'Godzilla' from 1998

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I do happen to love the design of Tatopolous's Godzilla. Whether or not a person considers it to be "Godzilla" or not it is a great design for a giant monster. I loved it so much I bought a giant version of it!

Although I am excited about the new Legacy adaptation of Godzilla I do wish the 98 version had had a sequel because it was such an excellently designed creature.

Oh no! Gojira and Zilla are attacking the Enterprise! Shields to maximum!

Don't worry. Even if you stack them they'll still be dwarfed by Shatner's ego.

I'm rather concerned for original Godzilla's virtue, there.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I do happen to love the design of Tatopolous's Godzilla. Whether or not a person considers it to be "Godzilla" or not it is a great design for a giant monster. I loved it so much I bought a giant version of it!

Although I am excited about the new Legacy adaptation of Godzilla I do wish the 98 version had had a sequel because it was such an excellently designed creature.

Oh no! Gojira and Zilla are attacking the Enterprise! Shields to maximum!

'Who gave those Gorn the steroids?'

 

[Christopher]

Anyway, aren't those toys out of proportion to one another? I checked the Godzilla Wiki, and it says Gojira and Zilla are about the same size range, variously 50-80 meters for the former (larger in later films), and around 50-70 m for the latter (inconsisently shown in the movie). And what we're seeing of the Enterprise saucer there should be nearly 30 meters at its greatest visible thickness. So that would make Gojira here around 120 m tall and Zilla nearly twice that. Clearly there's some kind of spatial anomaly at work here.

 

[lennier1]

^^ Why do I suddenly have to think of the scene in Armageddon, where the dog gnaws on a toy Godzilla?

(Hint: Both movies came out in 1998, hence the in-joke.)

 

[FordSVT]

...it just didn't feel like it captured the true heart of transformers. some of the scenes were just out of place, like bumblebee takin' a leak on the guy, which is something the original would have never done.

That kind of thing is, you know, discouraged on kiddie TV - somewhat surprisingly, as the target audience would probably appreciate it more than most.

Nonetheless, that doesn't mean it's a bad idea in a movie.

I just had a thought: if that kind of thing shouldn't have been in the movie because the original would never have done it, does that mean they could have put anything in the movie that they did? Because there are some messed up scenes in the original cartoon. Would you have approved of the Transformers "getting down" with Ravage and Razorbeak at a high school dance, for example?

People like to take what they remember about that (alternately great and terrible) cartoon and idealize it, and then use that as the base to criticize the movies. It's a bit amusing. I was a gigantic Trans fan (I was 7-10 years old when they were at their peak in the 80s), and I tried re-watching the original series a couple of years ago. The first season and original arc are quite good, and there are some good episodes in the second season and then later on in the series, but there are vast swathes of absolute shit so be seen. It's not as bad as Voltron, for example, I tried watching that too and after about three episodes I realized it's the same damned show over and over again with slightly different dialogue.

 

[ReadyAndWilling]

is there still a sequel coming out?

 

[Hartzilla2007]

is there still a sequel coming out?

No. They are however doing another unrealted U.S. Godzilla film in 2012. This time hopefully using the atomic fire breath.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

And a monster that actually looks and acts like Godzilla.

 

[Pingfah]

I know nothing about Godzilla beyond the big budget movie, which I thought was a steaming pile of shit.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

And a monster that actually looks and acts like Godzilla.

That too.