The Kaiju/Monsterverse Thread (Kong & Godzilla)

Started by BatmanFanatic93, Sat, 2 Mar 2013, 02:26

Previous topic - Next topic

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/godzilla-sequel-in-the-works-at-warner-bros-legendary-pictures-1201185365/

Very glad to see it looking increasingly likely that a sequel will happen!  ;D

First of all, I'll address the "Godzilla wasn't in the movie enough" complaint. I personally love what the director did here. Everything was purposely designed as a build up, and it all came together in a fantastic climax. Actually, come to think of it, some of my favorite Godzilla films are the ones where he is barely in it. People seem to forget that in the original Gojira, Godzilla is on screen for a limited amount of time, but you feel his presence throughout. Another is Godzilla vs. Mothra, which is usually hailed as the best of the Godzilla sequels, and Godzilla doesn't even show up until half an hour into an hour and a half long movie. Terror of MechaGodzilla, it's literally about an hour in before he shows up. All examples of the fact that it isn't always showcasing the monster, but rather about spending your time well to make the story work. That being said, it's interesting to see some people evidently suggest that the 2014 Godzilla film is the first time such a approach has been taken, when in reality, it's anything but.

Actually, the more I think about it, this amusing complaint reminds me of the same complaint associated with Burton's Batman films. Come on, you know the ones. Where, The Joker should have been the film's title instead of BATMAN since we, as an audience, spend a very good amount of time with Napier/Joker as opposed to Bruce Wayne/Batman. I won't even bother going into the Batman, or lack of Batman, with BATMAN RETURNS (Burton addressed this in the SE's right?) and all the villains screen time with Origins and what not, but I honestly can't say I ever watched those films, and thought those criticisms rang true. No, I thought of them, and continue to think of them, as Batman movies. I personally don't need to spend an hour focusing purely on a origin story. Give me the basics, the need to knows, and let's hit the ground running. To me, especially under the circumstances, the 2014 Godzilla doesn't need the introduction and the screen time required as opposed to the MUTOs. Does it make for a worse movie on its own merits? That is entirely dependent on the individual. It certainly didn't hurt my overall enjoyment. Apparently, it did others.

With Godzilla, some of the films within the franchise in the past have had messages, where other's don't or are severely surpressed. With the 2014 film, I think, just as in the classic 1954 original, the message is decidedly anti-nuclear. As the use of nuclear power, though obviously removed from a Cold War context, is depicted as ineffectual and ultimately misguided, Which, in the grand scheme of the film's plot, eventually leads to a potential MUTO invasion. So, yeah. Is all of this leading the viewer to come to the conclusion that arrogance and foolish actions could lead to something destructive? You betcha.

Like the Blue Oyster Cult song lyric:

"History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of man."

Indeed.
"Imagination is a quality given a man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humour was provided to console him for what he is."

The build-up was all centred all around the MUTOs, not Godzilla.

Burton's Batman focuses on the villains, sure, but they relate to Batman a lot more with their contrasts and similarities. People are talking about Batman in newsrooms, on the streets, police are denying his existence. Joker jealously utters his name after shooting down Grissom. Basically, Batman has a presence in scenes he's not in. And importantly, we see the guy strut his stuff a lot sooner and in full view. There's no cut-aways just as Batman takes on the two rooftop punks in 89, or as the Batmobile rolls up to take on the circus gang. From my point of view, there's mystery without frustration. There is a difference between the two approaches.

In comparison, Godzilla is pushed to the side, merely swimming with the military as muscle to crash a party. They mention him by name a few times, but he's quickly dismissed and the attention goes back to the MUTOs as they are the chief threat. And it must be said, one of Godzilla's main problems is the dull characters, and they take up 90 per cent of the time. Crappy characters dominating a film is never a good thing.

Not to mention that the point most people who complain about B89 miss is that the basic thrust of the film is the investigation of Batman/Bruce, through other characters. Vicki, Knox, the Joker, the police - everyone's trying to discover who Batman is (or a way to upstage him) or Bruce Wayne is.


It's painfully obvious that the build up was specifically designed around Godzilla. As his screen time is basically the equivalent of having audiences take a sip, and then another, and then another, and finally when the final act comes, you take your drink. As a result, each and every scene where he's FULLY showcased ( from the tsunami/airport sequence, to the Golden Gate Bridge sequence, and of course, the final battle) evokes a powerful presence and definitely leaves an impression on the viewer. It's special and awe-inspiring each and every time *because*, unlike the Muto's, he's not being paraded around in your face the entire time. Just as it was designed to. That's what you call a build up.

It's interesting to bring up that Batman has a presence in the scenes he wasn't in during the Burton era, cause, I believe the 2014 Godzilla film took the same approach. Course we can sit here and downplay it, but in the Godzilla film I watched, it's consistently pointed out that the military views Godzilla as a highly potential threat (obviously so if the opening vintage footage sequence didn't drill that in deep enough) throughout the overwhelmingly majority of the film itself.. Godzilla is definitely not portrayed as just mere muscle swimming along much to the military's delight to throw down on the Mutos. Nope. The fear of the unknown as far as Godzilla's motives are, are clearly an underlining theme. Hell, there's even a scene where they thought the breakout of the MUTO was tied with Godzilla. With only Serizawa having any decent guesswork about what Godzilla's possible behavior may be like due to his association with Monarch secret agency. So yeah, I would say a presence is most assuredly there.

"Imagination is a quality given a man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humour was provided to console him for what he is."

I happened to watch this film last weekend. I have to agree with TDK and zDBZ.

This film was complete and utter rubbish. Full of exposition regarding these Muto creatures and laughable dialogue about Godzilla "trying to restore balance", even though Godzilla is guilty of causing its own death destruction. And people complained about Man of Steel? ::)

***[SPOILER]*** Yes, I understand that Superman is a hero but -trying to make Godzilla a hero at the end of the movie was just laughably stupid. ***[/END SPOILER]***.

And it was incredibly inappropriate how scenes between Godzilla's appearances before fighting suddenly cut away to the people's reaction from the other side of the world/city, and scenes suddenly jump from one to another without any sense of continuity or flow at all. This film was completely dull. For all the collateral damage on action, none of it made me care what was going on. Another overrated, failed attempt at a reboot/remake whatever it is.
QuoteJonathan Nolan: He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

Source: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei

Checked it out again a few days ago.

Could the movie have used more Godzilla? Sure, but the same could be said for most of the Godzilla movies ever made if that's a big issue for you. Does new Godzilla kick arse? BIG yes. In terms of Godzilla movies, it's right up there (though nothing will top GOJIRA) on being one of the best (unless you want to rate them in terms of camp-iness), and that's basically the only scale worth judging the movie on. It doesn't have the camp of the older movies, but it also seriously lacks the clusterF approach of the 1998 endeavor.

  I've been watching Godzilla movies since I can remember, and I was not disappointed at all with seeing Godzilla return like this. Getting to see Godzilla roar in IMAX with a kickass sound-system had me grinning like a kid every time, and I really enjoyed the mix of human and kaiju scale because it's highly likely that this is the first Godzilla movie for alot of people, especially youngsters, and the film impressively hammers home just how titanic and unstoppable these monsters are.

As far as Godzilla's death toll on humans goes, that's to be expected if you want any semblance of realism. While it's true that any damage Godzilla himself caused was directly related to stopping both Muto's, the end result would have been much worse if he hadn't stopped them. If anything, the film remained surprisingly faithful to the Kaiju/Toho depictions on human death, where it's standard trope to have massive amounts of destruction and chaos but no, or very limited onscreen human deaths due to it (which is a pretty normal trope. Most disasters movies or super hero movies or big booming explosion riffic action flicks, for example, have the same).
There weren't a lot of onscreen deaths (true of Gojira, as well), but you get that effect from the tone and the reactions to what's going on. The stadium full of injured people at the end (and seeing a 'missing persons' type wall) helps to sell that.

Also, I'm not seeing this link between Serizawa theorizing about Godzilla and "restoring balance" and the human death toll caused by the big G himself. That theory, similar to other Godzilla movies I can name, is Godzilla being an apex predator among the Kaijus (in this case, an ancient apex predator). That's it. It's not suggesting Godzilla is on "our side" and will avoid any and all destruction as kaijualy possible. Human death is often displayed as a simple and classic consequence of one Kaiju not being at all friendly towards another. With the victor usually being the one that's less or non-aggressive towards humans, and ultimately going back for a long rest until the next threat pops up. Once again, the film stayed true to what's already been presented in the Toho Godzilla films (and alot of other Kaiju films) for decades now.     


Super-pleased to hear about a trilogy.
"Imagination is a quality given a man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humour was provided to console him for what he is."

Quote from: The Joker on Mon, 26 May  2014, 02:55

  I've been watching Godzilla movies since I can remember, and I was not disappointed at all with seeing Godzilla return like this. Getting to see Godzilla roar in IMAX with a kickass sound-system had me grinning like a kid every time, and I really enjoyed the mix of human and kaiju scale because it's highly likely that this is the first Godzilla movie for alot of people, especially youngsters, and the film impressively hammers home just how titanic and unstoppable these monsters are.


I don't call myself a Godzilla fan to be honest, but I thought the focus on the Mutos was so strong that Godzilla became an afterthought. For all the focus on the Mutos being hatched and all the exposition and reaction surrounding their existence, I honestly can't remember anything explained about Godzilla's existence at all. I'm don't care too much about characters having smaller screen time as long as they play a strong part in the plot, but don't you think it's a little ridiculous how we see Godzilla for the first time in Hawaii, and it suddenly cuts away to Elizabeth Olsen and her son watching the live news coverage from the other side of the world? On top of that, it cuts off to the next day. A lot of scenes happen like that in this movie; scenes just end abruptly by jumping from one period of time to the next without any sort of continuity at all.

It doesn't help that apart from Bryan Cranson, I didn't care for any of the characters. At this point I'd rather watch Bryan Cranston crying for two hours to be honest.  8)

Quote from: The Joker on Mon, 26 May  2014, 02:55

As far as Godzilla's death toll on humans goes, that's to be expected if you want any semblance of realism.

I still thought that Godzilla being identified as a hero was very laughable. Yeah, he stopped the Mutos but how many people did he kill in the process? When Serazawa said that "restore balance" line, I couldn't help but laugh, and  I thought "are they going to try to make him a hero"? I laughed harder in the end with the news headline. Yes, I don't know anything about Godzilla, but nevertheless I thought the way they tried to him a hero end was goofy.

This movie just didn't make me fan. I don't plan to watch the other two in the future, and I can't imagine the originals from the fifties to be worse than this.
QuoteJonathan Nolan: He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

Source: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Mon, 26 May  2014, 04:17
I don't call myself a Godzilla fan to be honest, but I thought the focus on the Mutos was so strong that Godzilla became an afterthought. For all the focus on the Mutos being hatched and all the exposition and reaction surrounding their existence, I honestly can't remember anything explained about Godzilla's existence at all. I'm don't care too much about characters having smaller screen time as long as they play a strong part in the plot, but don't you think it's a little ridiculous how we see Godzilla for the first time in Hawaii, and it suddenly cuts away to Elizabeth Olsen and her son watching the live news coverage from the other side of the world? On top of that, it cuts off to the next day. A lot of scenes happen like that in this movie; scenes just end abruptly by jumping from one period of time to the next without any sort of continuity at all.

For me, I enjoyed the slow build-up and I think that was handled pretty well. I will say Godzilla's first appearance actually felt a little rushed. Not in terms of how much time it took to get there though, but once the big-G does show up, it's suitably epic. I didn't mind them pulling away from the first fight so much - especially considering you got to see bits of it in the TV immediately thereafter and it's clear that it's a very quick and inconclusive fight with the MUTO taking off. Evidently, it's not the sort of scenario some people wanted where we are constantly given action and explosions to the point where we are numb, but again, I wasn't upset with it. If anything, alot of scenes featuring Godzilla are shot from the POV of the people who are directly in the vicinity of the action. Which is quite different than say, Pacific Rim.

As far as Godzilla's origin goes, the notion of giving us info Monarch was aware of, and quickly moving on was fine. In the original GOJIRA, we are never given a proper explanation either. As Godzilla could have been a evolutionary hybrid for all we know. We had theories, but nothing concrete. Course the Heisei era of films gave a more detailed account into Godzilla's past, but that's an entirely different timeline. Simply put, a Nolan-sized backstory for Godzilla wasn't in the cards. The info we got was brief. Just as it was in the 1954 film. 


QuoteIt doesn't help that apart from Bryan Cranson, I didn't care for any of the characters. At this point I'd rather watch Bryan Cranston crying for two hours to be honest.  8)

Cranston served his purpose. I've read some (and by some I mean alot) complaints about his lack of screen time, but I felt it was sufficient enough. With the other main cast, ATJ didn't do anything for me. Olsen was alright as an anchor for ATJ's character, and I'm cool with Ken.

Quote from: The Joker on Mon, 26 May  2014, 02:55
I still thought that Godzilla being identified as a hero was very laughable. Yeah, he stopped the Mutos but how many people did he kill in the process? When Serazawa said that "restore balance" line, I couldn't help but laugh, and  I thought "are they going to try to make him a hero"? I laughed harder in the end with the news headline. Yes, I don't know anything about Godzilla, but nevertheless I thought the way they tried to him a hero end was goofy.

This movie just didn't make me fan. I don't plan to watch the other two in the future, and I can't imagine the originals from the fifties to be worse than this.

If we're talking negatives here, the cheering and that headline about "The King of the Monsters defeats Mutos!" was a bit much. While it's true that any damage Godzilla himself caused was directly related to stopping the Muto's and the end result would have been much worse if he hadn't stopped them, I think the real people in that situation, having just lived through all that, wouldn't really be of a mindset to be cheering for him at that point. That was hammered in too much. Especially since he wasn't at all considered a friendly cooperative monster by the military for the length of the film. Could that have been a mandate by Toho? Possibly. I wouldn't rule it out. Though, at the same time, I wouldn't say putting a more positive light on Godzilla near the film's conclusion to further illustrate that he indeed is apathetic towards humans, and is clearly all about being the Apex predator and destroying other revived Kaiju's, thus "restoring balance" in his world to be a deal breaker. If anything the tsunami sequence illustrated that indifferent 'force of nature' aspect to the character (a pretty popular trait at that). Which isn't always depicted as being about malice.

The thing is, Godzilla is a character that has been around for, now, sixty years. He's been shaped and molded into many incarnations to suit audience and public expectations (touching upon commercialism, corporate greed, the environment, diplomacy, etc.), and that's what makes the franchise so enduring. It's not everyone's taste, and I would say Godzilla is certainly more niche than Spider-Man, which makes Godzilla's opening weekend besting ASM2 even more amazing. All in all, there's some quibbles (not too many films where that doesn't happen to be perfectly honest) but definitely nothing major where I couldn't sit and enjoy the film, and the good far outweighs the bad.

Not being a fan of the series, or this film is cool. Since I'm kinda known as the Godzilla guy at work, I've had some colleagues ask my opinion on various films since last weekend, especially with the films that's been recently released on blu ray within the last month. One of which was a friend who got me interested in the Doctor Who lore. Course it took this film to finally perk their interest, but that's cool too.  8)
"Imagination is a quality given a man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humour was provided to console him for what he is."


Looks like Godzilla is going to have alot of company for the sequel.  8)

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/comic-con-next-godzilla-monsers-revealed-1201269631/

RODAN

MOTHRA

KING GHIDORAH




And during the wait, a Legendary King Kong film is coming as well.

http://www.deadline.com/2014/07/king-kong-skull-island-movie-legendary/

"Imagination is a quality given a man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humour was provided to console him for what he is."