Japan Says America's Godzilla is Too Fat
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
wtf thick neck?
Since this Zilla is probably a mutation of a ground dwelling lizard like this one http://www.sunda-islands.com/img/NTT/NTTKOM-waran.jpg i can only say: thick neck not surprising?
Since this Zilla is probably a mutation of a ground dwelling lizard like this one http://www.sunda-islands.com/img/NTT/NTTKOM-waran.jpg i can only say: thick neck not surprising?
I've never understood that, I quite liked the '98 Godzilla, heck it was far better than most of the old movies, the creature actually moved and looked like a giant lizard stomping through the city. Story was good enough for a monster smashing everything movie. Guess I missed something with the older Godzilla's as I never watched them, the whole standing upright firing lasers etc of the older movies just didn't sit right with me, the '98 one atleast kept it looking and feeling plausible.Olas said:
Look, like I said to the other guy I get that you are not a fan, if you were you would realize that it isn't just an aesthetic issue, the 98 movie had absolutely no thematic semblance to the rest of the Godzilla franchise, and while it may have been an average monster movie it was a shitty Godzilla movie, to the point where the creators should have called it something other than Godzilla. The 98 movie was to the Godzilla franchise, what the 93 Mario movie was to the Mario franchise.immortalfrieza said:
And if we are going to talk about a bit about aesthetic, which as I mentioned is not that important, but anyway. Godzilla's origin is of a radiological disaster giving birth to a mutated and disfigured biological hazard, in other words, Godzilla shouldn't look natural or animalistic, but twisted and mutated, his very body even goes through a meltdown in one of the movies. He is supposed to be an embodiment of a Nuclear bomb, not an oversized Iguana.
As for the 98 movie itself, IMO it was below average, on the same scale as Independance day, complete with some of the worst and cheesiest dialogue ever, and way too much time spent on the thoroughly uninteresting Dr. Nick. It spends way too much time going through the relationships of the characters, and genre-wise the movie is more related to disaster movies like Volcano or The day after tomorrow than. Pacific Rim was a much better spiritual successor to the genre, as it stuck to themes and style of the a monster movie.
The 98 movie made a ton of money due to effective marketing, I remember "size matters" poster being everywhere. However it was universally panned as a bad movie, and despite having sequals planned and even hinted at, the creators chose not to make one, due to the bad reception and even let the licence expire and even admitting in retrospect that they "blew it". My point is that I am not alone, neither as a fan or an average movie-goer in thinking the 98 movie was bad, so bad that it didn't catch sequelitis.
The rubbersuit movies on the other hand spawned 27 sequels, from 1954 to the 2000's
Has no one else noticed the worst part about this particular article?
The news these days, they'll reach for any pathetic headline and pass up the real important issues.
MovieBob misspelled Bryan Cranston's name. Surely this is a more important story than some fat Japanese lizard!MovieBob said:
The news these days, they'll reach for any pathetic headline and pass up the real important issues.
Hey I thought he looked fat well before this article got published, and nobody gave a fuck about my opinion.
Must be a slow news week if they're digging through YouTube comments. If that's the case, why not do an article on that Facebook post I made on the Asian Trailer that has 3500 likes....
I AM a fan of Godzilla, which is why I cared enough to comment to begin with. I don't care at all where Godzilla was supposed to have come from (BTW, being a mutated creature from a radiological disaster is just one out of countless origins for the various Godzillas) or how many movies the old rubber suit Godzilla was in, he still looked terrible as a rubber suit and far better as the 98 CGI monster and that's what Godzilla should look like an actual living reptilian creature regardless of his origins. I mean, I don't see anybody whining about the fact that in the Alien movies the Queen looks smaller and sleeker now that they no longer use puppeteers to operate it and use CGI for it now. The plot and the characterization of the 98 movie was bad, but it's Godzilla was far better in every possible way than anything the Japanese have ever come up with.O maestre said:
Okay, I'll bite, here are some ways the "plausible" argument falls flat. Ever see this video?immortalfrieza said:
A realistic '98 Zilla would be doing an impression of that because its posture is front-heavy as hell and that tail would do bugger-all to help balance it out because it's too short. Then there are Zilla's legs. The dinosaurian build they have not only goes against his iguana origins, but would snap like a fucking twig. New Godzilla has similar features in his legs, but they are barely noticeable, because whatever changes he underwent were towards coping with his massive size. On that not, when designing a giant monster to be remotely believable, you want to put most of its mass towards its legs, you want a mountain, not a balloon. If Zilla had legs like the Vastatosaurus Rex in King Kong 2005 I would be more willing to accept it. As it stands, Zilla's body has shitty support in those legs. With all this said though how about we drop it and move on because any more derailing and Spider-Man is going to turn up.
It doesn't matter how plausible any of the Godzillas actually are, but that they look real. The rubber suit Godzilla looks like exactly that, a guy in a rubber suit. The 98 Godzilla looks like what a humongous lizard creature probably would look like, even if ultimately such a creature could not really exist it looks like it could, and that's all that matters.cojo965 said:
As a lifetime Godzilla fan...I actually think this is one of the best Godzilla designs we've had. Is it the best ever? No, of course not.
But compared to that weird cat faced Godzilla we've had, it's hardly the worst. I know some people are on him about the thick neck, but I actually really like that. I think it makes him look sturdier and quite a bit more intimidating. In some depictions his neck is so skinny it feels disproportional to the rest of his body.
Besides, why should it matter what "A Japanese Commenter" says about the new Godzilla. Toho themselves already admitted they liked it and the movie itself.
Honestly, what other source of information do you need that the new one is gonna be good when you've got the people who invented and built the character up for 50 years have given it the thumbs up?
But compared to that weird cat faced Godzilla we've had, it's hardly the worst. I know some people are on him about the thick neck, but I actually really like that. I think it makes him look sturdier and quite a bit more intimidating. In some depictions his neck is so skinny it feels disproportional to the rest of his body.
Besides, why should it matter what "A Japanese Commenter" says about the new Godzilla. Toho themselves already admitted they liked it and the movie itself.
Honestly, what other source of information do you need that the new one is gonna be good when you've got the people who invented and built the character up for 50 years have given it the thumbs up?
So your point is basically CGI>rubbersuits, and not Jurassic Park reject>classic Godzilla?immortalfrieza said:
Yeah sure graphically it is better no doubt CGi looks better on the screen than props, I however thought we were discussing aesthetics. So just to be clear, do you think that the new CGI fat zilla is a better looking than both the rubber suit and the 98 version?
Your example with Aliens is perfect, nobody whined about the Alien monster, precisely because they kept the style and aesthetic of the puppets as they moved to CGI, side by side you would recognize the CGI and the suit alien as the same creature. The 98 Zilla looks totally different side by side the original, hence why I don't like it. The new 2014 CGI Godzilla looks aesthetically similar to the rubber suit version, and fits with the style of the franchise.
"better in every possible way" is a stretch too far for me.
Oh, of course a ton of people beat me to it. I think this guy is confusing big with fat. The original (post the first movie) version was fat and pear shaped. These new ones are just massive.1nfinite_Cros5 said:
Ohhh yeah! Look at that thin, sexy hunk of scales!
Personally, I'm not sure what size I want Godzilla to be. I think he's a bit too massive in the movie. Too impersonal. Something more in the middle that looks more vulnerable but is still unstoppable would be preferred. But whatever, at least it's a movie.
Stop calling the 98' US Zilla 'a lizard.'
It looked like a dinosaur. Wasn't it supposed to be a mutated lizard or something? And not a giant chicken?
I don't think it becoming more anthropomorphic makes much sense either, but at least it looks less like a dinosaur.
It looked like a dinosaur. Wasn't it supposed to be a mutated lizard or something? And not a giant chicken?
I don't think it becoming more anthropomorphic makes much sense either, but at least it looks less like a dinosaur.
Honestly, how can Japan expect a good Godzilla movie if they keep putting him down? He might get really self conscious about his weight and not leave the ocean for fear of ridicule. Leaving us at the mercy of the Mutos.
If the Japanese are complaining then maybe they should make their own new Godzilla film.. like they did right after the 1998 american Godzilla film... or maybe Godzilla's been eating too many americans.. and there are a lot of fat americans (not me, I watch what I eat).. tell him to start eating Japanese people again..