‘Godzilla’ Inspires Viewers but Appreciation Differs

I feel compelled to comment on Kevin Thomas’ review of “Godzilla” (May 19). Having witnessed firsthand the disappointment of a hyped-up audience, I find it amazing that Thomas finds not one fault in the film.

Yes, it had moments, but they were few. The film is a dud. I always thought it was a movie reviewer’s responsibility to overcome media hype and truly evaluate a film for its worth. I will no longer be expecting this from The Times.

DAVID PONAK

Los Angeles

*

Having seen the original “Gojira” (the underlying film from which the 1956 “Godzilla” version was derived) and the current remake now on thousands of screens, it is clear that they both remain candidates for improvement by adding new scenes with Raymond Burr.

DAVID R. GINSBURG

Beverly Hills

*

I was both horrified and furious when I turned to the May 22 Calendar and could not help but see a photo of Godzilla. I realize the film had been playing for two or three days already, but I hadn’t had time to see it yet, and was indeed planning on attending a matinee that very day.

After the months of anticipation and the great lengths to which the filmmakers went to guard the images of Godzilla, how insensitive and greedy of you to print a photo, with no warning, on the front page of the Calendar section. You took a lot of wind out of the movie’s sails for me and I am very disappointed.

ROD REYNOLDS

Los Angeles

Editor’s note: True, the filmmakers zealously guarded the image of Godzilla, to the extent that only one national publication (USA Today) was given a picture of the creature to publish on May 19, the day most newspapers, including The Times, reviewed the film. By May 22, the filmmakers had provided newspapers throughout the country, not to mention TV stations, with Godzilla images.