As you might've expected, there's been quite a bit of jibber-jabber on the internet as to which was the better movie and how well-received one movie was relative to the other. It's even been said on here that general movie-goers, as in non-Godzilla fans, enjoyed the 98 movie more.
I'm here to completely debunk this claim right here, right now while also putting into perspective each movie's so-called "WOM". Let's take a look at online scores for each:
Rotten Tomatoes: 73% "fresh" critic score, 71% "fresh" audience score.
MetaCritic: 62% critic score, 7.2 audience score.
Rotten Tomatoes: 25% "fresh" critic score, 28% "fresh" audience score.
MetaCritic: 32% critic score, 5.1 audience score.
So count that: G14 is rated nearly 20 points higher on IMDb, nearly 50 points higher on RT (both user AND critic scores) and 30 points higher with critics and over 20 points higher with users on MetaCritic (let's face it, these scores for G98 are just pathetic, all of em, especially its RT and MC critic scores).
But wait, it gets better:
It should be worth noting that G14 was rated as the better movie in every (meaningful) category. The only categories G98 "won" in are "More Humor" and "More Plot Holes". The first one obviously doesn't matter (as that's only because the 98 movie had utterly immature New Yorker stereotype jokes and "zingers" like "that's a lot of fish" and "we need bigger guns!" while this movie aimed for a more serious tone) while the latter is actually yet more reason why this is the better movie.
So there you go, these stats clearly show which is the preferred movie in the general public's eyes, completely settling the debate, and the verdict is: there is no debate. The 2014 Godzilla was far and away the better movie in most people's opinions (and it clearly was at every level, including the acting and characters, which some like to knock this movie for), and this is reflected in user and critic scores (the last page in particular). Anyone saying they prefered the 98 movie to this are the exception, i.e: the minority.
SIDE NOTE: it also made a much bigger studio profit relative to budget than the 98 movie did, for anyone wanting to throw the "G98 sold more tickets" argument (which BTW: 'Batman & Robin' sold more tickets than 'Batman Begins' so it doesn't help your argument). The 98 movie grossed more, earning $643 mil adjusted to today's numbers, however, adjusted for inflation, it had a combined budget of $390 mil ($220 mil production and $170 mil marketing), only $40 mil less than TASM2's ($250 mil production and $180 mil advertising), which reportedly needed $660 mil to break even, meaning it would've needed to gross around $600-630 mil in today's dollars to break even. As such, it made well under $100 mil in total profit at best and barely broke even at worst even if you were to adjust it for inflation while this has made over $100 mil in profit encounting (as LP confirmed it needed to break $380 to make a profit) and it hasn't even released in Japan yet, hence why this is getting sequels and the 98 movie thankfully didn't.
This is a pretty good discussion.
“Banana oil.”- George Takei, Gigantis: The Fire Monster
^And the funny thing is, another user on here, who shall remain anonymous, said in another thread that was locked recently that non-G fans, or outside movie-goers preferred the 98 "movie" to this one which, as I've pointed out with all of these stats (especially the last page), is about as true as 2012 and the Easter Bunny. If that were the case, they wouldn't have rated G14 as the better movie in literally every category (except "More Humor" and "More Plot Holes"), including "Better Movie" nor would it be kicking GINO 98's ass in terms of average user and critic scores on IMDb, RT and MC. Like I said, these online scores are an extension of what people thought of each individual movie, and the people have spoken: G14 is far and away the better film.
you are preety much rigth MANX
Evacuate?, Godzilla is just a Legend!-Woman in GMK
Imdb had like a 9.7/10 before the movie even came out you can see how the fact that there were people giving this movie a perfect score before it was even seen by them could skew the results. Then there's that graph. The fact I have no idea how many people vote on that chart gives me doubts about it. Then there's the fact some of the categories are jokes. More monster battles? That's not even a topic that can be compared. Closer to toho originals? The 98 design was meant to be different, the 2014 tried to to pay tribute so once again can't really be compared. Then there's the category of Godzilla destruction. This topic isn't who did the destruction better, or how effective it was it's if there was more. That's the key word "more" and to say the 98 movie had less Godzilla destruction that the 2014 is pretty clearly false, especially when most of the destruction in the 2014 movie happened off screen.
I personally laughed at the "sexier" category. Bravo anonymous person bravo.
@KManx89 - G14 being far and away better? Far and away better only when you compare the creature designs and idealogy, and how it pays homage to the original titular chracter 'Godzilla'. That's why reviewers gave it a high score because they were comparing the movie with its 98 predecessor. If I did the comparison, I too would say G14 is far and away better than the 98. I really wonder why you try so hard to make yourself feel good about comparing G98 to Godzilla 2014 when it's obvious G14 was going to be much better-rated considering how far Godzilla 1998 veered from the original creature design. LOL.
Sites detailing good scores are not going to help in your argument because majority of the millions of people out there don't come online to give their reviews or ratings. So how do they show their support? Simply by turning up in numbers of course, which isn't progressing very well apparently, with G14 still stuck at $488 million to date.
You need to make a clear distinction here - G14 pleased a tonne of Godzilla fans but NOT majority of the mainstream audiences. Hence, the bad word of mouth and them feeling cheated by the movie's marketing. How do we know this happened? We need only look at whether the movie is meeting its projected earnings. And I'm talking about projections common to all movies.
And I'm pleased to tell you something Godzilla 2014 has achieved in being #1 at now. :)
First off, do you know what made Legendary decide to quickly announce 2 sequels for Godzilla in just the first week of its debut? It's the explosive $93 million domestic box office opening, along with big openings worldwide that prompted them to do so. Why?
Simple. - They based it on projections. Like what one of the members here @RatedRex (a marketing exec at a major movie studio for over 12 years) pointed out, studios have their ways of calculating projections taking into account competition and percentile decreases. Based on Godzilla's $93 million opening in the US and strong opening worldwide, he said we are looking at a figure of $600 - $700 million in overall sales based on gradual sales momentum. And he is right. And that's exactly what Legendary studios projected internally too, which far exceeded their expectations, and needless to say. it quickly prompted them to announce 2 sequels in just the first week of Godzilla's debut because they thought they had a strong momentum. Of course, they weren't prepared for what came later after the 2nd week, which is why I said Legendary was counting their chickens before they hatched.
We simply have to look at the track record of all movies which opened at $90 million. Typically, a $90 million box office opening would garner a domestic projection of $230 million, and not surprisingly, almost all movies that opened in this fashion went on to hit the projections both Domestic and Worldwide. But if a movie opens this big only to stray far away from projections, something's not right. Let's see:
1. Pirates of the Carribean: On Stranger Tides
Opening ($90.1M) Domestic ($241M) Combined ($1.04B)
2. The Maxtrix Reloaded
Opening (91.7M) Domestic ($281.5M) Combined ($742M)
3. Fast & Furious 6
Opening ($97.7M) Domestic ($238M) Combined ($748M)
4. Captain America Winter Soldier
Opening ($95M) Domestic ($257.2M) Combined ($711.2M)
5. The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Opening ($91.6M) Domestic ($200.3M) Combined ($704M)
6. X-Men Days of Future Past
Opening (90.8M) Domestic ($225.7M to date) Combined ($715.7M to date)
7. Godzilla 2014
Opening ($93M) Domestic ($197M to date) Combined ($488M to date)
You like to cherry-pick movies for comparison? Why not let's compare Godzilla 2014 with movies of the same opening-size then? Godzilla 2014 belongs to the all-time $90M opening league of movies, and I have not even brought in the rest of the movies in the $90M opening list, which all ended between upwards of $580M to over $700M in earnings by the way.
Let's face it - Legendary Studios got bullish about the sequel in the first week, because all movies that opened at $90 million typically ended with huge earnings, and Godzilla appeared to be following that trend. Even though Spider-Man 2, like Godzilla 2014, failed to hit the projected targets for the US Box-office, at least Spidey still managed a $700M in overall sales.
At $488m currently, (even if it goes on to earn $530-$550m eventually, which is seriously in doubt) whichever way, this still makes Godzilla 2014 officially the Worst-Performing movie of All Time both in domestic and worldwide sales in its $90M opener category. And I'm surprised you actually failed to realized that, or did you choose to only listen to the good news :)
Could you, in all your wisdom provide me a reason how the competition is dragging Godzilla 2014 down by this much such that it is way underperforming what other movies have achieved with the same opening figures? Apparently this "competition" phenomenon is not affecting the other movies that opened at $90M whether they are sequels or non-sequels, or reboots or non-reboots. And if Godzilla cannot hold out against the competition from other movies, something must be very wrong with the appeal of this movie. Is it also because the first waves of audiences are not recommending the movie well enough to others around them? Because either way whichever reason you can think of, it still doesn't detract from one fact that's taking place here. Stop using an artistic failure like G98 to make yourself feel good about Godzilla 2014 when it doesn't prove anything in the end. Let's face it - Godzilla 2014 opened big only to fizzle out like G98. And it is certainly Underperforming.
" Your kind feared the Darkness. "
Have we not even taken into consideration the fact that Godzilla hasn't even opened yet in Japan?
One thing to point out about the 90 million dollar movies is about the Matrix Reloaded. It opened to 18.7 million for the second highest opening ever in Japanese box office history. Imagine what Godzilla will do, since Godzilla has dominated Japan for nearly 60 years.
I don't think that Godzilla has underwhelmed at the box office, nor will I say that until Godzilla is completely out of the box office. Wait and see, Frozen ran forever in Japan and look at how much money it made, highest grossing movie of Japanese history.
Actually, DURPOO, the "more Godzilla destruction" thing is true for this movie as well, "Godzilla" didn't cause ANY destruction in the 98 movie, in fact, "he" wasn't even in the movie. That "thing" that attacked New York was NOT Godzilla, he's not even trademarked as Godzilla, anymore, he's had his Godzilla trademark and icon completely removed. You must be thinking of Zilla, which BTW, the "damage" Zilla did "cause" was pretty minimal, he tramples some boats, steps over a few cars, hits the side of some buildings with his tail, and that's about it. The bumbling military are actually the ones causing most of the damage, but of course, we all know why by the end of the movie as it would've been over right then and there during the helicopter chase scene if they would've actually done what they should've been able to do easily and hit the damn thing (how the hell do you literally fire all over the damn place and not hit a 200 foot tall iguana one time?) meaning no Jurassic Park ripoff scene with the baby Zillas to shoot.
And BTW, if you wanna talk about "useless categories" you might as well throw in "More Humor" (which was the only other category G98 "won" in besides "More Plot Holes" on that page) as well. These are monster movies, last I checked, not comedies. And on the subject of "categories that don't belong on there", will "Better Movie", "More Entertaining", "More Rewatchable", "Better Acting", "Better Cast", "Better Directed" and "Better Cinematography" not suffice? Because newsflash: it beat G98 in each of those categories, too, and then some! The movie is currently at a 7.2 on IMDb and hasn't dropped in months BTW.
And no, I'm not making those figures up for the 98 movie. Yes, adjusted for inflation, it did gross more than the 2014 movie, however, it cost $130 mil to make, which would be $220 mil today, and reportedly cost $100 mil to advertise, which would be $170 mil in today's dollars. TASM2 cost $250 mil to make and $180 mil to market, and that needed $660 mil to break even, so no way did it make $100 mil in total profit for Sony (as it's only $40 mil cheaper in total budget than TASM2 adjusted) even if you were to inflate it to today's numbers while this movie did, and it's not even finished yet. So yes, this movie made a bigger profit relative to budget than the 98 movie (even with way more competition and higher levels of piracy to deal with, too) and was much better received by audiences and critics as the above stats and page point out. THAT's why it's getting sequels and the 98 travesty thankfully didn't: because it actually has potential to make a profit with its sequels and the 98 movie didn't (as everybody hated it). I know it, you know it, and Sony knew it, too.
It selling more tickets is a moot point, anyway, like I said, by that '"logic", 'Batman & Robin' was the better and preferred movie over 'Batman Begins' (and it did sell more than it inflated, $403,119,745 as opposed to $374,218,673 for BB) which I guarantee would be faced with nothing but ridicule if you actually tried to make that argument. And yes, the characters and acting were better in this one, the fact that it didn't have Ferris Bueller "I'm siiiiiiingin' in the rain", "It's Gojira, you moron!" and makes the characters in this better by default. I'll take a nurse helping people over a bumbling reporter any day of the week.
The only damage we see Godzilla is G14 do is to the bridge and to the building. That's not much. At east in 98 he ripped through buildings as apparently by the holes he made running from the helicopters. As for the technical standpoint the monster was referred to as Godzilla in that movie so let's not get into semantics about what is and isn't godzilla.
My referring to useless categories pretty much is the problem with that poll. When i looked earlier more action was in the 98's bar and now it's back even farther in the 2014's which shows the poll probably consists of about 20 people max voting if the vote can be swayed that much.
I don't really see what you're trying to prove, no one is arguing that the 98 movie is better than the 2014 movie. Actually if the only argument is that the 2014 movie is better than the 98 one that's like me saying, "hey, Godzilla vs Gigan may no be the best, but at least it's better than Godzilla vs Megalon." As you can see that's not much of an accomplishment. Of course I think G14 is better than both but it's extremely middle of the pack still in terms of most aspects of the movie, which is sad since it had a budget and backing that should have allowed it to stand far and above all the competition.
As a side note on your nurse reference, I'll point this out just because I think Elle Brody was a horrible character, but when was she helping people? She was on the phone, then you see her say a patient is hers as they take them away and she opts to stay at the hospital, but you never see her doing anything there then she goes to the underground shelter. At least that bumbling reporter did things besides serve as a destination point.
@KManx89 - I really don't understand what you are trying to prove when you keep harping on that Batman & Robin nonsense VS Batman Begins. Are you trying to prove that Basically Reboots may not earn as much even though they may have the better story line and better impressions from audiences? And in doing so, I can see you trying to lump this analysis to prove that Godzilla 2014 is in the same boat or situation here, where it had the better story and concept even though it failed to reach what its disastrous predecessor had achieved in sales numbers. Really?
Let me tell you what's so embarassingly wrong about your analysis of Batman & Robin VS Batman Begins. First off unlike Godzilla, audiences have already been exposed to the plethora of Batman-themed movies dished out to them over the years both domestically and worldwide and the all-too-familiar villains. One doesn't even need to read up much and people already know who the classic villains of Batman are. The old Batman franchise were pretty good movies, but nothing exceptional either.
When word of the reboot came by in 2005, audiences' reactions were skeptical at first to catch the movie. Even I was one of them who didn't catch the movie, because basically we would be getting the same old shit from the Batman franchise, and I wasn't going to catch another reboot of this series. It came as no surprise then that Batman Begins only opened modestly in the US at $48M and averagely in the overseas market. However, word of mouth soon spread among the first wave of audiences and it won critical acclaim for its dark portrayal of Batman. Of course Batman Begins went on to earn $206M at the US box office, but the overseas market's reception was luke-warm.
And let me stress to you, the current Batman Franchise did not succeed at all merely by riding on the coat-tail of Batman Begins. I was one of those who never bothered to follow this franchise. It was only 3 years later, when the untimely death of Heath Ledger who acted as Joker brought tonnes of publicity to the movie's sequel 'The Dark Knight' that aroused the curiosity of audiences over how seriously Heath Ledger took his role as Joker. Needless to say audiences showed up in record numbers to support the movie, which went on to earn $1 Billion worldwide.
I already knew you were trying to lump this analysis to argue that Godzilla is something like Batman Returns, and the sequel is sure to make a tonne of money, but that's where you are wrong. It's the sensational publicity that turned the fortunes of the Batman Franchise and Godzilla will have none of that. Period. LOL.
Its funny how you like to cherry-pick the movies you want to compare but shouldn't reboots like Man of Steel be the best source for comparison? Why didn't you use that? After all Man of Steel is in a situation more similar to Godzilla 2014 than what Batman Begins is. - They are reboots of movies that were deemed unworthy by audiences. :)
Audiences were unimpressed by 2006's Superman Returns, similar to how they were unimpressed by Godzilla 1998. Fast forward when Man of Steel debuted, audiences readily gave the chance to the reboot because 2006's Superman was clearly disappointing and people wanted a fresh take of Superman. Of course Man of Steel went on to beat the domestic Box Office to earn $291 million and eventually $668 million combined.
And likewise for Godzilla 2014, the fact that audiences turned up in record numbers both in the US and worldwide is proof that people are willing to give Godzilla that shot ! But sorry to say Gareth Edwards squandered that opportunity with his unworthy direction of the movie, and audiences are giving Godzilla 2014 the cold treatment at the box office after the first wave.
The numbers have already done the talking - Godzilla 2014 is currently the worst-performing movie of all time in the $90 million-opener category. And btw, there are many movies that opened lesser than G14 and they still made more than just $488M. So what excuses have you got now? :)
" Your kind feared the Darkness. "
@Hking47 - Sorry to say this but Japan was never really a key market for Hollywood as far as movie earnings are concerned. Earnings typically hover around the $5 -$15 million mark for foreign movies. Coupled with the fact that the Kaiju genre is not really that popular among the new generation of Japanese.
You see, there's something quite wrong with the reception of the audience towards Godzilla 2014 at the moment. China has demonstrated that it had a taste for monster movies, like how Pacific Rim earned $114m from the Chinese market. We thought Godzilla could ride on that wave and easily beat Pacific Rim in China, but turns out, Godzilla is still hovering around $78 million and there's still doubt if it would ever cross $110 million now. Strangely, some people like to bring in the Transformers Age of Extinction and say its posing strong competition for Godzilla 2014 in China but forget that even before Transformers debuted, Godzilla was already stuck at $69 million.
And in Japan, Pacific Rim made just $14 million. Suppose I give Godzilla 2014 the benefit, and it makes $50 millon out of Japan's small market. Even when I add up all the numbers, it would still come up to a combined sales of less than $580 million. Even so, this still makes G14 the worst-performer in its opener-category of movies.
I am actually waiting to see what movie analysts have to say about Godzilla 2014's performance after the end of the entire sales period.
" Your kind feared the Darkness. "
Seventy bajillion walls of text.
Are we seriously comparing thet wo american Godzilla films? We're actually doing this? Why?
Why is anyone doing this?
Yeah man, Godzilla reboot totally losing out to established franchise sequels in the US. Its totally underperforming. Considering most of those movies are from ten+ year old american brands, comparing the 'new old kid on the block' like Godzilla to those numbers is pretty... redundant. its basically like saying that a new video game like Titanfall is underperforming in comparison to call of duty-- despite the fact that titanfall doesn't have the loyalist market.
In other words, Godzilla is basically a new brand over here, it was forgotten, swept under the rug, and expecting it to even compare to the established american brands that you listed is probably one of the silliest things I've read in a while.
I get what you're saying Destoroyah X, and I agree with you-- but its as though you're trying to use ticket sales to justify any opinion you have about the movie.
Whether I, or you, think something is good (and whether it is actually good or not) has little to do with how well it preforms. A lot of really bad movies make a lot of fricken money.
The Wyane brothers have an entire career because of it. So we can't argue that Godzilla is doing bad because people say its doing bad (I've found most of the negative comments coming from Godzilla fans more than the general public, pretty much every normie I met loved the movie and couldn't understand why I'd criticize it) same thing goes for all the bayformer films.
I think you have a point, I don't disagree, but I think the way you're making your point is really lopsided. I'd say for an opening reboot, Godzilla is out performing most expectations legendary had for it (their advertisement campaign showed little faith in the film's ability to make money-- so much that it lied horribly to potential audiences).
But I digress, I eagerly await whatever massive eighteen run-on-paragraph nonsense you throw at me and end with a smiley emote.
@ Destroyah-X yeah, I'm pointing this out because you keep using ticket sales to try and boast your point, you even said so yourself numerous times, "let money do the talking". According to your faulty "logic", and I use that term loosely (good to know I'm not the only one noticing this, Akagi), 'Batman & Robin' was the movie audiences preferred more, even though 'Batman Begins' spawned the highest-grossing trilogy of all time (besides 'Transformers' of course) and was widely hailed as single-handedly reviving the 'Batman' franchise while 'Batman & Robin' is regarded by many as one of the worst films of all time. But yet, just reading your arguments, you would have us believe 'Batman & Robin' was the more liked film between the 2 even though a little fact-checking a la those pesky little things called user and critic ratings paints a totally different picture.
Same concept with this movie relative to the 98 film as I've pointed out.
PS, it'll top $500 mil when it comes out in Japan in a couple weeks. Also, none of those other films have had to deal with major blockbusters the first 2 weeks in a row since they came out ('X-Men' and 'Maleficent') and then almost every week following that, which just happens to include the next installment in the highest-grossing film franchise of all time (right or wrong) in T:AoE. Even TASM2 at least had a couple weeks of breathing room before G14's $93 mil OW.
@ DURP004 but the character I was referring to Elle wasn't just "going from destination to destination" she was actually helping injured people as a nurse. Hell, that guy you're referring to (Ford Brody) wasn't, either, he was actually trying to diffuse a bomb. Also, none of the characters in this movie were so damn annoying that they literally made me wanna stick sharp objects in my eyes watching em on screen, that's the difference. You also don't hear the characters in this movie say utterly dumb lines like "where's the fun in that?" after hearing that the pregnant creature that was never meant to lay eggs is asexual. And countless other endlessly dumb character lines ("that's a lot of fish" yeah real clever).
(Cont'd) "And audiences have already been exposed to the plethora of Batman movies" WTF does this have anything to do with what I said?
And you act like these 2 aren't the same thing, no, they're exactly the same thing: they both had the stigma of a grotesquely awful and critically-panned film attached to them, 'GINO 98' for this movie and 'Batman and Robin' for BB, respectively.
And acting like nobody in the US has heard of Godzilla like they have Batman is completely asinine, to say the least: it's the reason the 98 abomination even made as much as it did (along w/virtually no BO competition to worry about during its run, and I can explain this one all day) despite being horribly-received and was hyped so much before its release. It's also why Devlin & Emmerich slapped Godzilla's name to it while remaing 'The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms' (because that's what it is): it was a money grab. If it wasn't called 'Godzilla' people wouldn't go see it, plain and simple. It would have at best a cult following like 'Cloverfield' while costing a ton more to make, meaning it would be colossal flop, so they needed a selling point for their "Beast" remake.
And BTW, now that we're on the subject of this, G14 actually outgrossed 'Batman Begins' you mean the reboot of a franchise that hasn't had a ton of exposure in the US (your own words) outgrossed the one everybody and their mom knows and has seen? You don't say!
After such a long wall of text from you, in the end you unknowingly just played right into my argument hahaha! (Oops gotta control my laughter here.)
Since everyone loves Godzilla according to you, there should all the more be no reason for G14 to be taking this little then? There should all the more be no reason why G14 is now #18 in the US box office and can't cross $200m domestically then? There should all the more be no reason why G14 can't cross G98 in sales figures then? You know, almost 2 weeks ago the US figure for Godzilla was $197 million and $488.9 million worldwide. Almost 2 weeks later now, it still stands at $198 million, and $489.5 million.
The crux of my issue with G14 was never the titular character 'Godzilla' himself, but rather the direction of the movie that failed to maximize the potential of the King of Monsters. That's was my point right from the start and you played right into it haha.
" Your kind feared the Darkness. "
You can keep using your "money talks" argument all you want, fact is, it dealt with a ton of competition, more than any other "major" film this year by far, and is still the 5th highest grossing creature flick of all time and will still end up making over $500 mil worldwide when it's all said and done, which is even more amazing considering the fact that T4 cut into most of its remaining screens in China, it was still making over $7 mil in its 3rd week beforehand. And BTW, the only reason TASM2 didn't end up losing more screens than it did was because it was already out of theaters and into secondary screens by the time T4 hit.
Also, the fact that a $500 mil WW film (and it will be once it's released in Japan) is the 5th highest of its kind (and that's after inflation) speaks volumes as to their mass appeal relative to comic book films, especially sequels, so to even compare the 2 is asinine, to say the least, making all upteen paragraphs on ticket sales you wrote completely irrelevant. Reaching for straws to try and coax the idea that you're in the majority. Well, guess what? User and critic scores (they're both over 70% positive on IMDb and RT) say you're not, deal with it.
And no, G98 did not have any competition to deal with, its biggest competition was 'Deep Impact' which was already 2 weeks in at the time and the first 'X-Files' movie 4 weeks after G98 came out. Let's face it, neither of these movies were ever going to make a dent in G98's BO run and it literally had no other competition besides that, what little it had to begin with, and it still had the 5th lowest Domestic Gross::Opening Weekend ratio that year of all films with $25+ mil budgets. If it came out today to the 2014 movie's schedule and much higher levels of piracy, it would be lucky to break $190 mil domestically and $450 mil WW which would mean a huge flop as it would need to make around $600 mil in today's dollars to break even as stated above (it really would).
In any event, though, even if you are right about G98 being more profitable, which you're not as (also) explained above, guess which one got two sequels and which one got none, that's right. Don't think it won't happen, either, just because it's "underperforming" (which LP says it's not), 'Pacific Rim' is getting a sequel with $411,002,906 on a $190 mil budget and 'Batman Begins' got two sequels with $374,218,673 on a $150 mil budget, so there's no reason to think this won't get its two sequels greenlit having made $489,506,34 on a $160 mil budget.
^PS, I guess money only "talks" when it's convenient for you, what difference does it make whether the two installments are part of a 'known' franchise or not? You're the one using ticket sales as a measuring stick for the films' popularity, not me! It's a moot point, as G98's year-round marketing campaign was so huge because it had Godzilla's name attached to it (thus refuting your claim of it having no exposure or drawing power), you think it would've been marketed as heavily as it was if it was named 'Giant Wiguana Thingy'? HELL NO!
And aside from it obviously failing as a 'Godzilla' film, Nostaliga Critic even says it fails as a monster film in general, which I agree with, watch his review of it on YouTube. Whether it's a 'Godzilla' movie or not, it was freaking horrible at every level, having Godzilla's name attached to it was just icing on the cake.
uhhhh....this is sad.
Guys, the movie was successful, the franchise is still alive, we are getting a sequal, what more do you all want with this?
Seriously man this makes the 5th thread where you talk about the same thing over and over, it is really getting boring reading almost the same thing over and over again. Not trying to be rude with this but can't we talk about something else please? Thank you. :)
http://hugeben.deviantart.com/ check out my gallery of Godzilla artwork! Follow me on [email protected]
You know, when I was a kid, I loved Godzilla (98). I thought it was B.S. that he died, but there were a lot of great moments. When Niko first meets Godzilla, that was a genuinely great moment. He smashes up out of the ground, accidentally destroys some stuff, sniffs the Dr and then eats some fish. It was nice to watch this big animal just do it's thing, and get to know it a bit.
They pulled off the whole "wait to reveal your monster" thing ten times better than the new movie did. Who can't still visualize Zilla's foot smashing into the crowded intersection, stopping traffic, the boats falling in the street, just catching glimpses up to his shin or his tail as it whips around a building. That was COOL, and when the Tatopoulous finally meets him, it feels like payoff.
There's a helicopter chase, a submarine chase, and a car chase. All were genuinely exciting and well directed, AND HAD THE MONSTER ON SCREEN FOR MORE THAN A MINUTE. The characters had more to do, were more fleshed out and their arcs lasted the whole movie (instead of wasting a whole hour on Joe Brody, who just got killed anyways, making almost his entire presence in the movie pointless).
Yes, the writing was bad, and they ripped off jurassic park and star wars and whatever else. But there was a sense of fun. I think the new movie could've used some silliness, less seriousness.
OF COURSE, it wasn't Godzilla, it was an irradiated iguana who was killed by getting caught in a bridge and shot by a few missiles.
I think I can say that if Zilla had survived, I might've preferred it over the new one. But he died.
Production Budget: $130 mil
WW Gross: $379 mil
Gross::Budget Ratio: 2.92 (379/130=2.915)
Production Budget: $160 mil
WW Gross: $489 mil
Gross::Budget Ratio: 3.06 (489/160=3.056)
G14 has a better WW Gross::Budget ratio, hence it did better, that much is irrefutable. It also cost a lot less to market in today's dollars than it.
And BTW, for anybody harping on the "oh, it's the first movie to open to $90+ mil and not get to $200 mil" 1)there's still secondary screens, which it hasn't reached yet. It only needs $1.9 mil more to get there, with yesterday's totals not even posted yet. 'Thor 2' made $3 mil at secondary theaters, so there's no reason to think this can't make $2 mil at them, and 2)TASM2 also needed secondary screens to get to $200 mil despite opening at over $90 mil, little food for thought.
@Panthalassan, you're comparing apples and oranges. G98 had a way bigger budget in today's dollars than G14, like I said, its $130 mil budget back in 98 would be $220 mil in today's dollars, G14 had a $160 mil budget which, while not exactly cheap, isn't enough to throw money at the screen with the kinds of effects and CGI used in this movie and not exactly a whole lot for a big summer film, so they couldn't keep the cameras on the monsters for long intervals because every second they were on screen is $$$ driving up the movie's production costs. I surmise the sequel will probably have a bigger budget to the tune of $190 mil so we can see the monsters on a more consistent basis and less cutting away, but they were just making due with what they had. They couldn't throw money at the screen because it only had a $160 mil budget.
Furthermore, let's go over those action scenes: the helicopter chase. He just runs and hides from the military, hardly what I'd call exciting. It gets worse, though: the bumbling military literally fired all over the place, and couldn't hit it once, even when it stood perfectly still for a split second or so, they somehow still managed to completely miss Zilla with their machine guns, logic?! And BTW, this consisted of most of the action scenes in the entire movie.
Submarine chase: good for you if you're amused by seeing a lizard who once again changes size for like the umpeenth billionth time swimming by submarines, but me personally? I prefer something a little deeper than that, a lot more, actually.
Car chase: the fact that it couldn't outrun a taxi cab when it could outrun choppers with ease earlier aside, whatever tension this scene brought was completely ruined by the fact that they could outsmart Zilla just by flashing their headlights at it, and they get caught inside its mouth and there was somehow no holes left in the car when it was being chewed up. It also led to the revolting climax of getting killed by a few missiles inside of a bridge that shouldn't have been able to support it in the first place.
Same with the NYC romp: what little suspense it gave was completely ruined by him stomping around and somehow never actually stepping on anyone, in the crowded streets of a city of 8 million people no less. And the fact that he somehow "suddenly disappeared" without anyone seeing where he went, again, in a city of 8 million people. Now how is that possible?!?! And the camera guy scene with Hank Azaria was completely dumb and tried to senselessly add humor when we were supposed to be terrified.
As for the characters being more polished, are we watching the same movie? Because the whole movie as I recall mainly consisted of some corny plot about a nerdy scientist trying to get back with his ex girlfriend all while completely forgetting that there's a giant monster roaming about or standing around and somehow not noticing there's a giant monster stomping right outside their complex. At least when Ford tries to get back to his family in this, the fact that there's giant monsters decimating things isn't completely pushed aside. And you wanna talk about the characters being fleshed? Okay: when Ferris Bueller goes to buy pregnancy tests that somehow deduce that Zilla was pregnant despite the fact that a HUMAN pregnancy test will never work on a giant iguana, keyword: human pregnancy test, his bumbling reporter asks: "what's the fun in that?" Yes, this is an exact quote! One of many examples of completely lulzworthy characterization (or lack of) in the 98 film.
BTW, Destroya-X, I can't believe I didn't mention this earlier, but this movie actually had better daily drop %s than 'Cap 2' before 'X-Men' came out, so that completely refutes every single one of your tired arguments that you keep repeating over and over and over again. And again, dare I say, your argument wouldn't explain why Seltzer & Friedberg and the Wayans brothers keep getting work, they've both made a career off of making money off bad films no one likes (except 12 year old years) nor would it explain why critically-acclaimed films like 'Pacific Rim' and 'Edge of Tomorrow' both flopped (that's actually only half true for PR, but EoT bombed big time, yes, worldwide). By your own "logic" 'Grown Ups 2' is a better movie than 'Pacific Rim' since it lost to that garbage on OW, let's not forget.
PS, it's common knowledge that user scores reflect what the general public thought of each film, so yes, my argument does hold water. The number of tickets sold is just the demand for the movie in question, which =/=WOM, I just gave you a couple perfect examples. Whereas user scores actually do reflect what people thought of the movie. Like I said, it had better daily drop %s than 'Cap 2' before 'X-Men' came out, it has nothing to do with so-called "bad word of mouth" which only exists in your head. Fact is: nothing you or I said about the film was going to convince people to flock the theaters for it in week 2 and beyond, they've already made up their minds to see 'X-Men' the following week since comic book films have a much bigger following than creature films, again, I'm not telling you anything you don't already know, this is common knowledge. And that just happened to be followed up by another $200 mil film, 'Maleficent' coming out a week later.
Sign in to add a reply to this topic!