Originally posted by Lestov16
Yeah, I saw that earlier. I disagree with him though. Just because Pacific Rim was the hitherto newest kaiju film doesn't mean Godzilla has to live up to it's action. A film's direction is like different painting styles. They can differentiate, but they still have artistic value.
Godzilla's a kaiju though so it's not our fault some of us anticipated his latest film to be like Pacific Rim or better action-wise since, y'know, he's a kaiju! You think everyone who watched the classics and then watched the new one anticipated for anything but? The hell?
Well he had just as much screentime in the Showa-era classics, sometimes even less. And Cloverfield was also a kaiju film and that had zero monster action whatsoever. So if you were trying to judge this film only on your subjective expectations rather than objective merit, you may end up rather misguided.
With basically any Godzilla film you don't really see much action with the beast himself until the 2nd half or so (even Final Wars kept me waiting a long time to see him). This is nothing new. How many minutes of screentime did Godzilla have in like the classics again? Wasn't much different from what he had in this movie. The buildup is usually worth it except for like the '98 film.
And Joe was just being like any other critic on this movie (unlike when he defended Man of Steel), so can't say I really agree with him on this either, other than that the character of what's-his-face from Breaking Bad should've been in the film longer and that he was easily the best human character.
Originally posted by Lestov16
Well he had just as much screentime in the Showa-era classics, sometimes even less.
I won't deny that even in those, it took awhile 'til the big guy finally arrived but when he did, he still made more appearances than all the scenes of the new Godzilla put together.
And Cloverfield was also a kaiju film and that had zero monster action whatsoever. So if you were trying to judge this film only on your subjective expectations rather than objective merit, you may end up rather misguided.
That wasn't a Godzilla movie though and I actually liked the suspense around the Clover monster because it was new and nobody could tell what exactly the military was fighting, making you lean over the edge of your seat thinking aloud "What is that? What is that?!". That just doesn't work with Godzilla. It may work in the trailers but the whole movie in general including the final fight? Less Taylor Johnson and more what's going on next to him please.
In an interview with ScreenCrush, director Gareth Edwards was asked to address the movie's pacing. Here's what he said:
"When we sat down, we talked about what kind of movie we were thinking about and we talked about ‘Jurassic Park,’ ‘Jaws’ and a lot of Spielberg movies like ‘Close Encounters’. Also, ‘Alien’ and ‘King Kong’. And, they all have one thing in common: it’s about an hour into the movie before you see the creature. Because our benchmark films had taken that approach, no one ever really got nervous. And, to be honest, we sat and watched those movies that give it to you straight away and don’t let up until you leave, and…you just get tired. Quite easily you reach a brick wall and you get what I call “CGI fatigue.” Where you can’t care anymore about anything. When everything is cranked up to 11, you just can’t care anymore. So, that was always the consideration. To try and build slowly and tease and pull the audience in, and then when they get it, it’ll be more powerful."
Originally posted by Lestov16
http://moviepilot.com/posts/2014/05/18/gareth-edwards-addresses-godzilla-s-screen-time-1431573?lt_source=external,manual#[b]In an interview with ScreenCrush, director Gareth Edwards was asked to address the movie's pacing. Here's what he said:
[/B]
👆
I gotta agree with him.
Originally posted by Lestov16CGI fatigue. Yes. When a movie leaves you more exhausted than entertained. CGI overload.
http://moviepilot.com/posts/2014/05/18/gareth-edwards-addresses-godzilla-s-screen-time-1431573?lt_source=external,manual#[b]In an interview with ScreenCrush, director Gareth Edwards was asked to address the movie's pacing. Here's what he said:
[/B]
Perhaps Edwards was too careful and ended up underdoing the action.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
What credit does Pacific Rim deserve? That graphic designers know how to make a good CGI fight scene?
Eh, the fight coreography and the CGI are about the less interesting things about PR, don't get me wrong they are pretty and shiny, but if you want to reduce the movie to that, you're watching it wrong.
The film builds an entire universe with Kaijus at their core, we get glimpses of cities build around their corpses, of them being sold ridiculously as afrodissiacs, of a historical match between them and the armies of different countries. This is done quickly and effectively, without slowing down, making you dive head in into a universe that could be just like ours, but seems so much richer and creative just by a minor tweak. Pacific Rim is FUN, it has a distinctive look in its monsters and robots, the aesthetics communicate all this idea of spectacle and entretainment: everything is neon lights and shines, you're treated with crazy angles and very cinematic perspectives. It's campy, but done right. Instead of making the epic conflict angsty and pointlessly emotional it becomes a tale of bravery and brotherhood that strays from the down to Earth disaster aesthetics and tired "gritty" holywood formula. Pacific Rim is a space opera minus the space, it knows what it wants to do and knocks it out of the park.
The movie, of course, is not without its flaws, but it does a great deal of things properly. It's part of a kind of monster movie that up to that point failed to be represented in the international market.