Forum - View topicNEWS: New Godzilla Film Shuffles Producers, Adds Frank Darabont
|
Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Tony K.
 SubscriberModerator  Posts: 11443 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
|||
|
Just the mere mention of "Frank Darabont" makes me more interested already. Shame about him getting canned from Walking Dead, but hopefully L.A. Noire will work out.
|
||||
|
||||
penguintruth
 Posts: 8501 Location: Penguinopolis |
|
|||
|
The director of The Shawshank Redemption?
Wh-why would he lower himself? |
||||
|
||||
|
Tony K.
Subscriber Moderator Posts: 11443 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
|||
|
Well, he made a movie about monster invasion feel like a surprisingly human story (The Mist), so maybe this new Godzilla will catch everyone by surprise and be a surprisingly humanized monster invasion movie, too.
EDIT: Grammar, missing words. Last edited by Tony K. on Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:32 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
|
Escaflowne2001
Posts: 468 |
|
|||
Which is what is was meant to be in the first place originally. |
||||
|
||||
|
Tony K.
Subscriber Moderator Posts: 11443 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
|||
|
Never read the novella. But most other monster/horror movies I've seen that try to pull that off don't really do it as well, so I like to think Darabont has a better understanding of this than most.
EDIT: Fixed the terminology to the correct one. Last edited by Tony K. on Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:32 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
|
Animegomaniac
Posts: 4158 |
|
|||
I did read the Mist, uh, novella and the he didn't get the feel for the B movie style story. And even if King approved the new ending, it kills off any chance for a repeat viewing. B movie fun becomes "message" movie about ... family... I think. Anyway, Frank Darabont added the growing list of writers and rewriters for Godzilla? Look, it's Godzilla; If you don't know what the story/character/point is {hint: they're pretty much all the same thing. Also, nuclear war, bad, monster, bad, place, toast. Pretty simple}, chances are the next guy won't get it either. Look, just ... Godzilla. Come on, it's not that hard... Oh yeah, that movie. It is oddly tricky, is it? No, it's not. From just another G-fan. |
||||
|
||||
mdo7
 Posts: 6397 Location: Katy, Texas, USA |
|
|||
|
I don't know if I should be concern or not.
|
||||
|
||||
|
KradvonWeiss
Posts: 35 Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United |
|
|||
|
Why do I have the sudden sick sensation that Darabont will be to this movie like Emmerich and Devlin were for the 1998 movie?
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nagisa
Moderator
 Posts: 6128 Location: Atlanta-ish, Jawjuh |
|
|||
To Godzilla? It's not all cheese, dude. Look at the original film, which Gareth Edwards is attempting to emulate by all appearances. When it came out in the 50s, it was a stark contrast to other monster movies of the time. Just about every other monster movie of the time was a shameless drive-in creature feature with thinly-veiled messages about anti-Communism and the usual slasher flick "morality" (good teens live, teens that have sex and do drugs and stay out late die), and almost always ended on an upbeat, jingoistic note about national pride slaying any monster in its path. The '54 Godzilla, by contrast, was a crushingly pessimistic metaphor for nuclear proliferation. The monster was killed in the end, but the genie was out of the bottle. We created it, we were creating more, and we were screwed. And of course, all of it was through the lens of a shellshocked Japan just a scant nine years after actually being nuked. It's honestly a very sophisticated film, difficult to watch at times even, and I wouldn't say that anybody attempting to recreate that is "lowering themselves" at all. Just because the franchise spawned kid-friendly rotten eggs like Godzilla vs. Megalon and Son of Godzilla later on down the line doesn't detract from the quality of the original. Hell, even the mid-60s efforts like Mothra vs. Godzilla and Invasion of the Astro Monster were really good popcorn movies for their time, and again hardly worth a snub just because of the franchise's infamous 70s lull. As far as the actual news, it could go either way, and I wouldn't be too worried just yet. Script rewrites (or "revisions," "edits" might be more accurate) aren't uncommon, and could very well be just as much the result of the production team making sure they have a genuinely good product as it could be executive meddling like everyone fears. That the date for actual production hasn't been delayed, in my opinion, is a good sign. This movie sounds like a real passion project for Edwards, so it might just be a bit of extra polish before the thing gets going. |
||||
|
||||
Relairknight
 Posts: 128 |
|
|||
|
Yeah I don't see how you could consider it 'lowering' yourself to be a part of one of the most well known and beloved franchises in cinema history. Everyone knows James Bond, everyone knows Superman and everyone knows Godzilla. He's an icon and I would imagine it'd be an honor to get to work on the project and put your personal touch on things...not to mention hopefully wash the bad taste out of everyone's mouth that's still lingering 15 years later after hollywood's first try(I hate you Roland Emmerich).
|
||||
|
||||
walw6pK4Alo
 Posts: 9322 |
|
|||
Except for the Beast from 20,000 Fathoms, which at least had some influence on Godzilla, though not on the social commentary which made Godzilla mean more than just "monster ruins cities". The dangers of nuclear explosions and their effects are still present, though. Why does Godzilla stand out more? Maybe it's the exotic nature of it being Japanese, and thus more closely tied to the idea of war, its abhorrence, and what it wrought. And that Godzilla is absolutely massive and more frightening. Problem is, society doesn't get subtle messages in films, so I expect another big dumb summer flick with zero subtext. |
||||
|
||||
|
Tony K.
Subscriber Moderator Posts: 11443 Location: Frisco, TX |
|
|||
I saw it as a movie about the human condition and not letting go of hope. The human condition part: spoiler[ where the religious lady used panic to pretty much turn everyone against Thomas Jane's character and the rest of the bunch is a perfect example of how corrupt sheep/mob mentality can be. They could've taken the more logical approach and just banned together as a group of people trying to tough things out, but her biblical nonsense warped their weak minds resulting into said mentality and really spoiled any chances of cohesive communal survival.] The ending: spoiler[ was about never giving up. Sure, theoretically the father spared what he thought was going to be a terrifying painful death for everyone left in the car, but he gave up too soon, which goes to illustrate that if you're at least going out, go out fighting. Although, I'd believe there are some circumstances where surrender might be more beneficial, but that last scene obviously wasn't supposed to be one of 'em.]
Most don't, but there's a crowd out there that can. It just depends on how you build the movie up through advertising, the names involved in production, and how good people are at actually keeping up with said names. I know whenever names like Aronofsky, Fincher, or Cronenberg are involved, I can expect some kind of social commentary or subtexts. And I've sorta' been doing the same with Darabont, but that's just me. Maybe there're enough followers of cinema out there that do the same? |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group