Godzilla Minus One (1 Viewer)

[St. Widge]

It's on Netflix now. I watched it the other night and thought it was pretty good.

Being a Toho film I assumed we'd be seeing a guy in a suit instead of a CGI monster, and the effects obviously weren't top of the line, but they weren't bad (I read the budget was only $10.8 million).

I haven't seen it yet, but it did win the Oscar for best visual effects and the below article is talking about how Hollywood could learn a lesson regarding shooting the movie with the later VFX in mind instead of using VFX to put bandages or problems and assuming they can make it look good no matter how you shoot it. So, it's interesting that you thought the effects weren't top of the line.

Anyway, looking forward to seeing it.

 

[fred8615]

Every year this guy takes a break from his normal naval history videos to do an April Fools Day spoof. This is this year's.

 

[Booker]

I haven't seen it yet, but it did win the Oscar for best visual effects and the below article is talking about how Hollywood could learn a lesson regarding shooting the movie with the later VFX in mind instead of using VFX to put bandages or problems and assuming they can make it look good no matter how you shoot it. So, it's interesting that you thought the effects weren't top of the line.

Anyway, looking forward to seeing it.

What I meant by "not top of the line" was it wasn't a big budget Hollywood movie, and I though some of the effects look like what you'd expect from the 1990's instead of the 2020's. Which is funny because the article you linked also compares the effects to 1990's vfx.

So if you want to get nitpicky there are some shots of Godzilla here and there that look inferior compared to the recent Hollywood CGI versions, but it's very well shot within the restraints of the budget, and they got a lot of bang for their buck. They did the whole movie for less than $11 million, while the recent Hollywood Godzilla movies all cost in the $150-200 million range, and I'd watch this one again before any of those.

 

[St. Widge]

What I meant by "not top of the line" was it wasn't a big budget Hollywood movie, and I though some of the effects look like what you'd expect from the 1990's instead of the 2020's. Which is funny because the article you linked also compares the effects to 1990's vfx.

So if you want to get nitpicky there are some shots of Godzilla here and there that look inferior compared to the recent Hollywood CGI versions, but it's very well shot within the restraints of the budget, and they got a lot of bang for their buck. They did the whole movie for less than $11 million, while the recent Hollywood Godzilla movies all cost in the $150-200 million range, and I'd watch this one again before any of those.

Cool. Yeah, the article does talk about 1990s VFX which I thought was interesting and odd but I guess in the 90s directors used VFX to supplement things they couldn't do practically and shot things to take that into account. Where as now the tendency is just to shoot it any way they can with someone in a green screen suit with motion cap balls on them and assume the VFX guys will fix it. Which, ironically, is much more expensive that the way the Godzilla Minus 1 guy did it and results in VFX burnout and crappy work due to crunch time.

 

[SystemShock]

I watched it last night on Netflix. I enjoyed it, it felt a throwback to old Godzilla movies, but I don't get the hype.

 

[nolaspe]

Ok, I really liked this movie...