Godzilla [Hindi] (1998) - Dubbed Other movies recommended for you
Godzilla [Hindi](in Dubbed Hollywood Movies) Godzilla [Hindi] (1998) - Download Movie for mobile in best quality 3gp and mp4 format. Also stream Godzilla [Hindi] on your mobile, tablets and ipads
Plot: In the wake of extensive nuclear testing in the South Pacific Ocean, the low-profile scientist, Niko Tatopoulos, is summoned by the U.S. Army to shed light on the mysterious attack on a fishing ship, and the ominous sightings of a gargantuan sea-dragon. Before long, a mutated scaly nightmare in the… Runtime: 139 min Release Date: 20 May 1998
Alright, I've had enough. Godzilla was a GREAT movie, and I'm just sick and tired of all the critics and others who view the movie as a complete disaster due to its lack of a story and other problems.Personally, I don't care. The movie, from day one was meant to be just a big effects laden action movie. It's just for fun. I understood the story. The movie should just be viewed as a fun, blow everything up in your way movie. Don't be so hard. Sit back and enjoy.
I thought it was great... (by LebowskiT1000)
As opposed to most people, I thought this movie was excellent. You can't watch the movie and expect Shakespeare...it's Godzilla. You have to appreciate the work that went into making this creature look so lifelike. This movie had spectacular special effects and a pretty decent story line. I thought this movie was great. I didn't find the acting to be all that bad. I would recommend watching this movie before you come to any conclusions.
Anyone who doesn't like this movie is wrong. (by Egon-3)
I don`t know what people expected from this movie. High drama, perhaps Shakespearean dialog. This is an all out action movie that deserves way better reviews than it got. This movie could have been horrible, but the characters were pretty well fleshed for a movie of this type, and the makers actually went for the pathos angle with the creature. Rather than make Godzilla a giant monster, they gave the creature a personality with its behaviour, a personality that can best be seen at the Madison Square Garden explosion. For anyone to not find that scene poignant, they must be heartless. Add to <more>
this the great acting, and the "scientific" explanations which was more than Independence Day ever managed and this is a grossly under-rated movie.
After bizarre attacks on a Japanese freighter, first the French then the U.S. learn of the existence of an apparent modern "dinosaur". When it's suspected that radiation from nuclear weapons testing in French Polynesia may have instead produced the monster, biological radiation specialist Dr. Nick Tatopoulos Matthew Broderick is called to the scene. While investigating the monster's path of destruction, a new sighting arrives--just off the coast of New York City! It's no secret that Godzilla has been much maligned. Even Fangoria editor Tony Timpone stated in an <more>
editorial that he thought it sucked, and he's usually willing to give movies the benefit of the doubt. The reasons why director Roland Emmerich's version of Godzilla is hated are as varied as people stating opinions. But I tend to think that there is also a strong bandwagon effect with this film that will be tempered by time. There are already signs of a number of people giving it a second look and lessening the severity of their criticism.The chief complaint seems to come from a very vocal but relatively small crowd of fanboy purists--they dislike that Godzilla is different here. In the Japanese films, made by the Toho production company, Godzilla is a guy in a rubber suit who stomps on models of buildings and such. He tends to lumber, as irrelevant military attacks on him provide pretty fireworks. Most Godzilla films feature him fighting some other monster, "professional wrestling" style, and Godzilla arbitrarily falls down and gets back up as he is attacked and attacks with various "death rays" from his mouth, eyes, etc. Now that might sound like I don't like the typical Godzilla film, but that's not true. I like them quite a bit, but a big part of the reason why is that most of them are very cheesy. I'm a fan of bizarre cheese/camp, and you get tons of that in Godzilla films.But I'm not a purist. To me, there's no good reason why Emmerich's Godzilla needs to be similar to the Toho incarnations, which in fact are often quite different from and inconsistent with each other, too. At this point, I see Godzilla more as a recurring character type--think of the various instantiations of Dracula or Frankenstein throughout the 20th Century. The Toho films can't really be seen as chapters in a single, long story. But whether their arguments are wrong or not, the fanboy purists are at least noisy and prolific, and too many people are followers.If Emmerich would have given us a guy in a rubber suit, acting just like the Toho Godzillas not "Godzilla" , with the typical gobbledy-gook of a Toho script, this film would have bombed even worse if we can call a 100 million dollar film that made a profit a "bomb" and the fanboys would have still found something to complain about. Even though I love the Toho Godzilla films, too, we can't deny that they do not tend to be bestsellers on video in the U.S., despite the fact that they're readily available for purchase.So what Emmerich gives us instead is an epic, expensive-looking film that spans a number of genres, features more coherent dialogue and subplots than a typical Toho Godzilla film, and showcases a redesigned, mostly cgi cast of monsters, where Godzilla looks and behaves much more like a "real" giant, mutant lizard. For those of us who are not purists, who do not care if our opinions match the majority, and who evaluate films on all or their technical and artistic levels, it's difficult to deny that Godzilla has many merits.For example, the cinematography in this film is gorgeous. The sound design is superb and the soundtrack score and songs works well with the film. All of the action sequences, and they comprise a large percentage of the film, are expertly staged--Emmerich doesn't resort to darkness, blur-cams and overly quick cuts like many other directors. It's always easy to follow the narrative during action scenes, it's always easy to see what's going on, and it's always coherent. That goes for the non-action scenes, too--the entire film is ingeniously designed in terms of the progression from one sequence to another. Also, the cgi is amazing--it's often difficult to tell where it stops and mechanicals/models begin.But the story is great, too. Broderick's Tatopoulos is an attractive anti-hero, a nerdish scientist who solve dilemmas with his professional knowledge. The other hero is Jean Reno as Philippe Roache, a humorously enigmatic French "insurance agent". The obligatory romantic subplot, involving Tatopoulos and Audrey Timmonds Maria Pitillo surprisingly avoids clichés, and Timmonds provides a launching pad for an all-too-honest satire of the media.Satire is high up on Emmerich's agenda. Godzilla not only satirizes the media, but the military, New York/New Yorkers, film critics, and even monster movies. While the film is simultaneously giving us a lot of genres--sci-fi, horror, adventure, war film, drama, etc. the most unexpected motif is the almost cartoonish, spoof-like humor. Godzilla is more frequently laugh-out-loud funny that anyone expected it to be. It's not just one-liners and overt jokes, although those are certainly present, but the amped up intentional absurdity of situations such as the final taxi cab "chase".Even if you think that Godzilla has some internal problems as an artwork and I agree that there is a slight clunkiness in parts of the narrative flow--it caused me to subtract a point , there's no way it deserves the trashing it's received so far. This is at least a well-made film on a technical level, and if you have any taste for slightly campy sci-fi/monster flicks, you should find much to enjoy here.
Very amusing to read the comments:People, who really "hated" this film.Why?"bad acting".Godzilla was the protagonist; and he was "acting" quite well. The other actors were part of the back ground. The actors in Independence Day were better??? Look once more that film ."not enough blood"; "not a monster". It was amusing to see the "human" side of a "monster". I hope next time, Godzilla 2 will give you more blood"not logical sequences"; "impossible situations"; "the President was not <more>
implicated"; "Godzilla won the helicopters and avoided the soldiers" etc No. There was no a "superman" Hero to save us from the "bad" monster. Yes, there were some foreign French agents operating in US soil to fight the Monster. Pardon Reading the rating of the film 5,1 I had decided not to see it. But one day between various films we chose to see Godzilla. All four of us ENJOYED VERY MUCH THE FILM.Last week we have seen "The Mask of Zorro". Excellent acting, very good production, "old style" adventure, very nice actors, very beautiful sets but all four of us considered Godzilla a BETTER FILM!
This is an awesome movie, it's just a lot of fun to watch!! O.k. there's no deep story or something but it's funny and the actionscene's are excellent!! I really love the scene with the old guy fishing and running for his life! The sound is also pretty awesome, it's a great demo movie to test your sound equipment. The pace/speed in this movie is good, overall it's just a light hearted action movie and one of the better ones! I really don't understand why you can call this a bad movie, probably because you don't like this kind of movies? Go watch something <more>
else!! Go buy this one! I always expected a Godzilla 2 btw. just filling up the rest of the 10 lines here
Enjoy a lovely hunk of cheese! (by EllenRipley112)
I have read the other comments about this film, and while I might agree with them from a critical point of view, the fact remains that this movie was NEVER meant to be a critic's favorite! We are not talking Oscar-material here, not even for special effects. OK, so it's nothing like the originals, and it has a skimpy little plot and no cinematic depth. But y'know what--WHO CARES! I went to this movie to be entertained, and I wasn't disappointed. It's loud, it's quasi-scary, it had explosions and giant lizards, it had cheesy characters with cheesy names and all sorts of <more>
good stuff you expect from a fun, no-brainer movie. C'mon, were its predecessors any better? No sex, no graphic violence unless you count the poor thing's demise at the end , minimal profanity--I was able to take my daughter to see it and not be embarrassed! Today you can pop it in your DVD player or VCR on a rainy Saturday, make some microwave popcorn just keep your pet lizard away from it! and kill about 90 minutes with the family. The only part I had a problem with was, they made the beasty so personable, so NICE it never INTENTIONALLY kills anyone, y'know , I couldn't help but feel sorry for it when it died at the end. They even gave it KIDS, for Pete's sake! As a fellow parent, I actually sympathized when it found out "they trashed the Garden". I was hoping for a sequel with the hatching egg at the end, but sad to say, that got scrapped. Anyway, my final word is: Get over it, folks! It wasn't MEANT to be taken seriously! Once you get past that, you can enjoy it for the cheap theme-park-ride it was meant to be. I love it!
Some friends of mine were discussing why they didn't like some movies. They complained about people being morons to see that kind of crap! Well apparently they saw those movies too so I take it they're morons too? Hehe.. And c'mon.. Movies are an escape from reality for an hour or two.. Do you expect everything to be "realistic"?It reminds me of when I saw Godzilla 1998 .. There was a guy in front of me with his never to be his girlfriend, on what I assume was their first and hopefully last date. He complained and moaned about how unrealistic this piece of crap was. <more>
Yes, I do agree; a big lizard eating New York is as silly as believing that the World trade centers and building 7 went down without controlled demolitions but that's another story ..But I couldn't help my self from mocking him on the way out as he continued to complain to the poor girl about how unrealistic it was by adding: "For an example, do you really think Godzilla could dodge those missiles..?"Let me get this right.. He accepts that a lizard mutates from nuclear experiments. He believes that it swam to New York. He accepts that she laid eggs even though there was no Mr. Godzilla. He also could cope with the friggin' thing running around and eat chunks of the Big Apple.. But when she dodges some missiles he reacts..!? Unbelievable..So when you see a movie, don't believe it, enjoy it!
Movie 8 out of 10 . . . Continuity 2 out of 10 (by TitusYorick)
The first time I saw this movie I was still in high school and I was interested in watching the old Japanese Godzilla a guy in a lizard suit used over and over again . Because of that, I didn't have very high expectations for it, but that was before I learned to treat movies as their own stories. Now, as I watch this movie again at about the first time Godzilla takes the large batch of fish , I find that the movie is a very good attempt at story telling.However, after watching it with a friend in college, a friend who lived in New York for much of his earlier life, I learned a few <more>
things about the movie that makes me think that it's one very well written continuity error.It seems to me that the writers tried to make New York a very fictional place, either that or perhaps some of them had never even been to the City that Never Sleeps. One example of this would be the layout of the city itself, like when the helicopters are chasing the big guy between the buildings. The city looked more like a maze rather than the grid of buildings that it really is. Perhaps the writers and miniature set designers did this on purpose to give the helicopters a sense of dread should they get lost. New York, after all, is a very big place where anyone can lose their way if they're not careful.Another part would be when Godzilla jumps into the Hudson river and encounters the two or three nuclear submarines ready to blast it with torpedoes. It depicts the river as being as deep as parts of the Atlantic when in reality, it's actually only about 15 feet deep. Don't get me wrong, it's a cool idea, especially since the Japanese Godzilla always emerged from the depths of the ocean. Perhaps it was to make him feel more at home, or to show his true amphibious nature by swimming through the river like an eel.Then, there's the final scene where Godzilla's chasing our heroes over the Brooklyn Bridge. I'm not sure whether the big guy actually weighs less than he looks or not, but anything that big would have done more damage to the bridge than just shaking it around a bit. One step on the Brooklyn Bridge by that thing would have torn it apart. I can understand though that it would be the only thing that could tangle it up for the F-18's to shoot it dead, but a more realistic method of entanglement would be for it to run down the river and slam into it like a tennis court net. But then again, just the fact that they maid the river about a league deep would make it hard for it to run along it.Godzilla's size comes into perspective once again when our heroes find the nest in Madison Square Garden where the big guy's laid his eggs. I know the place is big, but there is no way he could fit perfectly into the basket ball arena without doing anything more than ripping the floor out. The ceiling and roof would have been completely demolished and the halls would have been smashed through.Keep in mind folks that this is the point of view of someone who's only seen New York through one form of media or the other, so if there's anything anyone wants to add to the list of errors, than just submit them to my account.In all fairness, I still find this to be a good attempt at story telling. I hold to my rating of 8/10 for writing and production, but only a 2/10 for continuity.