Legendary Pictures' 2014 Godzilla Reboot - Directed by Gareth Edwards - Part 1

[BrollySupersj]

I am unsure. But, I'm going to take a wild guess given the release date you mentioned. Around when Godzilla came out there was a Japanese Godzilla movie that quickly followed it, might have been released in the US after Japan but it was definitely around the same time if my mind is remembering things right.

It was never made. It wasn't Japanese either. It was the first idea for an American Godzilla movie. It would have been 10x better than the 98 movie.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Theoretically yes.

But, personally that's why I mentioned except for ridiculous beliefs that stem from phobias and other such instances. I'm talking more likes/dislikes, art, food, entertainment, colors, cars, you name it. Stated that precisely because I knew someone would take it to the extreme.

Regardless of how much you hate something, it is not the equivalent of killing someone. And if it is then I don't know what to say. Subjective opinion on a like/dislike is not the same as the subjective opinion on killing someone. Theoretically it is, but that is a vast extreme. Also you would need to be unbalanced to kill someone intentionally while knowing what you are doing. Most likely a sociopath.

I'd say the more apt subjective form of that would be if a mentally ******ed person kills someone without knowing what they are doing is wrong and consequences of that - should they receive a prison sentence, be put in a home or facility, or be sentenced to death.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Personally I am pretty psyched for this new version of Godzilla, has anyone heard any rumors (aside from last years comic con footage) as to the look they're giving him?

 

[Breaker]

@UltimateHero, Alright, I understand what you are getting at clearly now.

Have any of you guys heard of the proposed Godzilla film Godzilla vs The Griffon? It was a project that came before the 1998 film. I saw a youtube video talking all about it. Personally, I think it would have been pretty neat.

Yes, this particular creative script was one of the first drafts for GINO. The film was suppose to be released in 1994, but was held back to 1998.

But Roland rejected it because he wanted a realistic Godzilla remake. In the first draft, Godzilla fought a monster called the Gryphon, a chimera looking kaiju.

And this was what GINO was originally going to look like before Roland changed it through Dean Devlin. This design was created by Stan Winston:

However, while that awesome script will never come to the theater screen, the draft writer has been molding the script into a graphic novel.

 

[Ultimatehero]

I truly wish more scripts would do that. We absolutely need a comic of SUPERMAN LIVES by Kevin Smith, WONDER WOMAN by Joss Whedon, among others. Those are really great scripts that people should be able to experience in one form or another. I'll also say that black and white pic is awesome. If we get that in this film -- seriously going to have a melt down right in the theater. There's just something about dinosaurs and dinosaur-like rampages through a city that makes me feel like a kid again.

We also really need a 'The Dinosaurs Attack' movie:

Albeit less gory than the cards (there's more really awesome pics - a lot more amazing visually than the above, but I can't post them due to the blood content). Tim Burton wanted to make this film before moving on to Mars Attacks. For those who are similarly intrigued by this card series and would like to see it, you can count on at least one person already other than Burton to make this thing a reality.

 

[StarLord]

He rejected that Stan Winston one and we got a square jawed ugly mess instead.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

@UltimateHero, Alright, I understand what you are getting at clearly now.




Yes, this particular creative script was one of the first drafts for GINO. The film was suppose to be released in 1994, but was held back to 1998.

But Roland rejected it because he wanted a realistic Godzilla remake. In the first draft, Godzilla fought a monster called the Gryphon, a chimera looking kaiju.

And this was what GINO was originally going to look like before Roland changed it through Dean Devlin. This design was created by Stan Winston:

However, while that awesome script will never come to the theater screen, the draft writer has been molding the script into a graphic novel.

I will forever hate Roland emmerich for depriving the world of this movie. You don't just throw out the work of Stan Winston like that. I'm glad this guys career went down hill after the nineties, he well and truly deserves it.

 

[Schlosser85]

Yea....Roland Emmerich is an untalented hack.

 

[TheIrishAvenger]

That is all. I will never talk about that movie again.

 

[Victarion]

That unused Godzilla looks frightening; its in the yellow eyes. There's malice in them that reminds me of a gremlin (1st movie's gremlins).

 

[MrMaooz]

How much BO do you think this will make WW?

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

To me, and to clarify this is not an attack, I don't believe there is such a thing as a bad movie. I will say that there are movies that I hate and that the critics and a lot hate, but I still won't say it is a factually bad movie. I despise the spoof movies, but there's got to be others who love them for whatever reason that they do. And those who write and direct them probably saw something in them. It's just the majority don't agree. To make things less extreme - Twilight. I hate them, some love them, and they're generally made fun of. I won't say Twilight is a factually bad movie, it's just a subjectively bad move for a varying amount of people. It doesn't really make it a fact still, in my opinion, just the majority of opinions flow in one direction. People may see things in it that others do not.

Take 'Movie 43' for instance. Although people want to say all of the cast members were duped into being in it. In interviews and bringing it up they generally seemed to like it. Elizabeth Banks starred and directed it. Gerard Butler in an interview burst out laughing just talking about it. Most audiences hated and critics hated it. I think there it had more to do with an "in-joke" that some might get and have fun with and others will loathe whether they get the joke or not. It's that as a Hollywood reader and actor you metaphorically have a gun pointed to your head by higher-ups demanding that you read poop even when it makes you want to tear your eyes out. As a previous reader, I thought that was a hilarious put down on all those terrible scripts that we're forced to read and most of those skits stemmed from similar ideas I've read and flat out rejected. So I can get what the directors and cast saw in it and it did that. It was a giant put down to that. Granted most loathed it and they're open to loathing it. I won't say that they're wrong for doing so, I just don't agree because of a different experience of influence in my own life. I see it in a way that some don't see it because of a different experience. I see something in it that those involved did. So, there is something in it. It's just that the majority sphere of subjective beliefs didn't and I'm perfectly fine with that. I just see this as an example of trying to find a really odd film in which I can show how people may see something that other's either don't or do and hate.

My main point is this - I'm just of the strongest belief that there is no fact. Truth doesn't exist. There is majority opinion. But, there is no concrete fact on pretty much everything except the more ridiculous beliefs that stem from phobias (people choosing to be gay) and other such instances (jumping off a building won't kill you). Everything else I just see as subjective rather than factual.

Theoretically yes.

But, personally that's why I mentioned except for ridiculous beliefs that stem from phobias and other such instances. I'm talking more likes/dislikes, art, food, entertainment, colors, cars, you name it. Stated that precisely because I knew someone would take it to the extreme.

Regardless of how much you hate something, it is not the equivalent of killing someone. And if it is then I don't know what to say. Subjective opinion on a like/dislike is not the same as the subjective opinion on killing someone. Theoretically it is, but that is a vast extreme. Also you would need to be unbalanced to kill someone intentionally while knowing what you are doing. Most likely a sociopath.

I'd say the more apt subjective form of that would be if a mentally ******ed person kills someone without knowing what they are doing is wrong and consequences of that - should they receive a prison sentence, be put in a home or facility, or be sentenced to death.

These posts are nothing but a roundabout way of saying "I love Godzilla 98', but I honestly can't defend it as a good movie" because Breaker pretty much perfectly explained almost all the reasons there wasn't.

And really? You're going use the "there is no bad movie defense?". This is a movie forum. No one's forcing you to you sit down and accept Godzilla as a bad movie. I love some movies that I think are bad because just because a movie's bad doesn't mean it's not entertaining. Stand by your bad movies, and don't bring all this there's no bad movie crap because honestly, that's really bush league to use that excuse because someone owned you in what you thought was a argument when it was a normal discussion in which you overreacted and freaked out that most people in this thread didn't enjoy Godzilla as much as you did.

Just like you can voice your opinion that's there's no bad movie and that Godzilla was good by skirting around the subject, Breaker can voice his opinion that Godzilla is a bad movie.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Um, find where I told him to ignore it and look past it as a fan...

If you mention 'so, yeah - you can look past it.' the you was more directed towards me and others who like it because he quite clearly said:



NOWHERE in those two sentences. NOWHERE in the paragraph before that did he mention fans. He mentioned fans after the fact.

So yeah - I - can look past it. I never told him to. My whole paragraph was stating that as not-a-fan, I have looked past it. So yeah, I did look past it. I didn't need to 'try' to look past it. I just did. If I read it wrong and it just meant fans (although fans was only brought up afterwards) I apologize because I'm so used to members acting like their opinions are facts around here. If it was an opinion as fact paragraph - those just irk me because it's saying everyone who disagrees with a subjective likes and dislikes are wrong which says a lot. And that's all I can say. If I'm wrong, I apologize - I'm just so used to it. If not, opinions are subjective.

No one stated their opinion as fact. The only one that's doing that right now is you by overreacting.

 

[Ultimatehero]

These posts are nothing but a roundabout way of saying "I love Godzilla 98', but I honestly can't defend it as a good movie" because Breaker pretty much perfectly explained almost all the reasons there wasn't.

And really? You're going use the "there is no bad movie defense?". This is a movie forum. No one's forcing you to you sit down and accept Godzilla as a bad movie. I love some movies that I think are bad because just because a movie's bad doesn't mean it's not entertaining. Stand by your bad movies, and don't bring all this there's no bad movie crap because honestly, that's really bush league to use that excuse because someone owned you in what you thought was a argument when it was a normal discussion in which you overreacted.

I call a movie that makes me laugh, cheer, get scared, and tear up a good movie. A broad range of emotions define having a good experience. And yes, I always hate it when then they take Godzilla down in the end. That shows that they were able to bring depth to even a character that has no lines of dialogue - especially depth following a rampage through a city. The only other movie that has been able to capture this with a monster like this that I've seen is King Kong the original and Jackson's remake. I also really like Matthew Broderick's character as being the fish out in the big sea for the first time trying to find his way. Plus, the action and spectacle of it has remained largely unseen for A LOT of years.

Also, sorry to offend you, but I stand by how I see it and how I see subjectivity which was really to state that while some may not like it others do. I see it as a good movie because of everything I've just stated. Plus, out of so many movies out there, it is sill largely original in that there has never been a large dinosaur walking through a city. The closest we have to that is King Kong. So in a way it has been the KEY large dinosaur in a city movie since 1998. But, again, sorry for offending your delicate sensitivities. I know people will attack me now for likening Godzilla to a dinosaur, I've heard people get upset over even that, but that is an apt connection.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Parker, I seriously hate that I have to post the following, but in advance you need to read replies that come before, before jumping the gun in posting:

No one stated their opinion as FACT. The only one that's doing that right now is you by overreacting.

And GODZILLA 1998 is FACTUALLY, from the ground up, a bad movie. Especially, a bad Godzilla movie.

"No one stated their opinion as FACT." "FACTUALLY, from the ground up, a bad movie." I'm not really sure, but I'm pretty sure the second would be considered stating an opinion as a fact.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I'm cool. I'm chill. With your bring out your big soliloquy on why no one can call the movie bad, I'd say your the one who's being sensitive.

We're on a movie forum where personal opinions are being debated everyday. No one in this thread needed a lecture on what's good and what's bad. No one's harrassing you or criticizing you for being a fan of the movie, but you express disbelief and disappointment because none of us in this thread are fans. Breaker said that he's not trying to change your opinion, but you're the one who took it as that. You're the one who decided to complaining about it other threads too when in fact you're the one who's trying get people to accept your opinions as facts.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Actually if you have reading comprehension at all, I have always said everyone is open to having their own opinions and those opinions have just as much merit as the next guy.

Also for everything else - if you still believe it wasn't stated as a fact, please I beg of you read the post above what you just posted before stating as such. Because it's basically right there in the most simplest of terms possible. "Nobody stated it as a fact." "Factually it is a bad movie." That's kind of contradictory. How can someone state an opinion as fact yet not state it as a fact?

 

[Solidus]

Parker is right and wise. Listen to him I would.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Parker is right and wise. Listen to him I would.

No one stated their opinion as FACT. The only one that's doing that right now is you by overreacting.

And GODZILLA 1998 is FACTUALLY, from the ground up, a bad movie. Especially, a bad Godzilla movie.

I don't know, to me that's contradictory. How can someone not state it as a fact after they blatantly state that it is a fact? Opinions aren't factual, they're subjective. And hey, if Breaker wants to state his opinions as a fact - he's welcome to it. I just don't know how anyone can say it's not stated as a fact when it's right there for them to see bright as day.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Actually if you have reading comprehension at all, I have always said everyone is open to having their own opinions and those opinions have just as much merit as the next guy.

Also for everything else - if you still believe it wasn't stated as a fact, please I beg of you read the post above what you just posted before stating as such. Because it's basically right there in the most simplest of terms possible. "Nobody stated it as a fact." "Factually it is a bad movie." That's kind of contradictory. How can someone state an opinion as fact yet not state it as a fact?

So you chose to focus on that one word? Factually? Breaker said he wasn't trying to change your point of view, and he accepted that you thought it was a good movie.

Even if he uses the word factually, it's still his subjective opinion. Adding a word doesn't change that.

And you know what, I agree with his comments. There are such things as a bad movie. It doesn't mean a bad movie can't be entertaining.

You were a script reader, you know what can make it into a movie and what can't make it into a movie. There may be subjective opinions, but you're still supposed to take an objective approach.

A movie has to have a coherent plot, entertaining characters, good pacing, and a theme to round it all together usually. Now, there may be twists and exceptions, but for the most part there is still an objective approach to movies, which Breaker was subjectively discussing.

 

[Solidus]

I don't know, to me that's contradictory. How can someone not state it as a fact after they blatantly state that it is a fact? Opinions aren't factual, they're subjective. And hey, if Breaker wants to state his opinions as a fact - he's welcome to it. I just don't know how anyone can say it's not stated as a fact when it's right there for them to see bright as day.

Everything you say is contradictory/hypocritical. You just don't see it because you shield yourself from it. You tell people they are free to what ever opinions they have, and yet you treat everything you say like a fact. Just because you don't say something is a "fact" does not mean you are not acting that way. Your tone constantly comes off that way.

Where as Breaker actually made very civil and nice posts, he may have said those words but if you read the rest of his posts later, and even the first one, the guy was being very polite. You focus on one part of the overall argument and just stomp your feet. Seriously man give it a break.

 

[Ultimatehero]

So you chose to focus on that one word? Factually? Breaker said he wasn't trying to change your point of view, and he accepted that you thought it was a good movie.

Even if he uses the word factually, it's still his objective opinion. Adding a word doesn't change that.

No one stated their opinion as FACT. The only one that's doing that right now is you by overreacting.

And GODZILLA 1998 is FACTUALLY, from the ground up, a bad movie. Especially, a bad Godzilla movie.

Actually it is when that is the only thing I had an issue with in his post before you randomly jumped on me saying I was trying to change his opinion when I was clearly stating that not everyone is going to see it the same way. Basically this whole thing is still going on because I've been stating that opinions are subjective and not factual and you've been drilling into me he never said it was factual. Now when you can see the evidence right in front of your face -- you're going elsewhere when that is the only reason why you've been keeping this up.

And you know what, I agree with his comments. There are such things as a bad movie. It doesn't mean a bad movie can't be entertaining.

And you are open to that opinion, I just don't have it. For me there are movies that I love that others hate, and there are movies that others love and I hate.

You were a script reader, you know what can make it into a movie and what can't make it into a movie.

And I would green-light this just like the studio did back then. It has fun characters, it takes on a variety of reactions and emotions, it has never before seen spectacle, it makes you have sympathy for the monster which is rare, it's part of what an audience likes to see and with that and the trademark name attached it will likely make a profit for the studio. Looking up now -- it did, so my prediction would have been right and I'd get a pat on the back.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Thank you, UH for increasing the size and bring up those same post again. I couldn't read it the other two times you brought it up. Actually, I did when I answered that in my last post.

He put up his opinion, and you were the one who decided to backtrack, not even discuss the movie, and discuss how there are no bad movies.

Like you're doing now about my last post when I talked about objective points of view in subjective opinions.

 

[Breaker]

A much better view of the Monster warehouse for SDCC this year

And for anyone who missed the SDCC Saturday Schedule, here's a light reveal of the plot synopsis for GODZILLA.

Legendary Pictures: Godzilla -- An epic rebirth to Toho's iconic Godzilla, this spectacular adventure pits the world's most famous monster against malevolent creatures who, bolstered by humanity's scientific arrogance, threaten our very existence. Gareth Edwards directs Godzilla, which stars Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Ken Watanabe, Elizabeth Olsen, and Juliette Binoche, with David Strathairn and Bryan Cranston. The screenplay is by Max Borenstein, Frank Darabont, and Dave Callaham. Thomas Tull and Jon Jashni are producing with Mary Parent and Brian Rogers. Alex Garcia and Patricia Whitcher are the executive producers, alongside Yoshimitsu Banno and Kenji Okuhira. The film is from Warner Bros. Pictures and Legendary Pictures.

And from that, as a G-fan, I happily approve! Haven't felt this excited since Godzilla became an official star of the Walk of Fame.

Plus, out of so many movies out there, it is sill largely original in that there has never been a large dinosaur walking through a city.

Technically, all of these movies predates GINO in that all of the star monsters are all prehistoric dinosaurs.(Although many of them are mutated by the H-Bomb in their own unique films, except for Gorgo). And they've been in cities way before the creation of GINO.

-Beast from 20,000 Fathoms, Behemoth, Gorgo, and Godzilla: King of the Monsters/Gojira. To name a few....

What GINO pulled was nothing original, a giant mutated Iguana in a city isn't all that original.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Everything you say is contradictory/hypocritical. You just don't see it because you shield yourself from it. You tell people they are free to what ever opinions they have, and yet you treat everything you say like a fact. Just because you don't say something is a "fact" does not mean you are not acting that way. Your tone constantly comes off that way.

Where as Breaker actually made very civil and nice posts, he may have said those words but if you read the rest of his posts later, and even the first one, the guy was being very polite. You focus on one part of the overall argument and just stomp your feet. Seriously man give it a break.

And this is why I can't take you seriously. This is actually also ironic coming from you because you blatantly attacked Rocketman and myself for saying our opinions don't change. Saying that our opinions never change because according to you - we are lying to ourselves. When really, Rocketman and I know ourselves better than you will ever know us. You are not us. You can not understand us. You understand you. And it is really narcissistic to even try to make the claim that you know anyone better than they know themselves. Just to bring everyone up to date. As I recall, I clearly stated that you were open to having that opinion that my opinions changing was sad. When I found it sadder that someone would get so mad and demand that other people's opinions change just as readily as your own does - you left. And you inspired the sig because you are the key example to this whole thing, attacking Rocketman and I for saying our opinions don't change in regards to entertainment. I'm sorry, but you don't know me. Your opinions might change at the drop of a hat. But that doesn't mean it is the same for others. And demanding it, so much so that this whole thing is still on your mind is seriously weird. You know you. You don't know everyone else and there's no reason to act like you do.