How do you view Zilla (aka Gino/godzilla 1998/etc)

[Zarm]

See what I mean.
When the actors are in a Japanese film, you make up all kinds of justifications for their bad acting. That you don't apply equally to American films.
A bad actor in an American film "ruins the film". But a bad actor in a Japanese film is part of it's "charm".
There's no acting issues in G98 that doesn't exist in the Toho films.

Um, no. We just don't agree that the examples you cite (well, I mean, King Kong Escapes, sure, but I've never given that movie a pass, either) actually are bad acting. Or, in my case, that an unintentionally annoying character that's supposed to be likable is the same as an intentionally-annoying character whose personality changes and grows as part of the story.

It's the difference between Eustace from Voyage of the Dawn Treader (the whole point was that he was a brat, and became changed for the better by his experiences) and Jar-Jar Binks (who wasn't meant to be annoying, but because of the writing and portrayal, ended up irritating many audience members to the point of distraction).


Now, there are less-liked Godzilla films whose characters are called out as film-breaking by many; Ichiro from Godzilla's Revenge, Susan from king Kong Escapes, the entire main cast of Godzilla vs. Mothra: Battle for Earth... not everyone agrees about those (just as not everyone agrees about Audrey from '98), because 'annoying' is a subjective perspective. But the idea that all Japanese characters get a blanket pass, or that the terrible characters and story of '98 get dinged by many simply because they're American, is not borne out by fan opinion here. There are plenty of detractors of legitimately-bad characters (and some defenders) just as there are plenty of defenders of legitimately-bad characters in '98 (along with us many detractors). And plenty of people who complain about both, or complain about neither.

[InnocentClarke]

See what I mean.
When the actors are in a Japanese film, you make up all kinds of justifications for their bad acting. That you don't apply equally to American films.
A bad actor in an American film "ruins the film". But a bad actor in a Japanese film is part of it's "charm".
There's no acting issues in G98 that doesn't exist in the Toho films.

No, no one sees what you mean. I provided reasoning for why it isn't the same, as did Zarm. You're just locked into this mindset of, "BUT TOHO TOO!" which doesn't really show your point to anyone.

[KManX89]

I, unlike seemingly a number of people, find Zilla's design to be absolutely unappealing anyway

They don't call him a chicken-legged, Jay Leno-chinned iguana for nothing.

[ScottA]

No, no one sees what you mean. I provided reasoning for why it isn't the same, as did Zarm. You're just locked into this mindset of, "BUT TOHO TOO!" which doesn't really show your point to anyone.

What are you babbling on about child?
I gave you two specific examples of characters that were just as bad, or worse, than Audrey. What the hell else do want....Time codes?
Don't speak for everyone else. Because the fact is that YOU are not seeing it. YOU don't get it.

Denial is not just a river in Egypt.
You're just kidding yourself if you think the acting in G98 is any worse than the Toho films.
You and Zarm can hate on G98 for the acting all day long. But you're hypocrites for doing so.
It doesn't matter if you can't see it. It's still the truth.

[Zarm]

I gave you two specific examples of characters that were just as bad, or worse, than Audrey. What the hell else do want....Time codes?

With all due respect, sir, his point is that others don't agree with your examples. (Well, I agreed with one of them). And as I pointed out in my post, perceptions of bad acting and writing are in the eye of the beholder; heck, I just watched a 15 minute video claiming Peter Jackson's Kong was a masterpiece with which I couldn't disagree more, despite many people I know who like it- and at the same time, I would defend nearly every part of The Phantom Menace that isn't set on Tatooine as great Star Wars, and certainly the best of the prequels, despite the legendarily-low opinions of those films.

What works for one person doesn't work for another, and vice-versa. Disagreeing with your examples is not denial; it is disagreement based on differing tastes. 'No one sees what you mean' is probably a bad way of putting it; a better one might be 'several of us do not agree that the ideas your case is built upon- that both your cited characters are equally bad, and that the bad ones are given a pass that '98 doesn't get- are correct, thus we do not see the conclusion as foregone, the way it is being presented.' In other words, subjective opinions on bad acting are not objective truth.


I'd prefer to avoid name-calling; I find one performance non-objectionable (Godzilla 2000) for reasons I defined, and the other two objectionable and detraction from the film. When it comes to '98, I simply don't find that performance to remotely be the only thing wrong with the film- hence why I detest it, for a myriad of terrible factors- whereas in Kong Escapes, I find the other elements to be perfectly enjoyable, hence why the bad acting of one character is not a deal-breaker, and I consider the movie only 'meh' instead of outright despising it. For me, '98 doesn't have any of those mitigating factors. I was merely commenting on the perceptions of bad acting in both sets of films, but if you want to get into my whole rationale behind my opinion on '98 (which is advisable before forming an opinion of me, my opinion, or my integrity), there it is. I am happy to list out specific complaints about the film if that is not enough. But in the end, some will work for you, some won't, you may or may not agree with any given point, and our opinions will remain our won based on intangible connections and attributes that the movie does or doesn't posses for each of us, personally- because these are only subjective opinions. Objective truth exists- but feeling on whether '98 is a good film or a bad film, or an individual performance is good or bad, is not it.

[ScottA]

@Zarm,
No. That was not his point.
His point was: "I speak for everyone on the internet. I'm right and you're wrong...I win the internet."

As you've said. The performance is in the eye of the beholder. I agree with you on that.
Therefore. The statement that G98 sucks because of the acting and dialog. In the context a film library consisting of flat out atrocious Toho performances is the height of hypocrisy. And Anyone saying such nonsense is lost in their own fantasy world.
Only G98 gets this ridiculous bad acting blanket statement thrown at it. When there's a plethora of other Japanese films in the library doing it just as bad, or much worse.

I still respectfully argue that if you have no problems with that Japanese actor. Yet do have a problem with the Audrey character. Then you are being biased. And you're not giving both actors the same scrutiny. But that's a different subject. That's not the problem. That's just human nature.
The problem is people jumping all over G98 for the "acting". When it's no worse than the other films.
Most monster movies have at least one bad performance in it. But G98 gets crucified for it, while the other films get a free pass.

[UltramanGoji]

It's a lot easier to notice bad acting in an American film than in a foreign film.

I still respectfully argue that if you have no problems with that Japanese actor. Yet do have a problem with the Audrey character. Then you are being biased.

Congratulations, you figured out how opinions work.

[ScottA]

Congratulations, you figured out how opinions work.

Thanks professor.

[The Kongfather]

I like to think of Zilla as a random monster that the US dealt with and mistook for Godzilla, as referenced in GMK. If you want to get more elaborate you could assume that the Zilla that gets wrecked in Final Wars was born from the leftover egg from the '98 film. Zilla is a weak and disrespectful Godzilla interpretation, but still very nostalgic for me. He deserves little more than an apathetic shoulder shrug.

[Loganrules115]

I like to think of Zilla as a random monster that the US dealt with and mistook for Godzilla, as referenced in GMK. If you want to get more elaborate you could assume that the Zilla that gets wrecked in Final Wars was born from the leftover egg from the '98 film. Zilla is a weak and disrespectful Godzilla interpretation, but still very nostalgic for me. He deserves little more than an apathetic shoulder shrug.

Does this make Godzilla: The Series part of the GMK universe as well?

[The Kongfather]

I like to think of Zilla as a random monster that the US dealt with and mistook for Godzilla, as referenced in GMK. If you want to get more elaborate you could assume that the Zilla that gets wrecked in Final Wars was born from the leftover egg from the '98 film. Zilla is a weak and disrespectful Godzilla interpretation, but still very nostalgic for me. He deserves little more than an apathetic shoulder shrug.

Does this make Godzilla: The Series part of the GMK universe as well?

I haven't seen the cartoon, so this is where that shoulder shrug comes into play.

[Mac Daddy MM]

Wait. People STILL think that joke in GMK makes G'98 canon to it? Are we in 2006, still? What year is this?

[Loganrules115]

Wait. People STILL think that joke in GMK makes G'98 canon to it? Are we in 2006, still? What year is this?

In all fairness, there aren't many other explanations for that quote in the movie.

[eabaker]

Wait. People STILL think that joke in GMK makes G'98 canon to it? Are we in 2006, still? What year is this?

In all fairness, there aren't many other explanations for that quote in the movie.

It doesn't make any sense to consider the two movies part of the same continuity, though. GMK presents itself as a sequel to the 1954 movie, while G'98 clearly does not exist in a world in which the events of that movie occurred.

The only explanation needed is, "Something attacked New York, it was not Godzilla, Americans misidentified it."

[KaijuCanuck]

Wait. People STILL think that joke in GMK makes G'98 canon to it? Are we in 2006, still? What year is this?

The essence of it could be canon, but not the whole thing. Kind like how the essence of Gojira is canon to Godzilla x Megaguirus, but not the literal movie beat for beat because Godzilla didn't die.

[The Kongfather]

Wait. People STILL think that joke in GMK makes G'98 canon to it? Are we in 2006, still? What year is this?

In all fairness, there aren't many other explanations for that quote in the movie.

It doesn't make any sense to consider the two movies part of the same continuity, though. GMK presents itself as a sequel to the 1954 movie, while G'98 clearly does not exist in a world in which the events of that movie occurred.

The only explanation needed is, "Something attacked New York, it was not Godzilla, Americans misidentified it."

I don't take Godzilla '98 as literal canon, I just enjoy GMK's jab at the character and like the idea of Zilla being some random Kaiju.

The essence of it could be canon, but not the whole thing. Kind like how the essence of Gojira is canon to Godzilla x Megaguirus, but not the literal movie beat for beat because Godzilla didn't die.

This guy gets it.

[Omegamorph]

In all fairness, there aren't many other explanations for that quote in the movie.

Yeah I guess Back to the Future 2 and Blade Runner are in the same continuity as well

ditto Alien and Spaceballs

amirite

[Loganrules115]

In all fairness, there aren't many other explanations for that quote in the movie.

Yeah I guess Back to the Future 2 and Blade Runner are in the same continuity as well

ditto Alien and Spaceballs

amirite

It'd be hilarious to see an Alien/Spaceballs crossover.

[American Godzilla]

Even though the monster in the 1998 film wasn't Godzilla (the look was cool, but without the intelligence or abilities the look doesn't mean much) I still enjoyed it as a generic monster movie. The cartoon version of the 1998 monster had the intelligence and abilities commonly seen in Godzilla, so I tend to call it a "Tristar Gojira" as it's worthy of being called a Godzilla.

Toho's take on Zilla in Final Wars I have mixed reviews. I don't care for the poor 3d take on it, nor the one sided fight. I never doubted that Godzilla would win, but to be fair they could have made the fight entertaining by making the Toho Zilla act more like the 98 version (preferring sneak attacks than open frontal assaults, and quite clever when she needed to be). That said, the whole acid-fire breath idea they gave it is a vast improvement over the weak heat breath seen in the film. Tristar Gojira could easily take it on though (as he faced tougher and smarter monsters).

Again, love the look for Zilla and making it a separate monster in its own right is a great idea... but 19 years later and (sometimes) I still hear people being just as upset over it as if it was still 1998 is extremely tiring.

Here's my question: What would you folks think of having Zilla Jr/Tristar Gojira in a future Godzilla game (in a similar style as the recent ps4 Godzilla game or the classic "Save the Earth" game)?

[Godzilla2004fan]

I view Zilla as an awesome kaiju. I hate when people calls it "G'98, or G.I.N.O, because those are nicknames of Godzilla 1998, not from Zilla, Because his Official Nicknames are, Jira, French Godzilla and Tuna-Head. I love this kaiju.