In 1933 New York, an overly ambitious movie producer coerces his cast and hired ship crew to travel to mysterious Skull Island, where they encounter Kong, a giant ape who is immediately smitten with leading lady Ann Darrow.
Following the French atomic bomb tests in the South Pacific, an unknown creature is spotted passing eastward through the Panama Canal. Scientist Niko Tatopolous is called in to investigate the matter, and he quickly arrives at the conclusion that a giant, irradiated lizard has been created by the explosions. Godzilla then makes its way north, landing at Manhattan to begin wreaking havoc in the big city. Even with the combined forces of the U.S. military to fight the monster, will it be enough to save the people of New York? Written by
Jean-Marc Rocher <email@example.com>
Due to the tight deadlines and likely because the monster's look was to be kept secret, the movie wasn't given test screenings. The studio later deemed this a mistake, since this had meant that none of the movie's faults could be fixed for the theatrical release. This was one of the reasons behind the movie's grandiose promotional campaign, since the execs expected the movie to fail without sufficient marketing push. See more »
At the end of the movie when Godzilla is chasing the cab across the Brooklyn Bridge, the bridge only has 2 suspension cables (1 on each side) whereas the real bridge has 4 (1 on each side and 2 running down the center). See more »
What were some of you expecting? Shakespeare? Tennesee Williams? Its a movie about a giant lizard in New York - just accept it for what it is! Its entertainment and no more - and on that level (at least for me) it works just fine! Its's not "realistic" enough? Again, how realistic is a giant lizard supposed to be? It's a FANTASY movie! Besides, I thought the special effects were pretty impressive! And its not as if the ORIGINAL Godzilla movies were good, with their actors in rubber suits and laughable, ridiculous "monsters" (gamera, mechagodzilla, etc etc)- the Godzilla in THIS movie was an animal, not a monster driven by a need to destroy things! I didn't think Matthew Broderick was bad at all
although I DID find Animal's girlfriend extremely irritating with her
shrill voice! Really, I didn't think this movie was bad at all - no, its not a profound meaningful work or art, but then who expected it to be? It's an enjoyable diversion - that's all anyone should expect!
76 of 115 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?