HOME | DD
SydSilco — G'94p-79
Published: 2013-02-08 21:54:13 +0000 UTC; Views: 1414; Favourites: 38; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Here's how that line version got used for the G'94 gn.It took a while for them to clean up this mess in San Francisco...
Related content
Comments: 36
It's sad that this is the Godzilla movie that should've been in 1998, and it was dropped for Roland "AKA-the-motherfucking-douchebag-that-shall-be-remembered-as-the-guy-who-buttraped-Godzilla's-name" Emmerich's crappy, disgraceful and unfaithful version.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I'm with you dude, Roland Emmerich's worse than Michael Bay, He called his movie Godzilla, knowing that people would recognize the name, yet instead of showing them what they were expecting, he showed them an Iguana instead? He thought he could convince everyone that his monster was Godzilla, even though he used his name for recognition so wouldn't that mean the audience would know what Godzilla looked like? IT'S STUPID, STUPID, STUPID, STUPID, STUPID, STUPID, STUPID, STUPID, STUPID, STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, it was just a big radioactive lizard.
If someone hears "big radioactive lizard" the first thing that comes to mind is godzilla, even if the creature dosn't even look like this.
From a certain point of view, it was just logical to name the movie as it is.
And image this: if the move would have had NOT be named "Godzilla" then i bet people would have start saying "Hey, that's a big lizard, that was created through radiation. That's just like Godzilla!"
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
First of all, Godzilla's a dinosaur not a lizard, dinos are more related to birds, Second of all, that's not what people would've said, they aren't going to compare an Iguana to Godzilla no matter how big or mutated it is, they're actually going to say "Why does that Iguana walk like a t rex" and "This movie is awful! It doesn't even follow it's Bull crap rules!" and "What? Male Iguanas can lay eggs, let alone asexually!" and "This is a Jurrasic park ripoff!" Don't believe me? Then why not watch the Nostalgia Critic review it, he's not a G fan, and even he hates this movie.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I did saw the NC's review and surely i can not agree. But that's not a suprise. I often have trouble to agree with Doug, even though i like to watch his videos. They are mostly quite amusing and i admit he has a point most of the time.
Also, as the first Godzilla movie was relased back in 1954, people still thought of dinosaurs to be just big lizards. "Science marches on" does not aply here. And about the Jurassic Park ripoff: That movie had NOTHING in comparison with Jurassic Park. Nothing at all.
For me, it's just one major proof, that many bashers are a bunch of trolls, that only "hate" the 98 movie because that Godzilla (yes, i dare to call him that) dosn't look like a guy in a rubber suit and that the movie was, at least regarding the durability of a certain big creature against armed forces, a bit more realistic.
Don't get me wrong: i do know most of the japanese movies and i also like the most of them. And still i see mistakes in them. But that dosn't stop me from liking the movies anyway.
Same with the american one. It is not perfect, but i still like it.
And most important: even though the similarity in name, i do not compare them with each other. That's just stupit. I accept them as they are and i am fine with it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You do realize that Roland Emmerich himself said that he regretted directing the remake and that he didn't care about Godzilla at all and also used this movie as an excuse to insult Siskle and Ebert right? Also, not only is this movie insulting to the franchise, but it's also insulting to Tomoyuki Tanaka, Ishiro Honda (Godzilla's creators) and all of those people who died from radiation poisoning fron the Hydrogen bomb after World War two, I'm not being a troll, I was just so angry to see my childhood raped and thinking about Tanaka rolling his grave. I'm just glad that this movie never got a sequel and that Gareth Edwards is going to be faithful to the franchise when he releases his movie in 2014.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What the hell are you talking about? Are you insane? How is this movie an insult against people who died because of radiation poisioning? Explain this to me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The original 1954 film was made to illustrate the death toll of nuclear warfare, and the first scene of that film was illustrating how the H bomb radiation poisoned the crew members of the lucky dragon boat near the Himigami Islands. The whole reason for Godzilla's existence was a comment of how destructive the atomic bomb is and how so many people died from that. Godzilla is the Bi product of mankind's mistakes and that they have to live up to said mistakes, he's not supposed to be the villain of a dumbed down disaster movie, he's not supposed to be ignored in favor of a poorly written love sub plot, and most of all he's not an Iguana!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Of course. But i still don't get it how the other movie is insulting.
Plus, in the 98 version, Godzilla was certanly NOT a villain (watch GMK, there he is one), it was rather portrait as an animal, that simply trys to live but due to the changes the bomb cast on it, he simply could not. Actually: this Godzilla was just another victim of the atomic bomb.
Also, as we later "learned" from the japanese movies , Godzilla mutated from a damn dinosaur. Now what's more illogical: having a creature that should be extinct for more then 65 million years, or an actuall animal, that mutates into something much bigger?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Nobody cares if the monster's realistic, in fact that's way Emmerich's movie failed, Godzilla's not a mere animal, he's a force of destruction, how would you feel if you're country was bombed and we decided to make a movie to illustrate that, and then another country makes a terrible remake of that without giving the people that died any recognition? We want Godzilla to attack a city, but not by accident like an innocent creature, we want him to attack a city on purpose, we want him to breath fire at the army, we want him to knock buildings down with his claws and tail, we want him to trample on people, monster movies don't have to be realistic, like Dracula turning into a bat, try to explain that (no rhyme intended) One more thing, if this movie is supposed to be caring to the innocent, then why did Audrey ignore the fact that dozens of people were reported killed on the news and instead focus on Matthew Broadrick?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
i tried to reason but i see it dosn't work. Very well then. If you like to keep your hate just like a klingon then so be it
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You know, I'm sorry, you were right that I have to move on, I'll let it go and pretend this movie doesn't even exist, is that okay?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
And that's where you're wrong in all accounts.
1. TriStar's movie is considered an insult to Toho and the fans because it disrespected the source material it was based on. Roland Emmerich went as far as admitting that he never liked Godzilla, that means he never watched ONCE a Godzilla film. Why do you think he said he regrets directing that movie? Because he hates anything that has to do with Godzilla.
2. The monster in that movie is not Godzilla, it's called Zilla. And yes, "Zilla" is now the official name and trademark of the beast, and it applies to ALL incarnations, that includes the '98 incarnation as well, Why? Because it did not resemble the original Godzilla in any way.
3. The "realistic" argument is a big pile of bullshit. Godzilla was never meant to be portrayed as an animal, he was meant to be portrayed as a symbol of the destructive force of nuclear weapons and unstoppable forces nature. Making Godzilla as just an animal goes against everything the character was meant to be, that role of "just an animal" goes to King Kong, who really IS just a misunderstood animal. The original Godzilla is realistic be of representative symbolism and the two questions "what IF Godzilla was real?", "how DO we deal with such a thing?", the realistic scenario would be that people would go into panic, a city would be turned to ground zero, thousand of lives dead or dying of radiation poisoning in a hospital, the streets of what used to be a city would be filled with radiation, the government would be involved in this situation and spends millions to billions of dollars to stop a beast that cannot be killed, and the economy would collapse after a failed attempt to stop Godzilla. GINO (referring to the '98 movie title) did not show any of that realism, the streets of New York were not filled with radiation even when it showed that Zilla was clearly mutated by nukes, the city was still standing in the end of the movie, (aside from the military) nobody died by radiation poisoning, the list goes on, and it goes against everything the original Godzilla stood for, and I really don't give a shit if you have a problem that Godzilla is mutated from a 65 million year old dinosaur, that's how the character has been officially established, and it's certainty better than a stupid iguana. Also, the argument that Zilla "is more realistic because it's CGI" is also another pile of bullshit, it's a stupid illogical and invalid argument at best, it doesn't matter that Godzilla is portrayed in any effect, what matters is that the character is portrayed correctly and properly with respect, and TriStar did not do that, they just shit on the source material.
4. If you watched the NC review, Critic compared the scenes with the baby Zillas with the raptors from Jurassic Park back to back, and seeing those sequences back to back, THE MOVIE DID RIP-OFF JURASSIC PARK, YOU DUMB APE!!! What are YOU smoking that makes you this ignorant enough to see that the movie DOES rip-off Jurassic Park, I have no clue, but you sure as hell suffered too much brain damage from it.
5. The concept of "big radioactive lizard" can be ANYTHING outside of Godzilla, it could be the Rhedosaurus from "Beast from 20,000 Fathoms", it could be Ymir from "20,000 Million Miles to Earth", it could be almost anything beside Godzilla.
6. We G-fans hate the movie because of the fact that not only it raped our childhood, it's because it disrespected the source material, and Toho hates the movie as well. Two Godzilla suit actors commented on the movie and they expressed the same thing "It's not Godzilla".
The movie isn't considered as a Godzilla movie, no matter what's your excuse, you can sure as hell ask Toho, and they can definitely tell you it is not a Godzilla movie because it lacks the spirit of the original. The '98 kaiju is renamed Zilla, and that's the trademark it'll permanently carry with. Here's a few links to get yourself educated.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ9Y74…
www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtpPfh…
youtu.be/f-ozgwzIF2U
And links from Wikizilla. BTW, Wikizilla is a 100% reliable wiki page, there's no fan biased info, it's all actual information with reliable sources.
godzilla.wikia.com/wiki/Godzil…)
godzilla.wikia.com/wiki/Zilla
godzilla.wikia.com/wiki/The_Zi…
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
I agree with everything you said, not that this movie was alive to me to begin with, but this movie is dead to me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i tried to reason but i see it dosn't work. Very well then. If you like to keep your hate just like a klingon then so be it
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
One more thing, there's only one Godzilla and the one from 98 is not him, your argument is invalid.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don't see them both as "the same". For me, they are very much different from each other.
Two different beeings, that just share the same name.
You will properly find a handfull of people who have the same name like you, but are not even remotely similar to you
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Last time I checked, Godzilla is not a person, he's a trademarked monster, keywords Trademarked and monster.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, how cute, you think I'm wrong and that you're smart, well I'm just glad the real Godzilla killed Zilla in Godzilla final wars.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
What's the point? You can't change other people's opinions, statements, thoughts, how to express, how they feel about it or way of thinking just because you don't like how others do so, you have to shut up, suck it up, and deal with it. We hate the movie, and its director, for very good, and justifiable reasons, why do you have to be such a bitch about it, I have no idea. All I know is that you should shut up and let us spit on Emmerich in peace. I don't care if it's 15 years since the movie's release, just leave us alone with another word from you, we don't need you here.
BTW, just because the majority of fans (like myself) heavily bashes TriStar's movie, with very good reasons, in a manner that YOU don't agree with, doesn't mean it gives you the right to call us trolls, if anything, calling fans "trolls" for expressing their thoughts makes YOU look like one. So, I guess so far, you've been the one acting like a troll.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hey that's a good point, Myuutsuu85 here is acting like a troll!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh, I forgot to mention in #3 is that TriStar never said they were going to make a "realistic" approach with the character, they originally said they were going to make it like the picture you see here. That invalid argument is also full of 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
By the way, if the 1998 film was supposed to be realistic, wouldn't New York be flattened and poisoned with radioactivity? That's what happened in the 1954 film we Godzilla fans know and love.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
it's 15 years since then. It's time to let go and move forward.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, um, how about a "I DON'T CARE!!!", you leave me alone, let me bash that horrible sack of monkey scrotum and the talentless Nazi who directed it as many times as I wish, and I'll get over it after the new movie comes out and people forgets about that stinking pile of kaiju
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
you have some serious problems. Ever thought about searching professional help?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh that's cute, you think I'm some kind of crazy ass psycho, huh? Listen, pal, I don't care who you are, what you do or what you say, if some of us wants to continue bashing that worthless crap of a film, get out of our way and let us. So SHUT UP AND LET ME SPIT ON EMMERICH AND HIS MOVIE AS MUCH AS I PLEASE!!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
And I reject your pity, because I actually find bashing that crap enjoyable. Seriously, what's your problem? Nobody can't express how they feel about that horrible adaptation? I don't know if you heard, but there's a thing called "freedom of speech".
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I am sorry, that you feel that way.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Don't be. I actually feel great giving that movie what it deserves - a beating and forgetfulness.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
it must be a great pain for you, that there are people who consider that movie as beeing quite enjoyble and actually beeing good, huh?
Excellent
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
As an independent, non-Godzilla related kaiju movie, probably; but as an actual Godzilla movie, it's the most God-awful adaptation ever made. The words "good" and "excellent" is WAY to strong and inaccurate to call this movie, "okay" is the correct word for it, but it still ain't no Godzilla movie. Legendary's version, however, is worthy to be called "a true American adaptation of Godzilla".
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, this one is actually recognizably Godzilla, why was it so hard for Emmerich to at least get the looks right let alone the character, message and story?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0