I don't get the flack Roland Emmerich's version receives

The criticisms come in two forms or a combination: (1) Godzilla purists complain that the monster is different than the one in the classic Godzilla flicks, and (2) others complain that the film is what it is -- a story about a 200-foot tall dino-lizard attacking New York City.

As far as the first point goes, so it deviates from the Japanese Godzilla, so what? The hailed 1982 version of "Conan the Barbarian" deviated a lot from (creator) Robert E. Howard's version but that didn't stop people from loving it. Or how about the respected "Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan" (1984), how faithful was that to Burrough's book? This 1998 film is an American reinterpretation of Godzilla, nothing more, nothing less.

Besides, the behemoth as depicted in the 1954 original "Godzilla" was actually cute. The last time I saw that flick it was impossible for me to take Godzilla's attack seriously -- he was too cute! In other words, the filmmakers HAD to change the monster's look to make him more threatening-looking. Moreover, does Godzilla really look THAT much different? Here's Godzilla in the 1998 film https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120685/mediaviewer/rm1714670592/?ref_=tt_md_4 and here he is in the fan-approved 2014 flick https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0831387/mediaviewer/rm4107251457/.

As for the second point, this is a film about a giant lizard attacking a city, why would anyone expect "Gandhi"?

I consider this the "king of the monster movies" with the understanding that the tone is more akin to Indiana Jones than the ultra-serious vibe of, say, "Aliens" or "War of the Worlds." Remember the scene in "Jurassic Park" where the T-rex chases the vehicle? This version of "Godzilla" has a similar scene except that the monster is 200-feet high rather than 20-feet. Remember the great velociraptor scenes? This has similar scenes except that there are a couple hundred creatures rather than just a few. In short, "Godzilla 1998" is like "Jurassic Park" on total overdrive. This may make it less realistic, but it's arguably more entertaining. In my opinion it is: Although the dinosaurs in "Jurassic Park" are great, the story isn't that compelling and the characters are weak. "Godzilla" by contrast has more drive and a better cast.

Speaking of the cast, Matthew Broderick plays the likable protagonist, Maria Pitillo his wannabe-reporter girlfriend, Hank Azaria a photographer, Jean Reno a French military officer intent on destroying the monster, Kevin Dunn the American colonel in charge of the New York operations, Michael Lerner the mayor of New York and Lorry Goldman his aide. The latter two amusingly spoof Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel, evidently because they trashed Emmerich's previous two films (and I agree that "Independence Day" was very disappointing).

Speaking of Ebert, he of course gave "Godzilla" a very low rating (1.5/4 Stars) and criticized it like so: "Going to see 'Godzilla'' at the Palais of the Cannes Film Festival is like attending a satanic ritual in St. Peter's Basilica. It's a rebuke to the faith that the building represents." But isn't this the same same critic who gave 2005's "King Kong" a perfect rating? What's strange with this is, as cartoony and unrealistic as this version of "Godzilla" is, "King Kong" is at least three times worse in this regard; actually, it's like a live-action Road Runner cartoon (Remember that moronic brontosaurus stampede sequence? Or how about the scene where one guy shoots the big bugs off another guy with a machine gun? You can't get any more stoo-pid). And yet Ebert praises "King Kong", but "Godzilla" is supposedly a terrible film. Not only is this absurd, since "Godzilla" is the better movie, but it reveals a double standard. Maybe Ebert is good buddies with Peter Jackson, who knows?

Broderick and Reno shine here and the rest of the cast are effective. The weak point is the women. Maria Pitillo is a quality female protagonist, very cute, but the filmmakers don't do enough with her. Vicki Lewis plays a scientist but her role is minor. And Arabella Field's role is even smaller (although that's not necessarily a bad thing since her character is so annoying). Needless to say, weak job on this front.

The film also has an entertaining soundtrack, including some "Kashmir."

At the end of the day, this 1998 version of "Godzilla" is a great turn-off-your-brain-and-have-a-blast flick. It has the fun air of Indiana Jones and The Mummy. It takes the concept of a giant monster attacking a city and goes over-the-top with it, but not to the ridiculous extent of Jackson's "King Kong" cartoon. Lastly, if you think the only menace to the city is the 200-foot tall creature, you're wrong!