous version could be done better. (The Donner Superman universe comes to mind).

This is true, just because something is new doesn't mean it's good. The problem with Hollywood has more to do with the lack competent filmmakers rather then a lack of originality, I blame this on the over use of CGI, filmmakers are beyond lazy today because half of the damn movie is done for them on a computer screen! Just take George Lucas for example, he was in such awe about how the prequels looked that he completely forgot what made Star Wars a success in the first place and that's and that's the acting and the story.

[Queen Victoria]

This is true, just because something is new doesn't mean it's good.

It doesn't rule out it being good, though. And frankly, given the number of bad unoriginal ideas we've seen over the past two decades, I guess I'd still favor bad new ideas over bad old ideas.

[A Saucerful Of Harry]

It doesn't rule out it being good, though. And frankly, given the number of bad unoriginal ideas we've seen over the past two decades, I guess I'd still favor bad new ideas over bad old ideas.

This is also true, but I do think it's been longer then two decades Queen. The thing is Hollywood runs in patterns, like back in the day cowboys dominated the big screen but now it's all about superheroes, so sooner or later pattern will change again. I think right now we are repeating the 1950's in terms of cinema, in the sense that the movies we have right now are more style over substance with slight variations, hell we even have 3D just like the 1950's.

What I mean about slight variations is that instead of Giant Ant-People from Outer Space we have Avatar, yes one looks a hell of a lot better visually than the other but does that make it any different? The answer is no, both lack any form of real plot or characters and the only reason people are seeing it is for something that looks ''cool'', basically we're stuck in another era of mindless entertainment. Now of course I understand that the monster movies of the 1950's are not the big blockbusters like we have today, but however I'm making this comparison based on the substance of the films, not the success of the films.

Until society gets sick to death of mindless entertainment we won't see a change in the movie industry, then again with that being said both Her and Gravity are original to some extent and have done very well, so maybe the industry is already starting to change a little. I for one hope for not just for original ideas but for the people that can do those ideas justice.

[Jay Rock]

Sorry, have to share this mash-up I found:

[Batman]

This is true, just because something is new doesn't mean it's good. The problem with Hollywood has more to do with the lack competent filmmakers rather then a lack of originality, I blame this on the over use of CGI, filmmakers are beyond lazy today because half of the damn movie is done for them on a computer screen! Just take George Lucas for example, he was in such awe about how the prequels looked that he completely forgot what made Star Wars a success in the first place and that's and that's the acting and the story.

Exactly. Hollywood tried that. They've given guys like George Lucas money in their prime for more original stories. Way too much money in fact , and their ideas didn't pan out and studios lost a ton of money on it.

I can usually tell if a movie will be good or bad from the trailer. This one looks like it'll at the very least be decent, not bad.

At least this one seems to be respecting the source material and not doing things like what the Robocop reboot did.