Unpopular Movie Opinions: Part III

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by dvining

I've never liked Godzilla. The original (Japanese version) is a boring slog of a monster movie knee deep in dull convention except for the attack on Tokyo with is amazing. It's also less than five minutes of the total movie.

The only one I've liked is the 2014 American Godzilla, and that was just pretty good.

The entire franchise (Godzilla, beginning in 1954) began as social commentary on the usage of atomic bombs, evolved into Godzilla becoming "the children's friend" and ended up sparking kaiju wanna-bees on Japanese/American TV (Ultraman, The Space Giants, Johnny Sokko, Gigantor, etc.). It's also been "rebooted" several times, The Return Of Godzilla (Godzilla '85) and Godzilla 2000 prior to the aforementioned Godzilla (2014). And don't forget the USA-only version of Godzilla in 1998 with Matthew Broderick and Jean Reno. Shin Godzilla was an attempt to reset the legend in Japan again in 2016 and is probably the closest redo of the vision of the Honda original.

You also cannot ignore the influences the franchise has had on recent TV such as Super Sentai/Power Rangers.

[levcore]

The 3 Monster Verse movies leading up to the new one are all excellent.

[AreaFive]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

The entire franchise (Godzilla, beginning in 1954) began as social commentary on the usage of atomic bombs, evolved into Godzilla becoming "the children's friend" and ended up sparking kaiju wanna-bees on Japanese/American TV (Ultraman, The Space Giants, Johnny Sokko, Gigantor, etc.). It's also been "rebooted" several times, The Return Of Godzilla (Godzilla '85) and Godzilla 2000 prior to the aforementioned Godzilla (2014). And don't forget the USA-only version of Godzilla in 1998 with Matthew Broderick and Jean Reno. Shin Godzilla was an attempt to reset the legend in Japan again in 2016 and is probably the closest redo of the vision of the Honda original.

You also cannot ignore the influences the franchise has had on recent TV such as Super Sentai/Power Rangers.

The social commentary really interests me. I have Shin Godzilla but haven't watched it yet. I'm particularly interested in the fact that it's something of a commentary on the government's handling of Fukushima Daiichi.

[dvining]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

The entire franchise (Godzilla, beginning in 1954) began as social commentary on the usage of atomic bombs, evolved into Godzilla becoming "the children's friend" and ended up sparking kaiju wanna-bees on Japanese/American TV (Ultraman, The Space Giants, Johnny Sokko, Gigantor, etc.). It's also been "rebooted" several times, The Return Of Godzilla (Godzilla '85) and Godzilla 2000 prior to the aforementioned Godzilla (2014). And don't forget the USA-only version of Godzilla in 1998 with Matthew Broderick and Jean Reno. Shin Godzilla was an attempt to reset the legend in Japan again in 2016 and is probably the closest redo of the vision of the Honda original.

You also cannot ignore the influences the franchise has had on recent TV such as Super Sentai/Power Rangers.

This defense of a movie as "important" because it has large cultural cache always misses the point.

I don't like it. I think it's a bad movie and an uninteresting franchise.

That it was popular enough to inspire countless sequels, ripoffs, and memes doesn't influence my opinion of the original film at all.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by AreaFive

I rented both Godzilla 2014 and King of the Monsters and didn't finish either one. They're entirely sufficient, I guess? They just didn't seem to hold my interest for some reason. Skull Island was entertaining (although much of the acting seemed extremely phoned in) at least and has an excellent Atmos mix.

Maybe they're just not for me.

Originally Posted by dvining

King of the Monsters is one of the most boring things I've ever sat through. Skull Island was dull, though John C. Reilly was pretty much the only actor who knew what kind of movie he was in.

I think it appeals to people who really just want genre thrills and nothing else. They kind of zone out in between the action beats, and then they get all excited for the big special effects showcases.

Different strokes.

....and that's exactly it!
First of all, place yourself in the actors shoes, regardless of how talented you are it's HARD to act to a character who isn't there while you're filming. Some can pull it off, others cannot.

Second, aren't MOST movies of this type about the CGI/special effects over substance/plot? Notice how you can take each Michael Bay Transformer movie, insert a Godzilla/Kong in it's place and it really doesn't change the point of the movie?
What made the Godzilla franchise "spoil" in Japan in the first place was NOBODY was interested in giant monsters fighting when men were accomplishing what they were in outer space. They even HAD the monsters go THERE as a plot device and involving evil aliens to boot!

Third, these were nearly "perfect" drive-in fare in the 60's and perhaps early 70's. First time I saw KK vs. Godzilla was on a double-bill at a drive-in with KK Escapes.

[Show spoiler] By the time Kong had defeated Mechi-Kong,

my brother and sister and I were dead tired and slept in the car on the way home!

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by dvining

This defense of a movie as "important" because it has large cultural cache always misses the point.

I don't like it. I think it's a bad movie and an uninteresting franchise.

That it was popular enough to inspire countless sequels, ripoffs, and memes doesn't influence my opinion of the original film at all.

...and again, that's fine. The "thing" about artistic impression is it DOESN'T effect everyone the SAME way, nor does it appeal to everyone either. But the mere fact that it HAS created such influence and "buzz" if you will, is a testament to its longevity and survival and I'd like to think approval by a large section of fandom.....otherwise this franchise would have died-on-the-vine LONG already!

Not EVERYONE loves Star Trek, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park or (insert your favorite franchise here)...but they DO each have enough support and fans to maintain each occurrence.

[John1701D]

Rampage > KotM

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by AreaFive

The social commentary really interests me. I have Shin Godzilla but haven't watched it yet. I'm particularly interested in the fact that it's something of a commentary on the government's handling of Fukushima Daiichi.

For good reason.... the disaster at Fukushima was eerily similar not only to the bombings of Hiroshima/Nagasaki, but also the more recent accident at Chernobyl.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by John1701D

Rampage > KotM

I haven't seen Rampage, so I cannot comment.

[dvining]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

...and again, that's fine. The "thing" about artistic impression is it DOESN'T effect everyone the SAME way, nor does it appeal to everyone either. But the mere fact that it HAS created such influence and "buzz" if you will, is a testament to its longevity and survival and I'd like to think approval by a large section of fandom.....otherwise this franchise would have died-on-the-vine LONG already!

Not EVERYONE loves Star Trek, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park or (insert your favorite franchise here)...but they DO each have enough support and fans to maintain each occurrence.

I really don't get your point.

You're not arguing the movie's merits. You're arguing public perception of the movie. We're talking about different things.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by dvining

I really don't get your point.

You're not arguing the movie's merits. You're arguing public perception of the movie. We're talking about different things.

You prolly should read my earlier comments then....

It's not in MY place to argue or question a film's merits. I see each film as artistic impression. Just because MY vision contradicts what the directors vision is doesn't make it a "bad film". If I wanted MY vision "out there" I'd make my own film!

[dvining]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

You prolly should read my earlier comments then....

It's not in MY place to argue or question a film's merits. I see each film as artistic impression. Just because MY vision contradicts what the directors vision is doesn't make it a "bad film". If I wanted MY vision "out there" I'd make my own film!

So, why talk about movies at all?

[HipsterTrash]

Originally Posted by dvining

I've never liked Godzilla. The original (Japanese version) is a boring slog of a monster movie knee deep in dull convention except for the attack on Tokyo which is amazing. It's also less than five minutes of the total movie.

The only one I've liked is the 2014 American Godzilla, and that was just pretty good.

Originally Posted by dvining

King of the Monsters is one of the most boring things I've ever sat through. Skull Island was dull, though John C. Reilly was pretty much the only actor who knew what kind of movie he was in.

I think it appeals to people who really just want genre thrills and nothing else. They kind of zone out in between the action beats, and then they get all excited for the big special effects showcases.

Different strokes.

I can't agree with your statement on Godzilla. I love the original and it's a genre changing film.
But I do agree with the take on Godzilla '14 and the rest of the series. The first film in the MV works like the original film. Gareth Edwards knew that it was better to show less.
Kong: Skull Island sucks. People go on how it's fun but I've seen it 4 times and I still can find anything outside of of Reilly and Miyavi that's good.
I know Vogt Roberts said he wanted to do a comedy about those two of their time on the island and that sounds way better than what we got.
The less said about Godzilla: King of the Monsters, the better. Dougherty has so much promised with his debut film but his last two films have been disappointments.
I like most of Wingard's films but I have no faith in Godzilla vs Kong.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by dvining

So, why talk about movies at all?

Movies are "art" and art is going to effect each person differently. You can "look" at a painting and appreciate its artistic vision, but you wouldn't pay a $1 to display it in your home. I see movies/film in the same light.

A film doesn't have to appeal to me for me to see its significance or its place in history. I can appreciate the artistic vision and effort in films like "The Birth Of A Nation" by D.W. Griffith and "Bloodsucking Freaks" when both of these would likely offend the masses today. I don't dismiss any film made as useless or unnecessary.

[Foggy]

Rampage was dire.

Skyscraper was unfairly overlooked.

[HipsterTrash]

Originally Posted by dvining

I think it appeals to people who really just want genre thrills and nothing else. They kind of zone out in between the action beats, and then they get all excited for the big special effects showcases.

Different strokes.

I always thought a movie about how Godzilla affects different people in different countries differently would be interesting. Like how Godzilla affects one countries economy while he affects the land of another (obviously). It could look at how the environment is messed up because of him and how there are crazy cults built around him.
I don't know. It just sounds different and something I like to see.

Originally Posted by AreaFive

The social commentary really interests me. I have Shin Godzilla but haven't watched it yet. I'm particularly interested in the fact that it's something of a commentary on the government's handling of Fukushima Daiichi.

Shin Godzilla is bonkers. Not the best but I saw it in theaters with subs. It's a movie designed for dubs since there is other text on screen. It seems more designed for Japanese speakers.

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by HipsterTrash

I can't agree with your statement on Godzilla.
Kong: Skull Island sucks. People go on how it's fun but I've seen it 4 times and I still can find anything outside of of Reilly and Miyavi that's good.
.

I've never understood posts like this... if it sucks-- why have you watched it 4 times?

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by HipsterTrash

Shin Godzilla is bonkers. Not the best but I saw it in theaters with subs. It's a movie designed for dubs since there is other text on screen. It seems more designed for Japanese speakers.

Yet, in Japan, critics selected it as Picture of the Year & Director Of The Year in 2016. Needless to say, Godzilla has more cultural impact in Japan more than anywhere else.

[tjritter79]

Originally Posted by HipsterTrash

Gareth Edwards knew that it was better to show less.

A lesson obviously learned from Spielberg when he made Jaws. By the time we get to "I think you need a bigger boat" the film is in its second half. More terrifying theatrically when you show less and it builds more suspense.

[HipsterTrash]

Originally Posted by tjritter79

Yet, in Japan, critics selected it as Picture of the Year & Director Of The Year in 2016. Needless to say, Godzilla has more cultural impact in Japan more than anywhere else.

That. But I meant how on screen it's nothing but text. You're reading what characters are saying, what's being said on a radio, maybe something else another character is saying along with text about said character's title and name on screen. It's a flurry of a film.

Originally Posted by AKORIS

I've never understood posts like this... if it sucks-- why have you watched it 4 times?

Because I saw it twice in theaters with different friends. Thought I'd like it after each attempt. At home tried once more myself and then finally showed the gf the MonsterVerse movies.
I believe in that if there's something there, it's possible I missed something and I wasn't in the right headspace.