BoxOfficeZ Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Godzilla sucked. Good night now. Baumer's departure. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mulder Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 So at my local AMC theater Godzilla didn't lose many screens to X-Men: DoFP if any at all. If anything TASM2 is suffering the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Godzilla sucked. Good night now. baumer on this thread 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoxOfficeZ Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 So at my local AMC theater Godzilla didn't lose many screens to X-Men: DoFP if any at all. If anything TASM2 is suffering the most. Yet another 50%+ drop this weekend in store for TASM2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mulder Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Yet another 50%+ drop this weekend in store for TASM2? At my theater it only has 4 showings this weekend. 2 in 3D and 2 in 2D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a2k Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) I don't mind the Godzilla screen time being less. Yes, in Jaws and Alien, the shark and the alien have less time too. However, they are always present, as in the story revolves around them. Even in their physical absence, they are what's pushing the story ahead. In Godzilla, for a large part it's about the MUTOs being at the center. Godzilla, not in physical presence, just in the story, is relatively sparsely present. MUTOs carry the story ahead(Eg: Cranston and his wife saga ) for a large part. Again, I did not mind that, but there's a fair bit of difference between less screen time of the creature in Jaws or Alien vs Godzilla. I would have said the same thing if JP was titled 'T-Rex'. I would still love the movie, but the tile would be a little misleading in a way that 'Jaws' and 'Alien' is not. Edited May 21, 2014 by a2k 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mulder Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 All Godzilla lost was two 2D showings funny enough. We'll see how it stands next week when Maleficent shows up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfirebird2008 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 So at my local AMC theater Godzilla didn't lose many screens to X-Men: DoFP if any at all. If anything TASM2 is suffering the most. I would expect that to be the case. Generally a movie is guaranteed a certain screen count for the first two weeks. After that, all bets are off. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I don't mind the Godzilla screen time being less.Yes, in Jaws and Alien, the shark and the alien have less time too.However, they are always present, as in the story revolves around them. Even in their physical absence, they are what's pushing the story ahead. In Godzilla, for a large part it's about the MUTOs being at the center. Godzilla, not in physical presence, just in the story, is relatively sparsely present. MUTOs carry the story ahead(Eg: Cranston and his wife saga) for a large part.Again, I did not mind that, but there's a fair bit of difference between less screen time of the creature in Jaws or Alien vs Godzilla. I would have said the same thing if JP was titled 'T-Rex'. I would still love the movie, but the tile would be a little misleading in a way that 'Jaws' and 'Alien' is not.Difference is Jaws had compelling human characters and the creature was kept off screen to build suspense and fear since we are supposed to fear the creature in that movie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I'll be back later. but I did reply. Non-action spectacle: the discovery of the bones and the hidden chamber. - Come on now. LOL I don't get this. Are we supposed to discount something just because no one's fighting or stuff's blowing up? It was a neat sequence. It was well designed and well put together. Classic old-school filmmaking, what's not to like? Action: the first MUTO reveal in Japan. If I'm not mistaken it took a long time between this and this. From here on out it was great still messy with the cut aways. 5-10 minutes is a long time? The whole movie's only two hours. The cutaways weren't messy at all: there was a very specific intention to show the MUTOs from a human perspective (and our means of transmitting information). Action: The MUTO attacking Honolulu. Spectacle: Godzilla coming ashore in Hawaii. Spectacle: the MUTO rampaging through Vegas. Action: the bridge sequence- with the train? yes agree. But there was a lapse between this and this. Again, it's not a particularly long time and I've certainly never argued that the film is non-stop action. Of course it isn't. But even in the downtime there are great little touches to keep the thing going, thin characters or not: Godzilla leading the fleet like he's the lead battleship and so on. Action: The Golden Gate and the arrival of Godzilla in SF. ....do I need to go past there? Well no because the movie was damn near over. For another half hour, you mean. Which is a quarter of the movie dedication to full on chaos, destruction, and multiple creature-on-creature and creature-on-building attacks.... all done impeccably. That's not counting the first immediate action-y crisis involving Cranston and Binoche (which I found fairly silly. Fun, but silly.) I'll reiterate that IMO the only thing keeping this from being a modern classic in every sense of the word are the thin characters. So yes, of course they knock the overall rating down a bit. But so much of the film was so well done and so well put together. "Majestic" is a good word for it. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Difference is Jaws had compelling human characters and the creature was kept off screen to build suspense and fear since we are supposed to fear the creature in that movie Of course, that's the difference between this and an all-time classic. Yes, categorically JAWS is a better movie than GODZILLA. But 99.99% of all genre movies fall short in that comparison, so I don't find it particularly meaningful. G14 is better than most genre movies these days. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfirebird2008 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 It's far easier to fear a huge Great White like in JAWS, since they do exist at that size VS A fictional monster that's 350 feet tall and doesn't exist in the real world, Oscar winning human performances or not.. This is a weak excuse. Gojira in the 1954 film was truly terrifying, and that was with a dude in a suit instead of state of the art CGI. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 This is a weak excuse. Gojira in the 1954 film was truly terrifying, and that was with a dude in a suit instead of state of the art CGI. I didn't find BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA particularly scary, but it's still a spectacular piece of genre filmmaking (even with the woeful Keanu moments.) 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a2k Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) Of course, that's the difference between this and an all-time classic. Yes, categorically JAWS is a better movie than GODZILLA. But 99.99% of all genre movies fall short in that comparison, so I don't find it particularly meaningful. G14 is better than most genre movies these days. It was as good as Pacific Rim imo. The difference was that PR knew itself. GZ tried very hard to be above PR but did not succeed. I did not care for any of GZ's character any more than I cared for PR's. But PR sold itself like that from the first scene, while GZ tried very hard to get me to care. Action and spectacle was an A-grade romp in both. Edited May 21, 2014 by a2k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) Godzilla is a totally average and forgettable movie . Not as good as it should have been. People aren't complaining because of lack of action. They are complaining because 1. The human "drama" was dull as shit, 2. The lead actor was awful and 3. Godzilla was a guest star. An honest title for the movie would be MUTOs The movie began with Godzilla, spent the entire movie showing the effect of Godzilla and the MUTOs and then ended with Godzilla. The movie was about Godzilla as shown through the eyes of humans, so basically a true Godzilla movie. If it doesn't deserve to be called Godzilla then none of the other Godzilla movies should be given that title either. Edited May 21, 2014 by Telemachos 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoxOfficeZ Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) The movie began with Godzilla, spent the entire movie showing the effect of Godzilla and the MUTOs and then ended with Godzilla. The movie was about Godzilla as shown through the eyes of humans, so basically a true Godzilla movie. Welcome to the forums Caesar! Edited May 21, 2014 by Telemachos 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) The movie began with Godzilla, spent the entire movie showing the effect of Godzilla and the MUTOs and then ended with Godzilla. The movie was about Godzilla as shown through the eyes of humans, so basically a true Godzilla movie. The movie showed Godzilla in brief snippets in the opening credits then focused on the MUTOs for about an hour before Godzilla is finally even mentioned the first time Edited May 21, 2014 by Telemachos 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecstasy Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Non-action spectacle: the discovery of the bones and the hidden chamber. - Come on now. LOLI don't get this. Are we supposed to discount something just because no one's fighting or stuff's blowing up? It was a neat sequence. It was well designed and well put together. Classic old-school filmmaking, what's not to like? Action: the first MUTO reveal in Japan. If I'm not mistaken it took a long time between this and this. From here on out it was great still messy with the cut aways. 5-10 minutes is a long time? The whole movie's only two hours. The cutaways weren't messy at all: there was a very specific intention to show the MUTOs from a human perspective (and our means of transmitting information). Action: The MUTO attacking Honolulu. Spectacle: Godzilla coming ashore in Hawaii.Spectacle: the MUTO rampaging through Vegas.Action: the bridge sequence- with the train? yes agree. But there was a lapse between this and this. Again, it's not a particularly long time and I've certainly never argued that the film is non-stop action. Of course it isn't. But even in the downtime there are great little touches to keep the thing going, thin characters or not: Godzilla leading the fleet like he's the lead battleship and so on. Action: The Golden Gate and the arrival of Godzilla in SF. ....do I need to go past there? Well no because the movie was damn near over. For another half hour, you mean. Which is a quarter of the movie dedication to full on chaos, destruction, and multiple creature-on-creature and creature-on-building attacks.... all done impeccably. That's not counting the first immediate action-y crisis involving Cranston and Binoche (which I found fairly silly. Fun, but silly.) I'll reiterate that IMO the only thing keeping this from being a modern classic in every sense of the word are the thin characters. So yes, of course they knock the overall rating down a bit. But so much of the film was so well done and so well put together. "Majestic" is a good word for it. Okay i'm on the train and i can barely type on his bootleg tablet you reecommended. But i'll be back later..Non-action spectacle: the discovery of the bones and the hidden chamber. - Come on now. LOLI don't get this. Are we supposed to discount something just because no one's fighting or stuff's blowing up? It was a neat sequence. It was well designed and well put together. Classic old-school filmmaking, what's not to like? Action: the first MUTO reveal in Japan. If I'm not mistaken it took a long time between this and this. From here on out it was great still messy with the cut aways. 5-10 minutes is a long time? The whole movie's only two hours. The cutaways weren't messy at all: there was a very specific intention to show the MUTOs from a human perspective (and our means of transmitting information). Action: The MUTO attacking Honolulu. Spectacle: Godzilla coming ashore in Hawaii.Spectacle: the MUTO rampaging through Vegas.Action: the bridge sequence- with the train? yes agree. But there was a lapse between this and this. Again, it's not a particularly long time and I've certainly never argued that the film is non-stop action. Of course it isn't. But even in the downtime there are great little touches to keep the thing going, thin characters or not: Godzilla leading the fleet like he's the lead battleship and so on. Action: The Golden Gate and the arrival of Godzilla in SF. ....do I need to go past there? Well no because the movie was damn near over. For another half hour, you mean. Which is a quarter of the movie dedication to full on chaos, destruction, and multiple creature-on-creature and creature-on-building attacks.... all done impeccably. That's not counting the first immediate action-y crisis involving Cranston and Binoche (which I found fairly silly. Fun, but silly.) I'll reiterate that IMO the only thing keeping this from being a modern classic in every sense of the word are the thin characters. So yes, of course they knock the overall rating down a bit. But so much of the film was so well done and so well put together. "Majestic" is a good word for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoxOfficeZ Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) The movie showed Godzilla in brief snippets in the opening credits then focused on the MUTOs for about an hour before Godzilla is finally even mentioned the first time Godzilla not being on screen doesn't mean he's not there. If the T-Rex or shark wasn't on screen through the whole film does that mean they aren't part of the story till the end? I swear people don't understand off screen presence. In the old Godzillas throughout the first half of most films he's mostly not there, does that mean the film doesn't revolve around Godzilla (On a side note, watched Godzilla versus King Ghidorah and Godzilla doesn't even show himself till the end of the film to kick Ghidorah's ass, it was mostly Rodan and Mothra). Edited May 21, 2014 by BoxOfficeZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) We've incepted ourselves, E. Between us, that quoted chunk is a hot mess. Let's start fresh. Edited May 21, 2014 by Telemachos 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
