Am I the only one that just does not seem all that excited?

[jellydonut25]

I think....hmmmmm...

Okay, I think he's just burned out on "super serious" and isn't willing to take into account whether it's the right thing for the project. Batman, YES. Superman, debatable at best. Spider-Man, NO. Godzilla....YES.

He references Mothra vs. Godzilla in his rant AGAINST serious takes on Godzilla. I know there are certainly very fantastical, borderline goofy ELEMENTS in that movie, but it's a fairly serious entry nonetheless. Godzilla 1985, and really the early entries of the Heisei series as a whole, as well as GMK, and a handful of other examples throughout the series here and there, are examples of serious takes on Godzilla.

So, though I'm not going to say he's wrong for not being excited because it's yet ANOTHER grimdark reboot, I am going to say he's wrong for thinking that the only really successful variations on Godzilla are those that are goofy.

[lhb412]

I think it's necessary for an introductory version of Godzilla to be serious: you have to set up Godzilla as a consequence of man's sins (sci-fi as myth stuff), the incredible power and unstoppable nature of Godzilla, the gravity of his appearing... you can't have the more whimsical stories until this basic Godzilla character stuff is established.

Considering Gareth Edwards saying stuff like wanting to basically remake DAM and how you can basically make a Godzilla film into any kind of movie as long as Godzilla's in it (very true!) I think he's got a good handle on what's what.

[XvGojira]

[mr.negativity]

[HannibalBarca]

Godzilla didn't lay waste to Las Vegas, nor were the destruction scenes in any location particularly dwellt upon.