MilqueChocolate
MemberBaragonJul-26-2015 6:43 PMHello forum dwellers! Today I want to discuss How Godzilla 2 can be presented. Cryolophosaurus made a discussion about 2014's presentation so check that out!
Order of discussion:
1. Trailers
2. Godzilla's Off-Screen presence
3. Godzilla's On-Screen Presentation
1. So we all remember 2014's Teaser right? The majority of its scenes were never in the movie. I like that idea, and it should be reused for the next teaser. Show the viewers scenes to grasp their attention not to be used for the movie itself, just how a teaser should be. For example, show a ruined Tokyo. Zoom in on the chaos, death, and destruction of this once peaceful city. The teaser should end showing a lightning strike and as it flashes, show the silhouette of the King himself. I made a comment about it in better detail as an opening sequence in Gigan923's discussion so check that out too! If you have a trailer idea, slap it on the comments section below!
2. Gareth Edwards said in interviews that they wanted to use the off-screen presence that Jaws gave off. It failed during the second half, when Godzilla was shown swimming. No terror was felt. He made an effort at least. Heres how he can make it better. In Jaws the off-screen prescence was conveyed perfectly. It made the audience think, whats gonna happen? Where is he? When will he arrive? When will he kill his next victim? It was terrifying not knowing the answers! In 2014, the off-screen prescence was cool before his airport appearance. It made us think this same questions (except the next victim part)! However, after the airport scene we know now that he was swimming with aircraft carriers until the Golden Gate Bridge. If the director didnt cut out the Airport fight, he could have presented an awesome off-screen prescence. For Example, when Godzilla stopped fighting the flying MUTO on TV, we had no idea what happended since then except for Hawaii's demise. In the next scene, it decided to show him swimming next to aircraft carriers. There was no reason for it. I have a feeling that scene was shown just to show a size comparison. Now to the point. In Godzilla 2, to present an off-screen prescence don't show us what Godzilla is doing yet until necessary. If it wants to show us a scene after the fight, thats fine. Its fine because we can already anticipate what his motives are, to head for his next enemy.
3. This is where it gets exciting. For Godzilla's on-screen presentation, it needs to give us a feeling of terror. To make us feel that no matter what effort we use, its hopeless. That's what made Godzilla what it is. If it shows us Godzilla, give us Godzilla. No more cutting away. When I heard that Godzilla was gonna be shown more I was jumping for joy! I'm hoping that Gareth does it the right way! For one of the scenes, I want to see Godzilla not fighting a monster, but decimating a city on purpose. Not only is it freaking awesome, but we get to see Godzilla's dark side. The rage of this beast being taken out on humanity.
Thats all I have to say, sorry if #2 was confusing. If you have questions or ideas to add on, please comment below! I respect critiscism too, good or bad. Lates!
Triple X
MemberMothra LarvaeJul-26-2015 11:02 PM1. As a trailer for the second movie, this is a horrible idea. Many movies god bad reviews because the trailer showed scenes that weren't in the actual movie. It's called false/bad advertising. The first teaser was a concept teaser. People had no idea what godzilla might look like and the teaser was to show the atmosphere of the movie. Doing the same for the second movie deosn't work. People want to see footage, not a teaser of something thats not even in the movie. I was highly dissapointet that they've cut "Vishnu" out of the first film.
gojira19
MemberMothra LarvaeJul-27-2015 4:33 AMI never liked the try to emulate jaws in someway. That works in thrillers, horror and suspense movies were the main characters are stalked by the beast, and obviously all of them are in constant anxiety and fear wondering how they can get-out of the trouble and who will be the next prey. That formula works well in a very focalized group of characters, but it's hard to cover the entire panorama of the mass destruction that the monsters are causing if it is done, because the thrills come when we share the perspective of those potential victims. The only movie that succeeded to do that was Cloverfield, but again it was because it was focused more in the struggle of the characters trying to survive the disaster than in the overall destruction caused by the monster.
GG
ModeratorGiganJul-27-2015 6:34 AMShowing Godzilla decimate a city is awful, it would go against everything Gareth has been striving for.
Good grief.
gojira19
MemberMothra LarvaeJul-27-2015 1:33 PMSome fans want precisely that, because they want to see the same from movies like the 1954 classic, giving a serious and dark tone to the new movie; but I am agree with you by the sense that it could be a bit harmful for the franchise because GOdzilla won´t earn any shympaty for that. No one lamented Godzilla´s dead in 1954, and if the producers go with that, we will get an audience yelling: KILL THAT BASTARD!!!
The public is pretty sensitive in that sense, so I prefer to see an approach similar to Heisei movies where he is considered a major threat, but still the last hope against worst thing, and still (how redundant) no-one friend like it is shown with Mr. Shindo in Godzilla vs King GHidorah.
G. H. (Gman)
AdminGodzillaJul-27-2015 6:46 PM"Showing Godzilla decimate a city is awful, it would go against everything Gareth has been striving for."
Depends on how it's handled. Gamera decimated plenty while trying to destroy the Gyaos. Superman did the same while fighting Zod in Man of Steel.
Of course Snyder didn't handle it as well as Kaneko and I doubt Edwards could either. So unless there's a good reason for it, I'd rather this Godzilla not clash too much with what was established in the 2014 film.
