Godzilla

I'm no great fan of summer blockbusters and for sure am resistant to the idea of paying over the odds to sit in a crowded room and be disappointed. This usually sees me picking up with such films when they are cheaper to get on rental and just watch in my own home. With Godzilla I will admit I was tempted to join for the spectacle because in addition to this the film had the appeal of quite a starry cast list in addition to being from Gareth Edwards, the man who famously made Monsters in his bedroom and on the fly. This suggested that perhaps there would be more to it than just effects and big money shots. That said, I had heard negative things and I did approach it with low expectations because after all, it is just a Godzilla movie.

The film does try to create a human story to ground the audience and it casts wisely with Cranston, Binoche, Watanabe, Hawkins and others – all people who have a good presence in front of the camera. I was not to know that so many of the names that drew me to the project would be removed from the film pretty early on – a device that has impact for sure, but doesn't seem particularly brave since one suspects that the reason people like Cranston got onboard was that they were promised a lot for only relatively small parts. This leaves us with Taylor- Johnson and his quest to get home; a quest that never really interested me but at the same time is constantly pushed into the middle of the action no matter what or where it is. This saw my interest in the human side waning as the film progressed, leaving just the action.

On this front the film pushes things as hard as it can. The makers clearly know their action genre because this is a film that understands that soldiers running with guns and speaking in tough military dialogue while music pumps in the background, can grab an audience – so it does it, lots. Considering I didn't care two hoots for them, I was surprised by how much time I spent watching soldiers sweeping areas with guns pointed – it did start to bore after a while. The monsters and their destruction is nicely hinted at first, but eventually the film plays all its cards and we have lots of action and knocking down of buildings. Unfortunately much of it plays out in darkness – something which helps the atmosphere but limits how much can be seen. Technically it looks good and the money is all up on the screen (in the darkness) but it is probably the noise that makes the most impact and even on a lesser system the roars and thuds of the monsters are engagingly meaty.

Unfortunately this is really all that the film does, and it is quite uninvolving and unsatisfying. There is a lot of very good noise and big spectacle, but we have to experience through the human characters who we increasingly do not care about, and when the action really ramps up, it is detached from any sort of reality and I found myself appreciating the technical work rather than getting lost in what could have been dramatic and thrilling. As a blockbuster it probably has enough noise about it to be a distracting two hours if you have a good enough home entertainment value.

Scenario 1: If you are going to see this film because you really enjoy classic Godzilla movies and you hope the music and campy theme of those films are represented in this one, you absolutely should go see it. Godzilla here looks much more like the beloved behemoth than it did in the '98 movie, the music hearkens to the classic Japanese overtures of the old Gojira film era, and the camera work has the comically silly nature of Sam Rami's Spiderman series.

Scenario 2: If you are really excited to see a deep, human film with camera angles and writing that really tell a story that is thematically transcendent such as "District 9" and the Korean film "The Host," this is not your film. The script is filled with overtly simplistic rhetoric and one dimensional characters (intentionally,) the scenes somehow manage to have very little tension (even for me, the pilot episodes for most sitcoms seem more tense than Gozilla,) and as stated above, the camera-work is intentionally hammy. It should also be noted that to add a human element, the director overuses children to the point that it ends up feeling very obvious, as though he did it to be intentionally campy.

Scenario 3: If you are one of those people who really just want a fun popcorn flick such as Pacific Rim, with some solidly choreographed action like in the over-the-top bulletfest Battle:LA, I would say proceed with caution. The fight scenes are less intense and more majestic, like any classic monster movie, and as such the human aspect of the combat is relatively insignificant, less so than any other monster movie I've ever seen. There are no little monsters for anyone to shoot at, if that's your thing.

Scenario 4: If you are interested in this film because you love the talented work of Bryan Cranston, Ken Watanabe, and/or Aaron Taylor- Johnson (three of my favorite actors) and are excited to see what they bring to the table, you should probably sit this one out. Bryan Cranston's role in this film garners far less screen time than advertised, Ken Watanabe spends literally every second walking through the scenes with the pained expression of someone who just walked in on their parents, and all three of the actors give off the vibe that they are very much aware of how cheesy their lines are. Everyone else's performance was similarly forgettable.

Honestly, I'm a stickler for deep, human storytelling, but I've also had a softspot for the classic, silly fun of many Godzilla movies, including my favorite, Godzilla vs. Destroyah. All told, depending on which camp you fall under, this will be an entirely different movie for you. As Godzilla movies go, I'd give it a B. As darker, more serious monster movies go, I'd give it a D+.

I saw the trailers for this a year ago while I attended a screening for Aronofsky's NOAH . I didn't fancy it much . GODZILLA conjures up memories of the big budget blandfest from a decade and a half ago . Just put some CGI on screen and voilà you've a Summer blockbuster . This version did get a very good average rating when it opened , something in the region 8.1 but progressively got lower and it now has a rating of 6.6 indicating something average . To be fair I went in with an open mind and did find myself enjoying things more than I probably expected

The original GODZILLA from 1954 was of a course a Japanese film that used the monster as a metaphor for the bomb . It did quickly abandon this subtext and just became a long running franchise where the titular monster got involved in all sorts of battles with other giant monsters . In its favour Gareth Edwards version of GODZILLA does keep the ethos of this . Radiation is very much to the fore of the story and while Godzilla might not be the hero he's certainly not the villain and this is reserved for "Massive Unidentified Terreistial Organism" a sort of hybrid between a giant praying mantis and a dragon . You know at one point they're going to be meeting in a climatic battle

Of course two hours of giant CGI creatures getting in to a punch up isn't going to resonate with an audience so Edwards includes a very human backdrop as the story takes place through the eyes of serviceman Ford Brody . You got to love that name , it's sounds like a character John Wayne was born to play , a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do , get off your horse and drink your milk etc . It wasn't until I found out after seeing the film that I found out Brody is played by English actor Aaron Taylor-Johnson who I was totally convinced was one hundred per cent Uncle Sam . That said this isn't an actors type of film and I'm speculating that the casting of Cranston and Binoche might have led to the backlash by many people . If you want to see Binoche try not to be blink because you will literally miss her . It's also difficult not to notice that there's a strong streak of manipulation as to how the characters play out . It's also yet another film where a little kid is used in a scene to keep the audiences emotions on tenterhooks

Regardless of this people watch a film like GODZILLA for action set pieces and you can't really fault Edwards for what he's done here . He doesn't have a idiosyncratic quirk to his directorial style and the film does have that kind of Summer blockbuster look but he also previously directed MONSTERS and that movie featured a couple of aliens mating and here the MUTOs have a similar though much more shorter sequence . If you need a film calling for alien reproduction I can see Gareth Edwards being a natural auteur

In 1998, Roland Emmerich attempted to reignite the eponymous film franchise by creating the critically-panned flop 'Godzilla', 16 years on and we are now faced with one of the best adaptations of the iconic monster's adventures. Gareth Edwards created 'Monsters' in 2010 on a mere budget of £500,000, barely 4 years on and Warner Brothers offered him the chance to create a $160 million adaptation of 'Godzilla'. All the aspects from 'Monsters' are employed in this action/sci-fi adventure, but on a much grander scale. This is a treat for all Godzilla fans and a very respectable adaptation that stays true to the 1950s Japanese classic rather than wandering away like Emmerich's one did. Packed with stunning cinematography, vast special effects and a sweeping spectacle of giant monster battles, 'Godzilla' has been a fantastic start to 2014. Bryan Cranston and Aaron Taylor-Johnson's performances are outstanding and there is a certain chemistry that makes their relationship that bit more believable. Whilst at time there are some cheesy and over-the-top scenes, 'Godzilla' is nonetheless an enjoyable action romp that restores the franchise's original glory.

Oh, the trailers looked so good. I had hope, and, for the most part, my only criterion was that it be better than Pacific Rim, Hollywood's attempt at the kaiju genre last year. I liked that one, but was disappointed (with Guillermo del Toro, I expected something with a little more meat). Godzilla does not clear that hurdle. It has the same major problem that all these kinds of films do: the human element is lacking. Severely here. And what a fantastic cast to waste! Bryan Cranston, Juliette Binoche, Sally Hawkins, David Strathairn, Elizabeth Olsen, Ken Watanabe! Every single one of them utterly wasted. Hopefully they all got a big check. We have all these people, but instead we're saddled with charisma black hole Aaron Taylor-Johnson (of Kick-Ass fame), who isn't even adequate. Thankfully, the big monster fights deliver, for the most part. There could maybe be more monster action, but when it's there, it's a lot of fun. I also thank the filmmakers for restraining themselves and keeping the film at only two hours (it runs a tad over that if you stay through the credits).