tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3941063564945505857.post7755633203336981775..comments2023-09-07T04:32:20.653-07:00Comments on Godzilla: King of the Monsters: What Went Wrong With Godzilla 98? - Inside The Mind Of Dean DevlinKen Hulseyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18251290408099991105noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3941063564945505857.post-73858792226740433092010-06-21T00:03:47.170-07:002010-06-21T00:03:47.170-07:00All one needs do is look at the original to see th...All one needs do is look at the original to see the serious intent of the director. The awesome power unleashed on the world through it's own weaponry, the moral imperative to use a forbidden weapon and cost the creator his life, and above all the beast with the single minded purpose to humble puny mankind, and walk through the city, destroying all in it's path. <br /> The model work was convincing, the acting and writing were far above any Godzilla films that have followed. There was none of the accumulated parody that followed in the myriad of sequels. The tone of the original film was solemn. <br /> As a fan, I urge all involved with any current efforts, maintain the original formula of Ishiro Honda and you have a chance at making a memorable movie. CGI could work, even real 3-D. It was Honda's original intent after all to use stop motion, but Whatever you do, it has to look like Godzilla.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08840058865742809588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3941063564945505857.post-61777173496486219762010-05-03T06:25:26.782-07:002010-05-03T06:25:26.782-07:00Funny you mention "blank check". For tho...Funny you mention "blank check". For those who didn't know, the $ amount that Jan De Bont locked-in with ILM& Stan Winston Studios to do the cgi/SPFX for SONY/Tri-Star's GODZILLA in 1994 was rejected at the time. Devlin and Emmerich's final budget ended up going far over that amount. The most painful aspect is that all we got from G'98 was one overgrown iquana, while De Bont's earlier production would have delivered a REAL Big G plus Rossio/Elliott's very inventive Gryphon battling it out for survival in NYC. This article confirms my convictions that Devlin and Emmerich wouldn't know "a really good script" if it sat on them. Good job, Ken.<br />btw: any comments telling me to "get over it". They will fall will on "deaf ears".Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17181934052816659909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3941063564945505857.post-43862810279137918852010-05-01T09:29:41.832-07:002010-05-01T09:29:41.832-07:00I agree with the previous comment - there is a def...I agree with the previous comment - there is a definite difference between two "rainmakers" who reluctantly agree to do a Godzilla movie because the studio keeps offering it to them and a group of filmmakers who aggressively pursued the rights to do a Godzilla film of their own volition. More importantly, Legendary has a good track record of faithful adaptations of existing material. While SUPERMAN RETURNS fails on almost every level (and even it tries to do the right thing), the rest of their franchise/adaptation work has been solid. Their Batman films, though darker and somewhat revisionist, are still clearly "Batman" movies. 300 and WATCHMEN are excellent comic-to-film translations. Just based on their previous efforts alone, I'd say the folks at Legendary aren't likely to make a Godzilla-In-Name-Only.<br /><br />There's also another factor at work here. In '98, Devlin and Emmerich got a blank check (figuratively and literally) from both Sony and Toho, because the suits on both sides of the Pacific were sure they would deliver a hit. This time, that's unlikely to be the case. Toho spent the last decade plus apologizing for/making fun of Sony's faux Godzilla in their own movies. They aren't likely to sign off on anything that wasn't pretty darn close to their original creation. And no American studio wants to repeat Sony's mistakes, at the cost of millions of dollars and quite a few executives' jobs. They all saw the public's reaction to the '98 GODZILLA, which ranged from lukewarm to outright hostile, and they all saw the fallout in corporate Tinseltown. I personally don't believe any major corporation, no matter how desperate for a hit, is going to give the greenlight to a movie called GODZILLA that doesn't at least deliver a reasonable approximation of the iconic titular character to fickle audiences already burnt once by that title.<br /><br />I also believe there's one other thing factoring in here - CLOVERFIELD. The advertising campaign for CLOVERFIELD had many speculating that it was a new Godzilla movie, and that speculation led to a lot of excitement. No doubt, Hollywood took notice of this and realized that despite the relative failure of Sony's 98 film, the American public still craves a big budget, US version of Godzilla, and will still get excited about the prospect if it's dangled in front of them. Just as importantly, many moviegoers were disappointed by CLOVERFIELD, in large part due to the fact that it wasn't a Godzilla movie... which says to the attentive observer that American audiences still want the real thing, not a knockoff (no matter how effective that knock off may be).<br /><br />With all of these lessons to draw from, the folks at Legendary would be fools to try and sell anything other than the genuine article to us. Personally, I can definitely tell the difference between the obligatory lip service paid to Toho by Dean Devlin and the passion and sincerity in the statements made thus far by Legendary. Whether the movie is good or not remains to be seen. But I have little doubt that it will star a monster who looks, acts, and sounds like Godzilla.djkrouskopnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3941063564945505857.post-76092811785830193662010-05-01T02:12:30.554-07:002010-05-01T02:12:30.554-07:00Well, I'll keep my fingers crossed and wait li...Well, I'll keep my fingers crossed and wait like everyone else to see what happens. One thing that really gives me hope is that Legendary wanted to do a Godzilla film and got the ball rolling, someone didn't approach them first. <br /><br />G98, like so many other things (Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, etc.), suffered from a total makeover. If you take a popular old movie/TV show, mold it into something different and then shoot it off in a new direction - it is no longer that special movie/show any more. Better SFX are always welcome but when you take a shows charm away . . . then it's dead.<br /><br />As for the new film: I would want to see something more like a Japanese/American co-production with a mix of CGI and a suit but without the campy scenes. Something comparable FX wise to G2000 with a bigger budget. I think that movie would have been alot better if they just cleaned up the CGI a bit. Maybe G trashes nuke subs/nuke plants on both sides of the Pacific and the JSDF and U.S. military combine to fend him off? He takes out Tokyo and San Francisco in the process. Maybe San Francisco twice . . .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com