Board Thread:Movie Discussions/@comment-24868748-20140518055647/@comment-6580055-20140714214206

TGriffy wrote: Bioniclezilla76 wrote: It would be pointless and redundant to have it be like the first Godzilla movie. I agree with Titanollante and DrGodzilla120's revised thinking here. As Titanollante pointed out, King Kong 2005 was a very good remake, being neither pointless and redundant. I would further argue that the main reason KK2005 worked so well is because it continually returned to the 1933 source at the same time it approached the source from a different angle. Moreover, this was a conscious decision made by the creators of KK2005 in rejecting their original plans for the movie. Had they gone ahead with their original ideas, the 2005 remake would have been horrible.

Much of my disappointment with Godzilla 2014 is due precisely to the fact that the creators decided to basically ignore the 1954 source, instead skipping to the mid- to late-Showa era without adequately grounding the backstory. See my comments above. On the other hand, starting a new series with a remake of 1954 would have been a much better decision because it provide an adequate jumping off point the series. I wasn't really disappointed with the film. I rather liked how it portrayed Godzilla as a "Good guy monster".

Again, we should remember GODZILLA (1998). Zilla was an antagonist in that film. If in this film, Godzilla was a villain, people would compare it to the 1998 film. Godzilla, being a good guy in this film, would give new people familiar with the 1998 one a different view on Godzilla. It worked for some of my friends and my parents.