Roland Emmerich’s 1998 Godzilla is one of the most prolific bad movies of the 1990s. It serves as an example of what not to do when adapting a pre-existing story, and still gets ridiculed to this day. “Zilla,” the new name of the film’s version of Godzilla following Toho’s disapproval, was essentially just an oversized iguana that could breathe fire. Not Godzilla whatsoever. Zilla hosted the extraordinary power of disappearing in Manhattan, one of the most densely populated places in the world, and hosted the weaknesses of a real iguana, like tanks and jets. While it’s a daunting task to appreciate a movie like Emmerich’s Godzilla, there are at least a few positive notes to take from it…emphasis on “few.”
LOVE: Some Of The Jokes Are Entertaining
As in most Emmerich movies, there is a light tone for the majority of the film, no matter the stakes. In The Patriot, one of Emmerich’s more serious films, Mel Gibson gets to stab a British horse with a US flag, and Independence Day, one of his sillier films, is filled to the brim with one-liners. So it’s in line with Emmerich’s M.O. that Godzilla would have its fair share of jokes. Everyone mispronouncing the name “Nick Tatopoulous” (Matthew Broderick) is a decent gag. Some of the physical comedy works, like Nick telling a group of baby Zillas, “wrong floor” while escaping via an elevator. Having an incompetent NYC mayor and his sleazy right-hand man modeled after film critics Siskel and Ebert is a funny reference to the pair’s bad reviews of Emmerich’s past films.
HATE: Most Of The Jokes Are Bad
Of course, most of the jokes are pretty tepid or unoriginal. Even Roger Ebert, when speaking of the film’s parody of himself, noted that “he fully expected to be squished by a bug” and was thus let off easy. For every decent gag in the movie, there are about 10 to 15 bad ones to compensate. The classic “someone points at something to someone only for that someone to turn around and see nothing” gag is used, and as always, it never ceases to not get a laugh. Everyone’s exaggerated New York accents and behaviors feel oddly cartoony, even for a movie with three members of the Simpsons cast. It’s also strange to be treating the movie like a joke one minute, and suddenly be demanding awe/terror from the audience in another.
LOVE: Everything About Jean Reno
Phillippe Roaché (Jean Reno) and his band of French secret service agents are charming enough. Why does the film have French agents instead of Japanese agents, considering it’s a Godzilla movie? That’s a great question with no answer. But at least the French agents get to act real sneaky-beaky like and spy on Broderick and friends, with their cool French accents and quips on US culture. When needing to pass US Armed Forces, what does Roaché do? He chews bubble gum obnoxiously and puts on a perfect Elvis impression. Jean Reno gets a free pass for the bad jokes because his acting is top-notch.
HATE: The Entire Rest Of The Cast
All of the charm of his performance from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off is drained out of Matthew Broderick in Godzilla. The “stuttering scientist” trope is downright insufferable in this film. But that’s not the only annoying stereotypical disaster movie character the roster has. There’s also “no-nonsense Army guy,” “goofster,” “girl that got away,” and “other goofster.” Yes, Jean Reno’s character is the basic “mysterious cool-headed badass,” but he is forgiven. Many disaster movies feature these expendable and downright obnoxious characters, and the stakes and thrill of the disaster dissipate when the audience actively roots for their comeuppance instead of their escape.
LOVE: A Variety Of Monster Action
To its credit, Godzilla does openly have some action once the big lizard makes his appearance. And it’s a decent variety of action. Zilla rampaging in Manhattan, Zilla vs. the military, Zilla babies vs. the research/assault team, a Zilla car chase.
Roland Emmerich loves to put action to screen, so it’s clear this is his bread and butter. And clearly, a lot of thought went into the creature design, whether it was good or not, as the agile design was meant to heighten the action scenes and make them out to be exhilarating.
HATE: The Action Is Lame
Of course, the action isn’t that interesting or original. Frequently, Zilla’s size ratio is inconsistent, and the unconvincing CGI doesn’t help the realism, either. The scenes involving the baby Zillas are ripped straight from the pages of the Jurassic Park franchise…which had just released The Lost World the year prior to Godzilla’s release. While there is an actual purpose to the action, which is a refreshing change of pace, the payoff is never engaging. There’s no sense of dread, no consistent scale, no sense that there is a creature actually there, and thus, no interest.
LOVE: It’s Honest About Being Vapid
Godzilla is at least somewhat self-aware that it’s a stupid movie. And that makes it better than the stupid movies that aren’t aware that they’re stupid, right? The movie very much plays to the beats of a basic B-movie, and a scene from It Came Beneath The Sea plays in one of the Zilla rampages. Likewise, the film’s plot is very similar to The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms.
The over-the-top characters, loose jokes and tone, ridiculous plot holes and general premise all point to signs that Emmerich wasn’t taking the movie originally about Japan’s response to nuclear destruction too seriously. He was more interested in what the big lizard stood on than what the big lizard stood for, and didn’t try to hide that fact.
HATE: It’s Still Vapid
That being said, Godzilla might host some self-awareness, but that doesn’t make it intelligent. Kong: Skull Island was a very self-aware B-movie, and was all the better for it. Knowing that it’s a “lesser” thought film and not attempting to raise the bar makes Godzilla all the more frustrating. And while it’s okay to play with a character’s origin to an extent, the Godzilla themes of nuclear destruction/nature are pivotal to the character.
Without it, yes, it’s just a big lizard. And while that can be fun, it’s not nearly as satisfying as a film with a purpose beyond making money and selling popcorn. Audiences shouldn’t be treated like ingrates incapable of thought, and original source material should resemble the source beyond just the name.
LOVE: It’s So Bad It’s Good
The Godzilla franchise has had 36 movies in its saga thus far, and many more on the way. A good portion of those films are pretty bad. Many of them carry a certain charm to them; some pander to children, some have cheap costumes falling apart at the seams, some have wonky plots. Some have a combination of things.
The 1998 Godzilla is a fascinating display of the 1990s blockbuster, when wanton empty destruction of cities (especially NYC) had free reign, in the times before 9/11. It’s also a showcase for all of the Roland Emmerich tropes he utilizes in his disaster flicks. And as a Godzilla movie, it’s fun to see the misfires get compared to the other Godzilla misfires.
HATE: It’s Very Forgettable
Movies and their capacity to stay inside our heads after viewing them determine their survival for generations to come. Their impact on pop culture, the arts, history, etc., all play a part in their longevity. And sadly, 1998’s Godzilla is hardly indistinguishable from other bad movies, Emmerich movies, or ’90s movies, aside from the use of a popular name.
The character of Godzilla has survived as the longest-running franchise because audiences can’t get enough of the iconic figure. They don’t care or care to acknowledge the big iguana that did more damage to the IQs of its audience than the city of New York. Just like the 1976 King Kong, the advertisement for the film was better than the final product, and likewise, better remembered.
