Jump to content

Godzilla, King of the Monsters


Recommended Posts

I still have not seen Shin Gojira, but have heard so many wonderful things about it I've got to. The Daikaiju genre as dark, biting political satire with a truly formidable Godzilla.

 

The original Gojira, as released in Japan, was a time capsule of the fears and values of not-very-far-postwar Japan. The American occupation had just ended, everybody remembered Hiroshima (we see brief references to it from a survivor), and the dilemma of how powerful a weapon do you dare use under an existential threat is explored in detail.

 

In terms of thematic depth, these are the only Daikaiju films that go beyond rock-em sock-em giant monsters. The original inspiration for the Kaiju genre iof, of course, the original King Kong, where the pride and hubris of the filmmaker Carl Denham overtook reasonable judgment and had devastating consequences for giant spa, Skull Island, and New York City alike. No wonder the story appealed to Peter Jackson, who is the picture of cinematic hubris in modern times. (he is, in fact, a truly gifted filmmaker, but he too is massively hubristic and believes he can do anything.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Michael Hopcroft said:

I still have not seen Shin Gojira, but have heard so many wonderful things about it I've got to. The Daikaiju genre as dark, biting political satire with a truly formidable Godzilla.

 

The original Gojira, as released in Japan, was a time capsule of the fears and values of not-very-far-postwar Japan. The American occupation had just ended, everybody remembered Hiroshima (we see brief references to it from a survivor), and the dilemma of how powerful a weapon do you dare use under an existential threat is explored in detail.

 

In terms of thematic depth, these are the only Daikaiju films that go beyond rock-em sock-em giant monsters. The original inspiration for the Kaiju genre iof, of course, the original King Kong, where the pride and hubris of the filmmaker Carl Denham overtook reasonable judgment and had devastating consequences for giant spa, Skull Island, and New York City alike. No wonder the story appealed to Peter Jackson, who is the picture of cinematic hubris in modern times. (he is, in fact, a truly gifted filmmaker, but he too is massively hubristic and believes he can do anything.)

 

Again, there are plenty of mature themes and messages in a ton of these "rock-em sock-em giant monster movies", but in typical American arrogance, we ignore them. 

 

The H-man: The pacific bomb tests and the potential effects on humans.

The Mysterians: The role of science in political thinking and society.

Atragon: The inherent problems of Nationalism.

KK vs Godzilla: The growth of unchecked consumerism (even Kong is just a product).

Mothra/Mothra vs. Godzilla: The effects of late game capitalism. Japan and potentially the world put at risk for the sake of the 1%

 

 

I could go on(easily), but I hope you see the point. These films are meant to entertain so ''thematic depth" takes a back seat to spectacle and fun, but to say that these films lack such themes in general is grossly inaccurate. Director Ishiro Honda and writers Shinichi Sekizawa and Takeshi Kimura often tried to put relevant depth in these films to the degree that they could. The dictates of business take precedence, but I'd say more often than not the "depth" you're looking for is there (though in fairness often tied to issues important to the Japanese themselves).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Dr. MID-Nite said:

 

Again, there are plenty of mature themes and messages in a ton of these "rock-em sock-em giant monster movies", but in typical American arrogance, we ignore them. 

 

The H-man: The pacific bomb tests and the potential effects on humans.

The Mysterians: The role of science in political thinking and society.

Atragon: The inherent problems of Nationalism.

KK vs Godzilla: The growth of unchecked consumerism (even Kong is just a product).

Mothra/Mothra vs. Godzilla: The effects of late game capitalism. Japan and potentially the world put at risk for the sake of the 1%

 

 

I could go on(easily), but I hope you see the point. These films are meant to entertain so ''thematic depth" takes a back seat to spectacle and fun, but to say that these films lack such themes in general is grossly inaccurate. Director Ishiro Honda and writers Shinichi Sekizawa and Takeshi Kimura often tried to put relevant depth in these films to the degree that they could. The dictates of business take precedence, but I'd say more often than not the "depth" you're looking for is there (though in fairness often tied to issues important to the Japanese themselves).

 

No. The American movies are not devoid of more serious themes.

 

In the first Legendary Godzilla film, we are explicitly told that the arrogance of man is in thinking nature is under our control, and not the other way around. We're repeatedly shown that these giants operate on a scale where we don't even matter. Our vaunted technology is not only stripped away from us, but gets out of our control and nearly causes even greater tragedy. We see the effect of tragic loss on a family, estrangement and obsession. There are constant reminders of the legacy of our nuclear age, whether it's death caused by a reactor accident, the abandoned ruin of the city of Janjira, a rogue nuclear bomb, or a main character whose father died in the Hiroshima explosion. The titular character is described not just as an animal or a monster, but as the embodied balance of nature.

 

The second Godzilla film plays on that balance of nature concept, and how Man has disrupted it, as the precipitant for the picture's main conflict. We have another example of a family broken by tragedy, and how it drives one character into isolation while motivating another to make a disastrous choice with the best of intentions. We get the revelation that these Titans have been woven throughout our history and mythology, back to prehistoric times -- that they were in fact our first gods, and devils. And we have the major character from the first film who lost his father in Hiroshima, sacrificing his own life in a nuclear explosion to help Godzilla, and thereby save the world.

 

In Kong: Skull Island we have a nod to American politics and society in the early Seventies, and how they tie into the expedition to the island. The theme of Man vs Nature is repeatedly emphasized, from reckless deployment of bombs that provokes Nature to retaliate; to the Monarch representative driven by fear that the ancient species ruling Earth would take it back if we don't destroy them first; to the colonel determined to show Kong that "Man is king." That character is portrayed as an old soldier facing lack of purpose without war, but with the death of his men on the island becomes an Ahab determined to kill Kong. Yet on the opposite side we have the example of a human culture on the island that has learned to adapt to the creatures they share it with, and formed a bond of respect and reverence for one species that's actually benevolent.

 

I would never claim that any of these themes and characterizations are the core of these movies. The movies are first and foremost spectacles and thrill rides for entertainment; these elements are seasoning. But the same can be said for most of the Japanese Godzilla films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, slikmar said:

I may be wrong, but when Dr. MId-Nite talked about American ignorance in ignoring them, I think (and I don't want to put words in his mouth) that he was speaking of the general public viewers who watch for the rockem-sockem and don't pay attention to the themes being presented.

 

It was more in reference to the Japanese films that are dismissed as simplistic trash by the masses. The 54 Godzilla gets praised and the others are garbage despite being made by more or less the same production staff. I just wanted to point out that these films are loaded with "mature themes" and aren't just "rock 'em sock 'em monsters". I wasn't even thinking about the American films in my post, but LL has me covered.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, Kaiju Krusader.

 

I particularly remember 2001's Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All-Out Attack, which has as its instigating premise, the corpse of the Godzilla killed in 1954 being revived and regenerated by the collective souls of those unjustly killed by the Japanese military during WW II, possessing Godzilla to drive him to destroy Japan in revenge. That's not only thought-provoking, but a bold move for a commercial film made for Japanese consumption. But that was still, at base, used mainly as an excuse for awesome giant monster action. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

Thank you, Kaiju Krusader.

 

I particularly remember 2001's Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All-Out Attack, which has as its instigating premise, the corpse of the Godzilla killed in 1954 being revived and regenerated by the collective souls of those unjustly killed by the Japanese military during WW II, possessing Godzilla to drive him to destroy Japan in revenge. That's not only thought-provoking, but a bold move for a commercial film made for Japanese consumption. But that was still, at base, used mainly as an excuse for awesome giant monster action. ;)

 

To me, the most thought provoking of the post 1954 kaiju films is 1963's Atragon. It rather directly attacks the concept of Nationalism less than 20 years after the end of WW2...which would have been extremely provocative to post war Japanese audiences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, slikmar said:

the general public viewers who watch for the rockem-sockem and don't pay attention to the themes being presented.

 

Indeed. I submit that nearly every movie ever made which is regarded as "highly entertaining" only plays on a surface level to mainstream audiences, and that the more thoughtful themes and elements within are largely lost on them. That doesn't change the fact that those movies still have those elements and are better for them. In fact, I would further submit that those deeper elements contribute to the general public's enjoyment whether they realize it or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm hopeful, but the more I see about GvK, the less that hope becomes.

 

#1 Executive - Bob! I've got it! We'll have Godzilla fight another monster.

#2 Executive - But we used all the monsters in the last movie.

#1 Executive - Did we?  There's got to be another one. 

#2 Executive - Well there is a giant ape.

#1 Executive - Giant Ape?

#2 Executive - Yes, a giant ape called King Kong.

--[[[ Follywood team watches King Kong original movie]]]--

#1 Executive- Well.....it was a giant ape, but he barely comes up to Godzilla's ankle.  No one would like that.  No match there.

#2 Executive- But we could spice it up.

#yesman 1 - Just make the ape the same size as Godzilla.

#yesman 2 - And give him an axe.

#2 Executive - Brilliant. Audiences are stupid anyway!

#1 Executive - Alright, run with it. Be sure to add in some gratuitous sex.

#2 Executive - Don't worry boss, this will be a billion dollar box-office.

 

And a movie is born......

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea is hardly unprecedented, there having been an earlier Kong vs Godzilla movie where they were close to the same size. I should note that in said movie, Kong needed an additional gimmick to beat Godzilla too. They gave Kong the power to absorb electricity to vitalize himself, and to release it by touch. If the origin of the axe is what people are guessing, it makes more sense than that in context.

 

I do like that this movie seems to be weaving the mythology of this "monsterverse" further into the story. It feels like it's part of something bigger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

16 minutes ago, Lord Liaden said:

The idea is hardly unprecedented, there having been an earlier Kong vs Godzilla movie where they were close to the same size. I should note that in said movie, Kong needed an additional gimmick to beat Godzilla too. They gave Kong the power to absorb electricity to vitalize himself, and to release it by touch. If the origin of the axe is what people are guessing, it makes more sense than that in context.

 

I do like that this movie seems to be weaving the mythology of this "monsterverse" further into the story. It feels like it's part of something bigger.

And I would point out they were setting this up with the post scene stuff in the first Legendary and also the Skull Island movies. 

The thing that annoyed me most about the original with the lightning absorption is that we watched Godzilla do the same thing in G vs Mechagodzilla and use it to magnetize himself. I understand that there isn't going to be consistencies but Sheesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2017 Legendary Pictures Kong was already much, much bigger than 1933 Radio Pictures Kong, and was described as a juvenile of his species back in 1973. In the nearly 50 years since the events of that movie, he has clearly grown to full size. At least they made a reasonable effort to explain the size equivalence in 2021. But honestly, if Kong's size is a sticking point for you then I don't know how you can enjoy any daikaiju movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, slikmar said:

 

And I would point out they were setting this up with the post scene stuff in the first Legendary and also the Skull Island movies. 

The thing that annoyed me most about the original with the lightning absorption is that we watched Godzilla do the same thing in G vs Mechagodzilla and use it to magnetize himself. I understand that there isn't going to be consistencies but Sheesh.

 

Yep, this new movie was in the planning stage at least since Skull Island, probably earlier.

 

In the interest of fairness, I should point out that King Kong vs Godzilla was the third movie in the franchise, from 1962; while Godzilla vs Mechagodzilla was the fourteenth and came out in 1974. By that point we're looking at a whole different continuity. But it is true that the writers for those movies would sometimes give Godz whatever plot ability they wanted for a particular movie. The character's origin and history were also rebooted several times, even from one film to the next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, zslane said:

But honestly, if Kong's size is a sticking point for you then I don't know how you can enjoy any daikaiju movie.

 

Because King Kong was never daikaiju.

 

It was a RKO picture along the lines of Creature From the Black Lagoon.

Yes, Toho adopted the character and tossed it into the mix, but it never really blended in.  It has never ever ever felt like daikaiju.  Even as a kid when I would go straight home from school to catch the after school monster movie on TV, I'd turn the channel when it came on.

 

But then I didn't have someone to let me know what was acceptable for me to like or dislike :think:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You absolutely have the right to like or dislike anything. But looking at the daikaiju genre as a whole, IMO it's tough to objectively say that anything in particular doesn't fit in. These movies have featured giant dinosaurs, giant insects, giant dragons, giant turtles, giant dogs, giant humanoids, giant aliens, giant robots, and giant things for which there aren't even words. ;)  Toho Studios even adapted a giant version of Frankenstein's monster!

 

My own view is that Legendary Pictures has done a pretty solid job of setting up a world in which all these things can co-exist and interact, so that if you can accept its basic premises (and I admit not everyone can), it all hangs together rather well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Spence said:

Because King Kong was never daikaiju.

 

If we accept daikaiju as essentially meaning "as big as Godzilla", then Kong was daikaiju in his second film appearance. This upcoming movie has more in common with that 1962 movie than any of the remakes of the original King Kong movie that came later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

 

Yep, this new movie was in the planning stage at least since Skull Island, probably earlier.

 

In the interest of fairness, I should point out that King Kong vs Godzilla was the third movie in the franchise, from 1962; while Godzilla vs Mechagodzilla was the fourteenth and came out in 1974. By that point we're looking at a whole different continuity. But it is true that the writers for those movies would sometimes give Godz whatever plot ability they wanted for a particular movie. The character's origin and history were also rebooted several times, even from one film to the next.

Hmmm, maybe he learned the ability after watching Kong use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...