
Godzillatheking123
MemberBaragonApr-30-2014 7:45 AMI am going to post something controversial. But before you all flame me for it, just reflect on what I said first.
I am talking about Godzilla King of the Monsters (1956), the American edit with Raymond Burr. Its been slammed for toning down the anti-nuclear message of the original, cutting out much of the core human story (i.e. the love triangle was only briefly touched upon) and giving an out-of-place cheerful tone to the ending by Burr. All those vices are true. That being said, and here is the controversial part, Godzilla 1956, in my opinion, is still a reasonably good and watchable film on its own.
Sure, it can't be compared to the original. And its far from perfect. But as "Americanized" movies go, it really wasn't that bad. Yes, Burr, as Steve Martin, looked awkward in places and its pretty obvious some of the scenes were edited in later (i.e. the lighting gives it away easily). But still, Burr gave a good performance. He treated his role seriously and didn't winked at the audience in a tongue-in-cheek manner (that would have surely destroyed the film). And despite cutting way too much of the original, the essential horror and destruction of Godzilla was retained. As was the grim mood of the original.
The 1956 director, Terry O. Morse, I think actually tried to do the best he could. Maybe given a choice he might not have edited the film at all, but being as it is, I think he tried his best to mesh his scenes with the original under the circumstances.
So, all in all, yes the 1956 version is inferior to the original. But I don't buy the argument it is a mere hack-job. On its own, it is a decent and watchable film. Maybe not necessarily great, but not really awful as it could have easily been.