I understand their complaints, although I think the people who make those complaints have never seen another incarnation of Superman, especially the JLU version who was smashing Darkseid through buildings mercilessly, not mention overestimate how much control Kal had over that fight.
I had problems with MOS, but collateral damage was not one of them.
Originally posted by Lestov16
I understand their complaints, although I think the people who make those complaints have never seen another incarnation of Superman, especially the JLU version who was smashing Darkseid through buildings mercilessly, not mention overestimate how much control Kal had over that fight.I had problems with MOS, but collateral damage was not one of them.
Oh yeah, I completely agree with you on that. I'm just saying Godzilla isn't the best comparison on the issue of collateral damage.
This movie really only raised 2 questions with its continuity for me.
1. Just how deep is the San Fran Bay if it can have a Aircraft Carrier in it and still be deep enough that that big of a Godzilla can swim underneath it?
2. The 90 min timer on the bomb. Are we really supposed to believe that with in that amount of time the military was able to get a meeting set up to come up with the whole plane on what to do. Get a C130 in the air with the team and all the stuff it needs then Halo jump into a city currently being destroyed by giant monsters and then get acrossed it, free the bomb from its monster goo prison (with big ladders apperantly) then carry said bomb thru said city then put it on a big slow boat and then have it tug its way out far enough so that it could go off and NOT destroy everything?
REALLY!?
All that in 90 minutes?
Originally posted by Lestov16
It's interesting that this film is essentially the Man of Steel of 2014. It's polarized everyone who's seen it into absolute love or hatred (I loved this movie). Ironically enough, critics of MOS say that had too much destruction, whereas critics of this film are saying it had too little.
MoS wasn't that good of a Superman film, sadly. This is a decent Godzilla film when it comes to the Godzilla lore. The faults from each movie are quite different too, but there is a point in common: the expectations from the critics played a huge role in how the film was valued.
Originally posted by Bentley
Was it stated that the second bomb had a 90 minute timer? I only watched the movie once, so I'm lazy to check that out. I guess if they were that quick the US army is actually depicted as quite competent mmm
Gee? That couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the US Military was a major contributor to this movie was it?
Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]This movie really only raised 2 questions with its continuity for me.1. Just how deep is the San Fran Bay if it can have a Aircraft Carrier in it and still be deep enough that that big of a Godzilla can swim underneath it?
2. The 90 min timer on the bomb. Are we really supposed to believe that with in that amount of time the military was able to get a meeting set up to come up with the whole plane on what to do. Get a C130 in the air with the team and all the stuff it needs then Halo jump into a city currently being destroyed by giant monsters and then get acrossed it, free the bomb from its monster goo prison (with big ladders apperantly) then carry said bomb thru said city then put it on a big slow boat and then have it tug its way out far enough so that it could go off and NOT destroy everything?
REALLY!?
All that in 90 minutes?
[/B]
1. The San-Fran Bay, under the Golden Gate Bridge, is 360 feet deep.
2. Yes. I come up with far more complicated plans and processes on a daily basis as part of my job. I expect the top military minds in a fictional story to come up with decent plans. In fact, their plan seems even simpler after you've described it. It is very linear and iterative with very few contingency plans. Seems very straightforward. 😐
The movie has faults but you're not really hitting them. Legitimate faults in the film can be the shitty acting from the lead actor or the cheesy dialogue written for the actors. How about a critique on the drab lighting (they did that, intentionally, but I find it slightly irritating...lighting is ****ing important in a damn movie)?
Originally posted by Zack Fair
Agreed. I dunno about Godzilla's fights not having enough destruction. I'm a destruction porn addict and I was pleased at the end.
I dunno...for me it wasn't "enough destruction" but a bit too much destruction...
It kinda seemed most cities were already shown in ruins even before either MUTO or Godzilla arrived...?
The MOUTOS were pretty agile for their size, they weren't exactly stumbling around bumping into every building...they walked around or over obstacles & the winged one was even seen gracefully flying between buildings without damaging them.
Originally posted by Lestov16
Just like the famous Showa-era Godzilla vs. films where Godzilla hardly appeared. He was only in 17 minutes of the 1954 original. Teasing Godzilla is not a new thing at all.
Agreed, the Godzilla movies have always been kinda a laugh riot and a matter of jokes.
Im surprised they wanted to spend this much money doing it that way but hey whatever, not my money. Here in Mexico it costs $4.00 for a imax 3d for a money ticket vs the states where its like $20-30 plus the cost of glasses.