Was 1998 really that bad?

You shouldnt be afraid of getting hate for liking the 98. Me on the other hand is most likely get it thrown in my face for what im about to say; Yes. Yes it was.

I dont like it, and its hated with good reason. And i really hate the "Oh its not that bad, it just shouldnt be called Godzilla" exscuse. Because newsflash, it doesnt change the fact the movie was called Godzilla. 

But not being Godzilla is only one small flaw. This movie manage to get Matthew Broderick(An actor i highly respect) thrown down in the slums of boredom. And the rest of the actors arent even trying. And i couldnt get immersive in the story or characters. Even TOHO`s Godzilla movies managed that.

But the movie did have a few good things;

The Intro was omnious. The music also incredible. And the angle shots of Zilla had such potential(Him going past the window, him shown from above and him chasing the chopper had GREAT angles).

But beyond that, yes, the movie was horrible. If you want to like it, do so. I cant and wont stop you. 

Well, I like the movie too, but the concept used for the monster was so far from the original Godzilla so it might be seen as a totally different creature than Big G to really enjoy the movie. But something I found in wiki indicates that maybe the approach that Roland Esmedrich used was Toho fault: the developers wanted to use the kaiju battle formula as we know in most of Godzilla movies; but Toho people forbade them to create another monster from their own, and if the new Godzilla was to battle it will be against another Toho creation like Mothra or King Ghidorah, the ones they offered for the deal.As you may guess, the budget was limited and the licenses over the other characters were outrageous high, so Roland and company needed to create a plan B. Indeed, the license cost is the main reason I highly doubt more Toho kaiju may appear in the upcoming film

Ahem

I really liked the movie and zilla design. Sure they called it godzilla and for that it cops alot of critism but other than that it was a great movie. I thought the whole 'asexual' idea was different ,but a good different. The way they portrayed zilla being scare & confused was realistitic. The only thing i didn't like was the amount they underpowered zilla.

Surprised by all of the 1998 defenders. Which is a little refreshing actually - folks going against popular opinion. And I think it is a little silly how people still seem to be so personally offended by it so many years later. Time to get over it right?

But...while I respect everyones opinion, m gonna be that guy: In my opinion, Godzilla 1998 was an absolutely terrible movie.

Yes, I hated it when I saw it because I had been waiting a long time for a proper Americanized Godzilla flick - and this was what we got instead. But I went back and watched it recently and tried to judge it on its own merits, and it holds up even worse than I thought.

It all started with the script. It was just lazy: Terrible dialogue. Awkward forced humor. Vapid characters. Contrived plot points that make you groan. Large gaps between action (what little there was). And it just atraignt up stole ideas from much better films.  Frankly - the finished script feels like a first or second draft. 

But it didnt stop there. The acting was bad to mediocre (probably the scripts fault to a certain extent, but everyone seemed to just be phoning it in). The action sequences were poorly shot-especially when godzilla first arrives (though ironically that was the only brief scene in the entire movie that made me feel I was watching a giant monster movie-as opposed to a chase flick)

It was also just plain ugly to look at. Whether it was done for aesthetic purposes or not, the picture often looks muddy and drab. The special effects are very hit and miss - while some scenes looked decent for the era in which it was made, at other times the sfx were outclassed by films made 5-10-15 years prior. The cgi used for the creature sometimes actually looks great...and then the next shot it looks like a cartoon. Very inconsistent.

Not actually being "Godzilla" aside -The creature itself was ok. Little to no personality unlike other memorable movie monsters, but I still think it deserved a better film.

But maybe my biggest complaint is that, when I watched it again for the first time since 1998, I was simply BORED! Not a lot actually happens, and what does doesnt really feel like it has a lot of weight. There is no tension, legit drama, or any scene that sticks out as being very memorable (atleast not for positive reasons). The story felt small.

Many of you compare the quality of the movie to the Hesei era real Godzilla films. The whole point of making 1998 was (or should have been) to bring Hollywood quality filmmaking to a great character that was always a little held back by budget, etc. It should have been MUCH better than the Hesei films because they had greater resources and talent pool. I hold hollywood films to a higher standard - this film didnt meet it.

Anyways, ill stop there. Im glad some of you actually liked it - cuz then that means it wasnt a total waste. But im a big fan of the entire giant monster movie genre - and I dont even own a copy of Godzilla 1998. That says something about just how much I didnt care for Zilla's first and only outing.

Thanks for reading haha.

Oh - and the Madison Square Garden part is one of the biggest fails in big budget action movie filmmaking ive ever seen. It encaptualizes every one of my above criticisms in one overlly long sequence.

I feel like this topic has been done to death. But the short answer is yes, it is really that bad. As a Godzilla film it's unrecognizable. As a Hollywood blockbuster it's a bottom feeder. There are so many incoherent elements that don't work to create anything unique or outstanding, but clash to make something visually boring and cinematically forgettable.

Even if there are technically "worse" films in the Godzilla series, (which if there are, it's a very short list) those films at least have more cinematic merit for their unique styles, strong directorial visions and persistant resourcefulness-- all of which are attributes that are completely absent in this movie.

This is all surprising, good on all of you for letting everyone know your real opinion. I'm a fan of the 1998 version also as this was my introduction to godzilla and the only one I saw for the first 6 years of my life (I'm 14).granted the creature did not resemble godzilla at all but the more agile and lean design was quite cool. I don't know...It just doesn't  deserve all the hate it gets but they are people's opinions so I respect them, they are entitled to them etc etc. thanks for reading...and happy st.patricks day ðŸ€ðŸ€ðŸ€ðŸ€

@Gman

Even though I agree with you completely-- I still stand by my opinion that most 'fan visions' of what Godzilla is-- are even further away from what Godzilla is/was than this film. At Godzilla's core, his very fundamental truth-- it is still a monster flick, regardless of whatever deep bs meaning people use to justify their fandom. I feel like too many fans try to 'dig deep with a toy shovel'. 

But honestly, as far as Emmerich and Delvin's works go, its one of their better films. I find pretty much all their movies to be so painfully formula its disgusting.

Smart guy: Something bad is about to happen everybody! LISTEN!

Everybody: lol u don't know what you talk about smart guy

Bad thing happens.

Everybody: SAVE US SMART GUY!

Smart guy: lol told you so.

That is literally, 90 percent of everything they've worked on together or seperately. 

The movie wasn't bad, the title was what was wrong with it.

I really wanted to like this film. I waited for it for years. I was there on opening day with such high aspirations. But when it was done, I left confused and put off. For a time, I tried to convice myself that I kinda liked it. But honestly, I don't. In fact, not even close. I find no redeaming qualities in it and it's borderline insulting.

Now, I can see how if this was your first Godzilla movie, and you have no frame of reference, you might like it because you had no pre-concieved notion as to what Godzilla should be. But I saw the '98 Godzilla when I was in my twenties, and had a fully formed opinion of Godzilla based on the most beloved movies of my childhood. If you are young, you can't understand that. If you're older and liked it for whatever reason, then okay, to each their own.

It's been on cable lately, so I thought it might be fun to watch with my kids. It wasn't. Honestly, I can't even sit through it, for all the same reasons that have been debated for years.

Don't give me a veggieburger and try to tell me what a great hamburger it is.

you're not alone i like it too, i mean sure it didn't look like godzilla, it didn't shoot fire, over all i thought it was fun to watch 7.5/10

you're not alone i like it too, i mean sure it didn't look like godzilla, it didn't shoot fire, over all i thought it was fun to watch 7.5/10

you're not alone i like it too, i mean sure it didn't look like godzilla, it didn't shoot fire, over all i thought it was fun to watch 7.5/10

you're not alone i like it too, i mean sure it didn't look like godzilla, it didn't shoot fire, over all i thought it was fun to watch 7.5/10

you're not alone i like it too, i mean sure it didn't look like godzilla, it didn't shoot fire, over all i thought it was fun to watch 7.5/10

Talking about the '98 version yet again? Come on guys, give this topic a rest.

But if you really want to know, yes I despised it. Not because everyone said so or its "hip/cool" to hate the 98 version. Its simply not a good movie in my opinion. There are exceptions and second opinions, but sometimes, a movie that is universally hated really do mean it actually sucks.

Yes, I didn't like the deception. They called it "Godzilla" when the monster clearly had nothing to do with the "real" Godzilla. Instead, what we got was a generic (and weak) monster-of-the-week you see on power rangers. . But more than that, the plot just stank. As others have said, it rip-off Jurassic Park and it sorely wasted the talent of Broderick. 

I just re-watched the movie again,so my opinion is fresh......

Yes! It is a completely shitty movie! People making excuses for it are wrong! Better than some Toho movies? I would love to see what Toho could do with $130 million dollars. Remember all the Toho Movies are made on the cheapish side.

This was a bad movie, plot holes that are huge (burrowing monster that can't get into a tunnel?), bad acting (Maria pitillo), unoriginality, (raptors) and a egotiscal team that had no respect for the source material and completely misunderstood the reasons why there would even be a demand for a Godzilla movie 44 years after the original. I equate it to two guys who just had a hit movie looking at each other and saying "I know, lets make a Bond film, but instead we will make him fat and from Texas beacause we know whats cool and beside I always thought the original 60's Bond films were a little campy!  Just slap the Bond name on him and people will come."

Sounding bitter? not really, I believe it is simply the only true classic giant monster flick (Cloverfield was more art school take) that people have grown up on. So this smelly coil is their what they are comparing everything else on. Oh, to those who said it made money, the movie was techincally successful but it wasn't a hit. It did its buisness here in the States in the first two weeks befor word of mouth got around and according to Steve Ryfle the movie disappeared from US theaters very quickly.

Bottom line....it was because of that crappy movie that we have had to wait SIXTEEN MORE YEARS... for another Godzilla to have another shot on the big screen. Happy St. Patrick's Day everyone!

I just re-watched the movie again,so my opinion is fresh......

Yes! It is a completely shitty movie! People making excuses for it are wrong! It was a massive disappointment to me then and it has only gotten worse over time.  Better than some Toho movies? I would love to see what Toho could do with $130 million dollars. Remember all the Toho Movies are made on the cheapish side.

This was a bad movie, plot holes that are huge (burrowing monster that can't get into a tunnel?), bad acting (Maria Pitillo), unoriginality, (raptors) and a egotiscal team that had no respect for the source material and completely misunderstood the reasons why there would even be a demand for a Godzilla movie 44 years after the original. I equate it to two guys who just had a hit movie looking at each other and saying "I know, lets make a Bond film, but instead we will make him fat and from Texas beacause we know whats cool and beside I always thought the original 60's Bond films were a little campy!  Just slap the Bond name on him and people will come." That is what happened with Godzilla!

Sounding bitter? not really, I believe it is simply the only true classic giant monster flick (Cloverfield was more art school take) that people have ever known and grown up on. So this smelly coil is  what they are comparing everything else to. Oh, to those who said it made money, the movie was techincally successful but it wasn't a hit. It did its buisness here in the States in the first two weeks it was out before word of mouth got around and according to Steve Ryfle, the movie disappeared from US theaters very quickly.

Bottom line....it was because of that crappy movie that we have all had to wait SIXTEEN YEARS... for  Godzilla to have another shot on the big screen. Happy St. Patrick's Day everyone!

The reason we hate the movie, well me anyways, is because of the hype.  I was born in 1993 and I've been watching Godzilla for as long as I can remember.  I remember being 5 years old and watching the film and loving it because as a 5 year old my imagination ran rampant.  As I grew older I kinda realized that "hey wait a minute that isn't Godzilla" so on rewatches it's not a bad movie it's just the fact that when you open the case of the DVD/Blu Ray you see the name Godzilla.