This is an entertaining movie, so i like it anyway, and if you don't agree then fight me
956 Reviews
i dont care if it sucks
masoncheek18 May 2020
Better than I remembered
utgard1430 August 2016
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.
America's First Take On Godzilla
iquine5 June 2020
(Flash Review)
Starting off relatively well, this turns into Jurassic Park as it felt like a dinosaur chase movie rather than focused on the mythical Godzilla. This new Godzilla also doesn't hold true to many of the original's traits such as what it eats and how it can be killed. Now on American soil of course Godzilla ravages Manhattan while the military try to take him down as they create a ton of (needless) damage. The media desperately looking for the inside scoop also create their own damage by stirring mass hysteria. One special scientist learns Godzilla is pregnant and warns that it's nest of eggs must be found to avoid hatching more of these beasts. As expected, this is full of explosions, destruction, roars, human ineptitude, light romance and heroics. Your typical Hollywood CGI fluff action monster movie with some notable plot holes.
Starting off relatively well, this turns into Jurassic Park as it felt like a dinosaur chase movie rather than focused on the mythical Godzilla. This new Godzilla also doesn't hold true to many of the original's traits such as what it eats and how it can be killed. Now on American soil of course Godzilla ravages Manhattan while the military try to take him down as they create a ton of (needless) damage. The media desperately looking for the inside scoop also create their own damage by stirring mass hysteria. One special scientist learns Godzilla is pregnant and warns that it's nest of eggs must be found to avoid hatching more of these beasts. As expected, this is full of explosions, destruction, roars, human ineptitude, light romance and heroics. Your typical Hollywood CGI fluff action monster movie with some notable plot holes.
I thought this was fun. I don't know why people whine about it so much.
LLAAA483728 May 2008
Well, being a longtime fan of the GODZILLA/GOJIRA films as a youngster, I remember seeing this with great anticipation. I, unlike a lot of people, was not at all disappointed. This film was exactly what I was hoping it would be at the time. Sure, it certainly wasn't as charming or as funny as the films I loved as a kid, but it was a lot of fun. I loved the action scenes, the look of the monster was crazy to me, and the plot was simple enough for a first time viewer to get right into. Seeing it again 10 years later, I had the same reaction. My opinion of this film hasn't changed one bit. I guess everybody's complaints stem from how this has no charm or any kind of attempt at being cute or original. I guess that's understandable, but I still don't see what everybody's problem is. This was supposed to be a fun, exciting, and action packed thrill ride. That's all it is, no more, no less. I personally think that it succeeds at what it achieved to be perfectly. Matthew Broderick may not exactly be an action hero, but his character sure was quirky and funny. Jean Reno was as good as usual.
Wine improves with age, and some movies; not this one
jimimac7 January 2005
I waited six years before seeing this movie. I should have waited longer.There are bad movies and there are bad movies. God knows I have seen my share. This movie was beyond bad. It is so bad that even if it had been classified as a comedy (It was funny, strange), it would have failed. I am so thankful that movies like "Glory" came along to rescue Matthew Broderick. On the other hand, one would have to be a real actor to do the lines he did in this movie and keep a straight face.
Oh, how this movie made me long for the Japanese dubbed versions.
Fantasy movies have lot of room to play with. How do you make a bad fantasy. Use Godzilla as your model.
Oh, how this movie made me long for the Japanese dubbed versions.
Fantasy movies have lot of room to play with. How do you make a bad fantasy. Use Godzilla as your model.
Flawed but not bad guilty pleasure movie
85122223 January 2017
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 will make you dumber...
RcktMgnt29 October 1998
This movie is the worst piece of trash to come out of the summer of '98. This proves that the success of "Independence Day" was a fluke for Devlin and Emmerich. Why on Earth would Hollywood ever hire them to do a film is beyond me...
Don't watch this film. Watch "Jurassic Park" or "JP: the Lost World" instead, this film does nothing but rip off these films among others (such as "Alien" and "Hunt for Red October"). The reason the entire film is in the rain and/or in the dark is to hide the poorly done not-so-special effects.
Except for the noble attempts (despite the script) by Jean Reno and Hank Azaria, no one who starred in this trash should ever star in a movie again. Broderick is a has-been actor, and both he and Pitillo show they have virtually no talent at all.
Only those with no taste for *decent* film will like this, this abomination.
Don't watch this film. Watch "Jurassic Park" or "JP: the Lost World" instead, this film does nothing but rip off these films among others (such as "Alien" and "Hunt for Red October"). The reason the entire film is in the rain and/or in the dark is to hide the poorly done not-so-special effects.
Except for the noble attempts (despite the script) by Jean Reno and Hank Azaria, no one who starred in this trash should ever star in a movie again. Broderick is a has-been actor, and both he and Pitillo show they have virtually no talent at all.
Only those with no taste for *decent* film will like this, this abomination.
Not Great, But Not As Bad As It's Been Described
tabuno21 March 2020
Matthew Broderik and Jean Reno star in what in the industry is considered a "bomb." It cost a lot but didn't make much money. However, it would be unfair to consider this movie a bad movie. Instead one can view this English version of the relatively more cheesy 1950s Japanese "Godzilla" movies with Jurassic Park overtones as entertaining, blockbuster-like. It attempts along with Broderik's own wonderful personality to insert a fairly large dose of comic humor throughout the movie. Yet the balance between comedy, drama, and horror is more uneven than the best of these monster movies. There a bit more gore than the typical Jurassic Park movies, but not necessarily over the top considering how gory movies have become. There are also lapses in rational or logical chase scenes were Godzilla seems to speed away from helicopters but can't catch up to a speeding taxicab. The attempt to create a somewhat sympathetic monster is also intriguing though it wasn't completely successful in pulling it off. Overall, this is a feel-good action monster movie that could have been better, but it wasn't nearly as awful as the dollar numbers indicate.
Very happy that I waited for cable
CHRIS-5820 June 1999
Not great but better than I remembered
pmtelefon24 May 2020
"Godzilla" is a great example of a big budget summer movie that doesn't really work. It plays by the big summer movie rules but it misses the mark. The first half of "Godzilla" is very good. But after an hour or so, the story takes a wrong turn. It actually becomes pretty silly for a while. I don't want to say that "Godzilla" wore out its welcome but it is too long by at least twenty minutes. That said, I still enjoyed watching "Godzilla" tonight.
Okay, I'm going to be like everybody else and hate this just to be trendy and sheep-minded!!!
Chimera-520 February 2000
No, I don't think so! I'm still not clear why the American public despises this so much. Can you say "bandwagon"? IT IS NOT BAD AT ALL! What did you people expect? The Sound of Music??? I went in this movie to see awesome special effects, good use of digital surround sound, and stunts. AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I GOT!!! "Oh man, but the dialogue, the acting, blah blah blah". Oh yeah, I forgot THAT'S why I was seeing this movie! And I saw American Beauty for the action, Shakespeare in Love for the stunts, and Gandhi for the special effects! STOP TRYING TO DRAW BLOOD FROM A STONE! If you don't know exactly what your $9 is getting you into when you walked up to the box-office, maybe you should have stayed home and watched Nick at Nite!!!
Rating: an unashamed, much deserved 10 out of 10!!!
Rating: an unashamed, much deserved 10 out of 10!!!
One of the most underrated movies ever!
kerianfunnyman21312 June 2022
I dont get it guys, just because its different doesnt mean its bad, unless it actually is bad, but it isnt at all!
Sure Godzilla didnt have a ton of screentime, and he is very weaker than the previously was, but that make sense since its about the characters planning to stop him, its a movie where he is the enemy, not the one you're cheering on, speaking of which, the characters are great! I like Nick, Audrey, Philippe, everyone! I love the music in this movie too, i freaking love deeper underground! The Story is great, and so are the characters, music is amazing, horror, action, and sometimes comedy aspects are great!
Overrall, an awesome movie in my book, even a great godzilla one!
Sure Godzilla didnt have a ton of screentime, and he is very weaker than the previously was, but that make sense since its about the characters planning to stop him, its a movie where he is the enemy, not the one you're cheering on, speaking of which, the characters are great! I like Nick, Audrey, Philippe, everyone! I love the music in this movie too, i freaking love deeper underground! The Story is great, and so are the characters, music is amazing, horror, action, and sometimes comedy aspects are great!
Overrall, an awesome movie in my book, even a great godzilla one!
really, its not that bad!
raymusicman20069 September 2007
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!
Horrid
rfaison12 September 1998
This movie did not have one redeeming quality. I almost felt sorry for Matthew Broderick as I watched it. The special effects were lifted straight from Jurassic Park (the babies looked uncannily like velociraptors). The scary parts weren't; the funny parts even less so. The writing bit, and Maria Pitillo's performance was possibly the worst I have ever seen in a major motion picture. Give me an over-dubbed Japanese flick with a guy in a rubber suit any day of the week over this waste of celluloid.
When we first realize there is a big lizard invading New York.
TxMike16 September 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I had missed this version of Godzilla back when it came out. More recently I saw the one with the MUTOs so I felt compelled to see this one also. They can't really be compared because the focus in each is entirely different. On DVD from my public library.
The lead character, other than Godzilla, is Matthew Broderick who plays biologist Dr. Niko Tatopoulos. He has established his reputation and he is called in when very, very large footprints are discovered. Eventually these are found to belong to Godzilla, looking a lot like a very large T-Rex dinosaur.
They find some tissue after the monster does some destruction and with the hormones present figure he, it, is about to lay eggs and needs to find a nesting place. And, he, it, logically chooses Madison Square Garden, the famous sports arena.
Jean Reno is one of my favorite actors, here he is Philippe Roaché heading an international group interested in the monster. Also Maria Pitillo as Audrey Timmonds, former classmate and lover of Tatopoulos and now trying to make it as a reported.
Overall this is a well made movie that entertains. I especially like the underwater CG scenes of Godzilla swimming.
SPOILERS: When they find the next they estimate that at least 200 eggs have been laid and, if they are allowed to hatch and escape, at their breeding rate would quickly overrun the world, snuffing out humans as the dominant species. Drastic measures are called for and the military manages to destroy the nest building with planes and missiles. But as the movie ends we see one last egg, and then a young Godzilla breaking out of it. Sequel?
The lead character, other than Godzilla, is Matthew Broderick who plays biologist Dr. Niko Tatopoulos. He has established his reputation and he is called in when very, very large footprints are discovered. Eventually these are found to belong to Godzilla, looking a lot like a very large T-Rex dinosaur.
They find some tissue after the monster does some destruction and with the hormones present figure he, it, is about to lay eggs and needs to find a nesting place. And, he, it, logically chooses Madison Square Garden, the famous sports arena.
Jean Reno is one of my favorite actors, here he is Philippe Roaché heading an international group interested in the monster. Also Maria Pitillo as Audrey Timmonds, former classmate and lover of Tatopoulos and now trying to make it as a reported.
Overall this is a well made movie that entertains. I especially like the underwater CG scenes of Godzilla swimming.
SPOILERS: When they find the next they estimate that at least 200 eggs have been laid and, if they are allowed to hatch and escape, at their breeding rate would quickly overrun the world, snuffing out humans as the dominant species. Drastic measures are called for and the military manages to destroy the nest building with planes and missiles. But as the movie ends we see one last egg, and then a young Godzilla breaking out of it. Sequel?
America butchers Godzilla once again
gizmomogwai23 September 2012
The 1954 Japanese classic film Godzilla is very good as a horror film and a fun movie, which was thankfully recently given Criterion treatment. Alas, in the West the film has not always been available in its true form. In 1956 it was butchered thoroughly, massively edited and manipulated into Godzilla, King of the Monsters!, a goofy movie in badly dubbed English. If that weren't enough, in 1998 the Americans decided to butcher Godzilla again, with a movie about as bad- Godzilla, by the makers of the smash hit Independence Day (1996).
Because of my love of Independence Day as a youth, when I saw Godzilla '98 in theatres I assumed I had to like it, and tried to convince myself it was a good movie, much as with Batman and Robin the year before. Time has made me realize how much of that was self-deception, however. Godzilla '98 is loud and often stupid, and the action scenes never really blew me away. Most of the damage to New York City in the film is done not by Godzilla but by the army trying to kill the creature. The moments of comic relief all fall flat (we were supposed to be rolling over laughing every time someone called Broderick "the worm guy"). The movie repeatedly pulls the same tricks, with people thinking they're clear of danger before Godzilla pops up suddenly again. The dialogue is often painful, as adult characters interact as if they were children ("You were supposed to be my friend, I trusted you.")
Some parts defy logic. Why can't the military ever actually shoot Godzilla? Are we really supposed to believe Godzilla can pick up a car in his mouth and crunch on it but the car and people inside it are still functioning? The Nostalgia Critic also did a good job illustrating how the "Babyzilla" scenes imitate the raptor scenes in Jurassic Park (1993).
Admittedly, I still love this movie's soundtrack. "Macy Day Parade" by Michael Penn and "Untitled" by Silverchair are beautiful songs, though unfortunately they don't seem to be in the film itself, which favours "Come With Me" by Puff Daddy which is only sort of okay because it sounds like "Kashmir." The special effects are mostly good, although we don't actually get a good look at Godzilla besides his feet. The movie also had an attractive ad campaign. One commercial showed Godzilla stepping on and destroying a tyrannosaur fossil, and that unfortunately isn't in the movie either. Ultimately, Godzilla '98 has none of the charm of the Japanese original, and is more of a cliché Hollywood disaster movie.
Because of my love of Independence Day as a youth, when I saw Godzilla '98 in theatres I assumed I had to like it, and tried to convince myself it was a good movie, much as with Batman and Robin the year before. Time has made me realize how much of that was self-deception, however. Godzilla '98 is loud and often stupid, and the action scenes never really blew me away. Most of the damage to New York City in the film is done not by Godzilla but by the army trying to kill the creature. The moments of comic relief all fall flat (we were supposed to be rolling over laughing every time someone called Broderick "the worm guy"). The movie repeatedly pulls the same tricks, with people thinking they're clear of danger before Godzilla pops up suddenly again. The dialogue is often painful, as adult characters interact as if they were children ("You were supposed to be my friend, I trusted you.")
Some parts defy logic. Why can't the military ever actually shoot Godzilla? Are we really supposed to believe Godzilla can pick up a car in his mouth and crunch on it but the car and people inside it are still functioning? The Nostalgia Critic also did a good job illustrating how the "Babyzilla" scenes imitate the raptor scenes in Jurassic Park (1993).
Admittedly, I still love this movie's soundtrack. "Macy Day Parade" by Michael Penn and "Untitled" by Silverchair are beautiful songs, though unfortunately they don't seem to be in the film itself, which favours "Come With Me" by Puff Daddy which is only sort of okay because it sounds like "Kashmir." The special effects are mostly good, although we don't actually get a good look at Godzilla besides his feet. The movie also had an attractive ad campaign. One commercial showed Godzilla stepping on and destroying a tyrannosaur fossil, and that unfortunately isn't in the movie either. Ultimately, Godzilla '98 has none of the charm of the Japanese original, and is more of a cliché Hollywood disaster movie.
A 20 foot giant lizard can disappear in New York City?
Smells_Like_Cheese15 May 2004
Warning: Spoilers
Godzilla, one of the major monster classics that we all know and love, mainly of course with the old badly dubbed Japenese films. As badly made those films were, they were still incredibly fun because of all the camp. It was just a good time to watch those movies and Godzilla was just freaky looking and scared the heck out of you. So naturally the men who created the big time special effects movies like Independence Day and Stargate would naturally try and re-create the gigantic lizard and you guessed it, put him in today's New York City. Now who are we going to rely on to save us? Arnold Schwartzenegger, Syvester Stallone, Bruce Willis, Jackie Chan? Nope, Ferris Bueller, er, I mean Matthew Broderick. He plays a nerd in this movie, so who better to save us? Godzilla is barely recongnizable as he is just a CGI love fest where it seems that the creators were not even close to what Godzilla really looked like in the old films. Oh, this was a bad movie.
A Japanese fishing ship is attacked by an unseen, giant monster that attacks from below the water: only one sailor survives. Traumatized, he is questioned in a hospital by a French scientist as to what he saw. His only reply is Godzilla. Dr. Nick Tatopoulos, an NRC scientist, researching the effects of radiation on earth worms, is interrupted by the arrival of an agent of the U.S. State Department. He is sent to Panama, escorted by the military, to observe the wreckage of the recovered Japanese fishing ship and a set of massive dinosaur-like footprints in the grassy soil. The Frenchman is also there, observing the scene and introduces himself as an insurance agent. Aboard a military aircraft, Tatopolous identifies skin samples he recovered as belonging to an animal "unknown to science". He dismisses the military's theory that the creature is a reawakened dinosaur, theorising that its origins in French Polynesia make it a mutant created by nuclear testing. An old man is seen fishing on the dock. He takes a bite from his fishing rod, and a big wave comes toward him after a few minutes of trying to pull in his line. The big wave happens to be Godzilla, and he emerges from the dock. Godzilla then travels to Manhattan and creates havoc in the city, killing dozens of people. Godzilla is revealed to be a gigantic, bipedal lizard that towers over much of the New York skyline. The city is evacuated and the military attempt to kill Godzilla, first luring it out with a huge pile of fish (the creature's staple diet). It takes the bait, but is scared off by small arms fire, but oddly enough, it's just not working on the giant lizard.
That's pretty much a good enough "summary" of the movie, there's more in the movie than that, but it's kind of pointless to mention as this movie was just pointless to make. It's just badly written, the special effects are way over the top and obvious to anyone, and the actors are just so out of place it's insane. Now is this the worst movie of all time? I wouldn't say so, but it is just a bad movie over all, I wouldn't really recommend it. Godzilla just doesn't belong in America, especially since our government is stupid enough to constantly loose a gigantic lizard in NEW YORK CITY! So I wouldn't recommend this film, it's just a stupid way of killing time, you could be doing more useful things like the dishes.
2/10
A Japanese fishing ship is attacked by an unseen, giant monster that attacks from below the water: only one sailor survives. Traumatized, he is questioned in a hospital by a French scientist as to what he saw. His only reply is Godzilla. Dr. Nick Tatopoulos, an NRC scientist, researching the effects of radiation on earth worms, is interrupted by the arrival of an agent of the U.S. State Department. He is sent to Panama, escorted by the military, to observe the wreckage of the recovered Japanese fishing ship and a set of massive dinosaur-like footprints in the grassy soil. The Frenchman is also there, observing the scene and introduces himself as an insurance agent. Aboard a military aircraft, Tatopolous identifies skin samples he recovered as belonging to an animal "unknown to science". He dismisses the military's theory that the creature is a reawakened dinosaur, theorising that its origins in French Polynesia make it a mutant created by nuclear testing. An old man is seen fishing on the dock. He takes a bite from his fishing rod, and a big wave comes toward him after a few minutes of trying to pull in his line. The big wave happens to be Godzilla, and he emerges from the dock. Godzilla then travels to Manhattan and creates havoc in the city, killing dozens of people. Godzilla is revealed to be a gigantic, bipedal lizard that towers over much of the New York skyline. The city is evacuated and the military attempt to kill Godzilla, first luring it out with a huge pile of fish (the creature's staple diet). It takes the bait, but is scared off by small arms fire, but oddly enough, it's just not working on the giant lizard.
That's pretty much a good enough "summary" of the movie, there's more in the movie than that, but it's kind of pointless to mention as this movie was just pointless to make. It's just badly written, the special effects are way over the top and obvious to anyone, and the actors are just so out of place it's insane. Now is this the worst movie of all time? I wouldn't say so, but it is just a bad movie over all, I wouldn't really recommend it. Godzilla just doesn't belong in America, especially since our government is stupid enough to constantly loose a gigantic lizard in NEW YORK CITY! So I wouldn't recommend this film, it's just a stupid way of killing time, you could be doing more useful things like the dishes.
2/10
Deeply flawed, but kind of a guilty pleasure
TheLittleSongbird10 January 2011
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
sucks, sucks, sucks, sucks, ad infinitum
ambrosia-63 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
You know a movie is bad when you start rooting for the monster (see "Jurassic Park 3"). It had bad everything, from acting to plot to sfx. Matthew Broderick runs like a girl. And Spielberg (in most of his films) did the whole open mouth look of awe to death, but we get even more of it here, at least they stole from a good director. The indestructible (almost) taxicab was such a leap of faith that, well, I can think of no adjectives to even barely describe it. If Ed Wood had a hundred million dollars this is what he would have made. Without a doubt a strong contender for worst movie ever. See it only if you have time to kill. Otherwise stay away--it sucks beyond anything, arrgghhh.
Time has been kind to this movie
crossluke2130 May 2023
This film's legacy is that it was a gigantic misfire that was trashed by critics and hated by the fans it was trying to impress. I think a lot of people hate this movie because they think they are supposed to hate it. If you look at this movie for what it is, not what people wish it was, you will find that is one of the most expertly constructed monster movies ever made. Roland Emmerich is a master action filmmaker. The action scenes in this movie are clear, coherent, breathlessly suspenseful and exciting. Comparing Godzilla to the action films of today makes you realize the extent to which the filmmaking craft has deteriorated. So many action scenes now are a dull, sludgy CGI mess, with quick cuts and sloppy editing that render the action incoherent and weightless. This movie feels so grandly cinematic and epic in a way that movies just don't feel anymore. The lines between film and television have been blurred now, and that cinematic language has been lost.
The main criticism of this movie is that this Godzilla does not have the characteristics of his Japanese counterpart, which is true and valid. This Godzilla is not impervious to traditional weaponry, he runs and hides and uses stealth attacks instead of being a slow, lumbering wall of destruction, and his mighty atomic breath beam attack has been reduced to more of an oral flamethrower. But it is important to realize that a Godzilla movie had not been theatrically released in America for 14 years, the only way most Americans knew of Godzilla was through TV reruns and VHS tapes. He was simply not a major cultural force in America at that time. What was a major cultural force was Jurassic Park, so it makes sense that in order to create the largest draw possible, the filmmakers would reference Jurassic Park more than traditional Japanese monster movies, because that's what most audiences would be familiar with. Indeed, Godzilla and his offspring are more akin to a mutated T. Rex and raptors than to the big G himself. Also, the conception of giant movie monsters is fundamentally different in America vs Japan. In America, giant monsters are mutated animals on the loose, that cause a lot of violence before they are inevitably destroyed by military might or scientific ingenuity. In Japan, giant monsters (called kaiju) are immortal, indestructible, god-like beings. Japanese monster films operate much more in the realm of fantasy than their American counterparts. If Godzilla 1998 had gone for more of a traditional Japanese approach, wide audiences might not have understood it in the same way as they would a giant T. Rex run amok in NYC.
Forget expectations and cultural baggage. Watch this movie for what it is, and you will have a good time.
The main criticism of this movie is that this Godzilla does not have the characteristics of his Japanese counterpart, which is true and valid. This Godzilla is not impervious to traditional weaponry, he runs and hides and uses stealth attacks instead of being a slow, lumbering wall of destruction, and his mighty atomic breath beam attack has been reduced to more of an oral flamethrower. But it is important to realize that a Godzilla movie had not been theatrically released in America for 14 years, the only way most Americans knew of Godzilla was through TV reruns and VHS tapes. He was simply not a major cultural force in America at that time. What was a major cultural force was Jurassic Park, so it makes sense that in order to create the largest draw possible, the filmmakers would reference Jurassic Park more than traditional Japanese monster movies, because that's what most audiences would be familiar with. Indeed, Godzilla and his offspring are more akin to a mutated T. Rex and raptors than to the big G himself. Also, the conception of giant movie monsters is fundamentally different in America vs Japan. In America, giant monsters are mutated animals on the loose, that cause a lot of violence before they are inevitably destroyed by military might or scientific ingenuity. In Japan, giant monsters (called kaiju) are immortal, indestructible, god-like beings. Japanese monster films operate much more in the realm of fantasy than their American counterparts. If Godzilla 1998 had gone for more of a traditional Japanese approach, wide audiences might not have understood it in the same way as they would a giant T. Rex run amok in NYC.
Forget expectations and cultural baggage. Watch this movie for what it is, and you will have a good time.
Worst movie of 1998
ECM-25 November 1998
I'll easily name Godzilla one of the worst movies ever made- and I truly wasn't expecting much, but I would have paid money not to have sit through this. If you haven't seen it, consider yourself lucky. The one thing this movie had going for it, the special effects, were far outweighed by the horrible acting and bad dialogue, which is is ridiculous, unbelievable, unimaginative and just plain cheesy.
Definitely under rated...
bheadher11 August 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I don't usually start like this, but...
Come on guys, to all of you that thought this was a crummy movie, all I can say is...I loved it for several reasons.
First off, it held tightly to the original 1950's movie concept, a mutated lizard from all the atomic bomb tests...
Two, the movie let Godzilla be what he was, a frightening BIIG lizard, terrorizing New York City this time...
And three, they inserted some fun, sometimes clever, humor into this outing, heh heh...
Yes, it was fun watching this movie...not because of the humor involved, but because the movie actually has a soul, if you watch it closely...
And yes, everytime I see this one, I remember that cute little Chiuahua in the Taco Bell commercials, going "Heere Zilli Zilla"...
Come on guys, to all of you that thought this was a crummy movie, all I can say is...I loved it for several reasons.
First off, it held tightly to the original 1950's movie concept, a mutated lizard from all the atomic bomb tests...
Two, the movie let Godzilla be what he was, a frightening BIIG lizard, terrorizing New York City this time...
And three, they inserted some fun, sometimes clever, humor into this outing, heh heh...
Yes, it was fun watching this movie...not because of the humor involved, but because the movie actually has a soul, if you watch it closely...
And yes, everytime I see this one, I remember that cute little Chiuahua in the Taco Bell commercials, going "Heere Zilli Zilla"...
The "Nickleback Sucks" of Films
oblithian11 June 2021
I was there when people were seeing it in theaters, people were enjoying it and telling other people to go see it, the vast majority of people didn't walk out and say, "This was certifiable garbage". - Critic 2021
It won a lot of awards and it sold a lot of tickets. Cinematically it was cutting edge (at the time), and it was entertaining. I would argue this film is the reason so many people watch/know Godzilla today. Before 1998 it was just an old monster movie mostly cult fans cared about (at least in my part of the world).
I can't say it's flawless or has everything (no film does). It isn't scientifically accurate, but it's a monster/disaster film all of them are unbelievable (look at King Kong, or Planet of The Apes). It doesn't have monsters battling the whole time, quite frankly it was more believable than the newer one with mothra, and had better characters. (Not that the newer one doesn't have advantages).
In all, watch the film if you are interested, it may not be as true to the source material (I don't know, nor have I ever cared to) but so many people these days say it's bad just because that has become the expected perspective. Or maybe modern critics can only stand out by bashing formerly popular films?
It won a lot of awards and it sold a lot of tickets. Cinematically it was cutting edge (at the time), and it was entertaining. I would argue this film is the reason so many people watch/know Godzilla today. Before 1998 it was just an old monster movie mostly cult fans cared about (at least in my part of the world).
I can't say it's flawless or has everything (no film does). It isn't scientifically accurate, but it's a monster/disaster film all of them are unbelievable (look at King Kong, or Planet of The Apes). It doesn't have monsters battling the whole time, quite frankly it was more believable than the newer one with mothra, and had better characters. (Not that the newer one doesn't have advantages).
In all, watch the film if you are interested, it may not be as true to the source material (I don't know, nor have I ever cared to) but so many people these days say it's bad just because that has become the expected perspective. Or maybe modern critics can only stand out by bashing formerly popular films?
The preview was better than this movie
Xophianic2 February 2000
I remember sitting in the movie theaters when I first saw the preview in which a giant monster green foot crushed a T. Rex skeleton in a museum. It was a good preview, and I thought the movie would be just as good. I was wrong, the preview was better than the movie itself. The movie was boring, plotless, unfunny and annoying.
The acting is not very good. Aside from Inspector Gadget, I think this is the worst that Matthew Broderick has ever done. The plot was almost nonexistant, much like the original Godzilla movies. The monster Godzilla and its babies were ok, but nothing too spectacular. I was hoping a few of the main cast would be eaten or fried or something, which didn't really happen.
Most of the jokes really didn't work, the story was boring, the characters were flat and annoying and the movie itself, although it had a few fair moments, was very dull. Your kids may enjoy it, though.
The acting is not very good. Aside from Inspector Gadget, I think this is the worst that Matthew Broderick has ever done. The plot was almost nonexistant, much like the original Godzilla movies. The monster Godzilla and its babies were ok, but nothing too spectacular. I was hoping a few of the main cast would be eaten or fried or something, which didn't really happen.
Most of the jokes really didn't work, the story was boring, the characters were flat and annoying and the movie itself, although it had a few fair moments, was very dull. Your kids may enjoy it, though.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
