Godzilla

This movie is far from amazing, but it doesn't entirely deserve the maligning it gets. Is the pace plodding sometimes? Yes it is, especially in the middle act. Is the script weak? Yes it is rather. Is the direction unfocused? I think so, but it is Roland Emmerich, a director I never found particularly good anyway, that said I actually think it is one of his better directing jobs here. Is the acting bad? Sort of and sort of not. Matthew Broderick is very bland, and his character is poor, same with the female lead whose acting style doesn't belong but Harry Shearer is fun and Jean Reno is surprisingly dignified.

I did love the idea of Godzilla though. There may be the odd hole here and there, but thanks to a quite riveting final half hour especially it remains interesting. The scenery is splendid, the editing is good enough, some sequences are entertaining and Godzilla while different is very well designed. The score is also memorable. And while there are flaws to Godzilla, I couldn't help being entertained. This film isn't Emmerich's best, but contrary to what others might say I don't think it is his worst either. Overall, it has a lot of problems, but I kind of liked it. 6/10 Bethany Cox

"Godzilla" is a great example of a big budget summer movie that doesn't really work. It plays by the big summer movie rules but it misses the mark. The first half of "Godzilla" is very good. But after an hour or so, the story takes a wrong turn. It actually becomes pretty silly for a while. I don't want to say that "Godzilla" wore out its welcome but it is too long by at least twenty minutes. That said, I still enjoyed watching "Godzilla" tonight.

Well, being a longtime fan of the GODZILLA/GOJIRA films as a youngster, I remember seeing this with great anticipation. I, unlike a lot of people, was not at all disappointed. This film was exactly what I was hoping it would be at the time. Sure, it certainly wasn't as charming or as funny as the films I loved as a kid, but it was a lot of fun. I loved the action scenes, the look of the monster was crazy to me, and the plot was simple enough for a first time viewer to get right into. Seeing it again 10 years later, I had the same reaction. My opinion of this film hasn't changed one bit. I guess everybody's complaints stem from how this has no charm or any kind of attempt at being cute or original. I guess that's understandable, but I still don't see what everybody's problem is. This was supposed to be a fun, exciting, and action packed thrill ride. That's all it is, no more, no less. I personally think that it succeeds at what it achieved to be perfectly. Matthew Broderick may not exactly be an action hero, but his character sure was quirky and funny. Jean Reno was as good as usual.

Like many people, I wasn't fond of this when it was first released. Revisiting it now nearly twenty years later I can say my opinion has changed quite a bit. It's still not a great Godzilla movie, at least not how I quantify that, but it is an enjoyable "big monster movie" on its own merits. The special effects are great, the action is pretty well staged, and the music is surprisingly nice. The only real problems for me are that the cast is a little too goofy at times (I think they were going for some kind of Jurassic Park humorous/serious blend) and the movie does run a little long. Overall, though, I think it's an entertaining movie that deserves a second look.

What were some of you expecting? Shakespeare? Tennesee Williams? Its a movie about a giant lizard in New York - just accept it for what it is! Its entertainment and no more - and on that level (at least for me) it works just fine! Its's not "realistic" enough? Again, how realistic is a giant lizard supposed to be? It's a FANTASY movie! Besides, I thought the special effects were pretty impressive! And its not as if the ORIGINAL Godzilla movies were good, with their actors in rubber suits and laughable, ridiculous "monsters" (gamera, mechagodzilla, etc etc)- the Godzilla in THIS movie was an animal, not a monster driven by a need to destroy things! I didn't think Matthew Broderick was bad at all - although I DID find Animal's girlfriend extremely irritating with her shrill voice! Really, I didn't think this movie was bad at all - no, its not a profound meaningful work or art, but then who expected it to be? It's an enjoyable diversion - that's all anyone should expect!