फ्रांसीसी परमाणु परीक्षण एक इगुआना को एक विशाल राक्षस में विकिरणित करते हैं जो न्यूयॉर्क शहर के लिए रवाना होता है।फ्रांसीसी परमाणु परीक्षण एक इगुआना को एक विशाल राक्षस में विकिरणित करते हैं जो न्यूयॉर्क शहर के लिए रवाना होता है।फ्रांसीसी परमाणु परीक्षण एक इगुआना को एक विशाल राक्षस में विकिरणित करते हैं जो न्यूयॉर्क शहर के लिए रवाना होता है।
- पुरस्कार
- 10 जीत और कुल 13 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
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!
This is an entertaining movie, so i like it anyway, and if you don't agree then fight me
Greetings from Lithuania.
"Godzilla" (1998) is definitely not a bad guilty pleasure movie. It has pretty good special effects, nice pacing and some good action sequences involving Godzilla himself. Well its not entirely a Godzilla everyone knows, its more of a dinosaur but still its a good looking creature, especially when it interacts with environment (city buildings in this case). The downsides of this movie were pretty lame script at the moments, zero chemistry between Matthew Broderick and Maria Pitillo (and her poor performance as well) and just the look of this movie - literally almost all movie time action takes place at night, sure because its much more easier (and cheaper) to make all the big special effects sequences in a bloody dark, but not so much fun to watch it.
Overall, "Godzilla" is a guilty pleasure. As a pure fun flick it does its job, nothing else and nothing more. A pure guilty pleasure.
"Godzilla" (1998) is definitely not a bad guilty pleasure movie. It has pretty good special effects, nice pacing and some good action sequences involving Godzilla himself. Well its not entirely a Godzilla everyone knows, its more of a dinosaur but still its a good looking creature, especially when it interacts with environment (city buildings in this case). The downsides of this movie were pretty lame script at the moments, zero chemistry between Matthew Broderick and Maria Pitillo (and her poor performance as well) and just the look of this movie - literally almost all movie time action takes place at night, sure because its much more easier (and cheaper) to make all the big special effects sequences in a bloody dark, but not so much fun to watch it.
Overall, "Godzilla" is a guilty pleasure. As a pure fun flick it does its job, nothing else and nothing more. A pure guilty pleasure.
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
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
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThis movie features more Simpson voice actors than any other project besides The Simpsons (1989) itself: Hank Azaria, Harry Shearer and Nancy Cartwright. When the Simpsons later did a Godzilla parody called Homerzilla, they referenced that "Homerzilla" received a Hollywood remake that failed, a jab at this movie. The episode ends stating that Homerzilla will one day return just as soon as that "Zilla" film is forgotten.
- गूफ़Based on the width and depth of the Hudson River, it would be impossible for a Los Angeles Submarine to navigate submerged, let alone make high speed turns.
- भाव
Apache Pilot: [after accidentally hitting the Chrysler Building with a missile, blowing the roof off of it] Aw, damn, uh... That is a negative impact. I repeat, that is a negative impact.
Radio Technician #3: Negative impact, sir.
Mayor Ebert: [shocked] Negative impact? That's the goddamned Chrysler Building we're talking about here.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटA dedication to Godzilla creator Tomoyuki Tanaka appears towards the end of the credits.
- कनेक्शनEdited into अमेरिका में एन्जिल्स (2003)
- साउंडट्रैकHeroes
Written by David Bowie & Brian Eno
Produced by Andrew Slater
Performed by The Wallflowers
Courtesy of Interscope Records
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषाएं
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Godzilla
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $13,00,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $13,63,14,294
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $4,40,47,541
- 24 मई 1998
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $37,90,14,294
- चलने की अवधि2 घंटे 19 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.39 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें