Think that was the point. The military is generally not very effective in a Godzilla movie. I get your opinion, but come on now, comparing this to a Michael Bay movie just because it has a guy in the military as the lead is a bit much.
If that was supposed to be the point, then why wasn't it ever reinforced? At no point does anyone really lament their ineffectiveness. At no point does anyone express true frustration with how small they are compared to the events happening around them.
That was one of the big issues with this film. Cranston was easily the most expressive actor in the whole film, and he was barely in it. His storyline was sewn up inside of the first third of the film. While I am grateful that they didn't dwell on his story any longer than necessary, there was no one else in the film to pick up the emotional core.
As far as the human element is concerned in a film like this, the real gold comes from seeing people's reactions to the astounding events taking place around them. And we essentially got none of that. The human parts of the film were far too dry.
If that was supposed to be the point, then why wasn't it ever reinforced? At no point does anyone really lament their ineffectiveness. At no point does anyone express true frustration with how small they are compared to the events happening around them.
"The arrogance of man is thinking nature is in our control and not the other way around "-Dr. Ishiro Serizawa
"The arrogance of man is thinking nature is in our control and not the other way around "-Dr. Ishiro Serizawa
This line is delivered to a US Military officer. It is delivered after the advice that the doctor gives the military had been summarily ignored. At no point does anyone come up to the doctor and admit that he was right, even after the events of the plot prove that he was indeed right.
This just highlights my frustrations with the film. There were numerous instances where it could have turned in more interesting directions. There were sequences that were visually impressive, and served to capture the grandeur and awe of larger-than-life creatures. But the reactions of the human characters continually failed to live up to the circumstances they found themselves in.
Interesting, emotional characters like the one played by Ken Watanabe were constantly getting shunted to the side to make room for the boring, generic characters with no emotional depth. The addition of a few more scenes to comment on this trend would have been all it took to show the audience a winking understanding of its own absurdity. But instead it plays it straight from beginning to end. I didn't need comic relief, but some concession of self-awareness would have gone a long way in a film like this.
And spoiler tags are not necessary for this particular film. Nothing in this movie was surprising. Everything is telegraphed to the viewer. There were several moments where I rolled my eyes at the heavy-handed foreshadowing.
Not everything has to be completely spelled out in black and white.
That's the thing. Everything in the film OTHER than interesting themes was spelled out in black and white. All of the obvious, banal aspects of the story, plot, and characters got lots of exposition, explanation, and foreshadowing. All of the more weighty and interesting ideas got sound bites from characters whose roles were severely marginalized.
I made the dreaded "Michael Bay" comparison, and that was slightly unfair. Godzilla wasn't even close to being as bad as the Transformer films, or as heavy-handed. And the 3D designs for the monsters were way better than the cluttered messes in Transformers. And cinematography and shot composition were also much better than Bay's usual fare. But it does suffer from Bay's signature obsession with the United States military.
I did find some enjoyment in Godzilla. For anyone who is a fan of the original Zilla movies this is a must-see. The portrayal of Godzilla himself was quite satisfying, and the battle sequences were very entertaining. I was just left a little disappointed by the squandered potential. This was a decent genre film, especially for monster-movie fans. But it could have easily been a great film. And vast majority of the improvements wouldn't have been expensive, as almost all of them could have been made to the human elements of the film.
You might possibly be the only person on the planet that's a Godzilla fan that thinks this.
Nope , you are TOTALLY WRONG.
And a Tttttt- what? The 1998 film has a better godzilla and we all complain about it (fans like me). The newer one is similar to the old japanese versions... and meh..
The '98 Godzilla was a cool looking monster and all, but not really... Godzilla. The new one being similar to 'the old Japanese version' is exactly what makes it better. It actually looks like Godzilla.
That's the thing. Everything in the film OTHER than interesting themes was spelled out in black and white. All of the obvious, banal aspects of the story, plot, and characters got lots of exposition, explanation, and foreshadowing. All of the more weighty and interesting ideas got sound bites from characters whose roles were severely marginalized.
I made the dreaded "Michael Bay" comparison, and that was slightly unfair. Godzilla wasn't even close to being as bad as the Transformer films, or as heavy-handed. And the 3D designs for the monsters were way better than the cluttered messes in Transformers. And cinematography and shot composition were also much better than Bay's usual fare. But it does suffer from Bay's signature obsession with the United States military.
I did find some enjoyment in Godzilla. For anyone who is a fan of the original Zilla movies this is a must-see. The portrayal of Godzilla himself was quite satisfying, and the battle sequences were very entertaining. I was just left a little disappointed by the squandered potential. This was a decent genre film, especially for monster-movie fans. But it could have easily been a great film. And vast majority of the improvements wouldn't have been expensive, as almost all of them could have been made to the human elements of the film.
Yeah I got ya. It wasn't a perfect film, but I think a lot of the faults that you see were things that were necessary for a film like this that is establishing this world and everything. People didn't like how the first Transformers film had an emphasis on the humans as much, but it was something that was necessary to establish the mythos and such to the audience, through the human's eyes (then those films went completely off the rails, but that's another story). With everything in place now, I expect the sequel to completely knock it out of the park even more.
It wasn't a perfect film, but I think a lot of the faults that you see were things that were necessary for a film like this that is establishing this world and everything.
Actually, I think a lot of the faults stem from a desire to cater to a U.S. audience.
The producer's desire to showcase a lot of the U.S. military in this movie also probably hamstrung it, and would explain a lot of the film's narrative failings. In order to get direct access to the U.S. military for the purpose of shooting a film, you have to agree to portray the U.S. military in a positive light. If you put anything derogatory about the military in your film, you lose that access.
This is where the Michael Bay comparison comes in. Michael Bay is notorious for his love of the U.S. military, and his willingness to portray them as heroic exemplars in all his films.
With Godzilla, it really feels like the main character, the portrayal of the military, and the shunting of more interesting characters to the side where all decisions made to appeal to a U.S. audience. And I think all of these hurt the film. Pacific Rim handled this aspect much better. It intentionally marginalized it's U.S. appeal in favor of targeting a broader international market. And in the long run it payed off. Pacific Rim didn't do that well in the U.S., but it did fantastic overseas.
I worry that this iteration of Godzilla might not do as well as it could have because of it's selective U.S. focus. But then, the Transformers movies apparently do really well overseas, so maybe i'm worried for nothing.
I wanna keep this short, so im just gonna drop a few lines of:
- if you want to make a movie where the characters are the focus and not the monster, freaking make the humans actually interesting and make what they do matter.
- dont try to be both pacific rim and clover field at the same time, youl end up in the middle, missing the awesome parts from the two extremes.
Actually, I think a lot of the faults stem from a desire to cater to a U.S. audience.
Maybe its because the movie has a toyline, and has to play to a wide age range in a way that anyone who watches can understand. They're PG summer action movies, it's not supposed to be anything terribly complex.
Godzilla, Transformers, TMNT, GIJoes... every time its the same thing. We may have grown up with 'em when we were kids, but that doesn't mean it is tailored for us specifically. Every day there are fewer people our age, and more people younger than us. The torch has to be passed on at some point. Sure they could have made a monster movie just for 30-somethings and had actors like Cranston play the hell out of it, but that's obviously not the limited market they're after.
Godzilla, Transformers, TMNT, GIJoes... every time its the same thing. We may have grown up with 'em when we were kids, but that doesn't mean it is tailored for us specifically.
I watched Jaws when I was about seven years old. It was a good movie then. I've watched it numerous times since then. It gets better, every single time I see it. The older I get, the more suited I am to appreciate the subtelty of the performances in that movie. The film was shot and set in the 70s. It is 2014 and it is still a fantastic film. I can watch it right now and enjoy it even more than I did when I first saw it.
That's the halmark of a great film. Some of my favorite genre films fit that mold. Alien, Terminator, The Thing, these are all fine movies that are extremely watchable, even decades after they were produced.
No one is going to be saying that about Godzilla 2014. It will be fondly rembered by Godzilla fans, but no one is going to ever regard it as a timeless classic.
And there is nothing wrong with demanding more of media. Where do you set the bar? I measure most movies by those films that hold up to multiple viewings. If I can watch a film multiple times and not get tired of it, I can be confident that it was a respectable effort. A good film can be made from any subject matter. The subject of the film is no excuse for failings of basic plot, characterization, and themeing.
I watched Jaws when I was about seven years old. It was a good movie then. I've watched it numerous times since then. It gets better, every single time I see it. The older I get, the more suited I am to appreciate the subtelty of the performances in that movie. The film was shot and set in the 70s. It is 2014 and it is still a fantastic film. I can watch it right now and enjoy it even more than I did when I first saw it.
The relevant part of this quote is here:
I watched Jaws when I was about seven years old.
Nostalgia is a very powerful filter.
Someone seeing Jaws for the first time today probably wouldn't feel the same way you do about it.
Someone seeing Jaws for the first time today probably wouldn't feel the same way you do about it.
I watched the Transformers cartoons when I was seven years old as well. When I put in the DVDs for those today, they are very hard to watch. Not everything can be dismissed as nostalgia.
Some things can be considered good because we see them as children, and we don't have the maturity or critical analysis necessary to process them. When we grow up, we gain those tools. Quite a bit of the media I consumed and enjoyed as a child does not hold up. I can look at it today and it is not as good. The experience I've gained since I first saw it allows me to see all the cracks.
A young person seeing Jaws for the first time today wouldn't feel the same way about it. But not for the reasons you're citing. The film would seem strange to them because it is set in a world before their time. It would be like me watching a film set in the 1950s. The world being portrayed in the film is one I never lived in. And the original Jaws would not be as immediately accessible to modern children, who have been raised on the kind of brain-dead spectacle that the Transformers film series embodies.
You can't use "targeted at kids" as an excuse either. The best media holds up to the test of time.
One thing that I'm hopeful for is that Toho Studios will now go back to making Godzilla movies. They still do it best. I loved the new one, and I love that we now have a huge budget, more serious Godzilla franchise; but at the same time, I would love nothing more than for Toho to start putting out more. I want the crazy aliens, the ridiculous monster designs, the rubber suits, all of that. Godzilla 2000 came out right after the debacle that was the '98 American version (if anything, to show them how you do it), but what better way to capitalize on the success of this film than by going back to the "real" Godzilla.
Replies
If that was supposed to be the point, then why wasn't it ever reinforced? At no point does anyone really lament their ineffectiveness. At no point does anyone express true frustration with how small they are compared to the events happening around them.
That was one of the big issues with this film. Cranston was easily the most expressive actor in the whole film, and he was barely in it. His storyline was sewn up inside of the first third of the film. While I am grateful that they didn't dwell on his story any longer than necessary, there was no one else in the film to pick up the emotional core.
As far as the human element is concerned in a film like this, the real gold comes from seeing people's reactions to the astounding events taking place around them. And we essentially got none of that. The human parts of the film were far too dry.
"The arrogance of man is thinking nature is in our control and not the other way around "-Dr. Ishiro Serizawa
also, you might want to cover up those spoilers!
This line is delivered to a US Military officer. It is delivered after the advice that the doctor gives the military had been summarily ignored. At no point does anyone come up to the doctor and admit that he was right, even after the events of the plot prove that he was indeed right.
This just highlights my frustrations with the film. There were numerous instances where it could have turned in more interesting directions. There were sequences that were visually impressive, and served to capture the grandeur and awe of larger-than-life creatures. But the reactions of the human characters continually failed to live up to the circumstances they found themselves in.
Interesting, emotional characters like the one played by Ken Watanabe were constantly getting shunted to the side to make room for the boring, generic characters with no emotional depth. The addition of a few more scenes to comment on this trend would have been all it took to show the audience a winking understanding of its own absurdity. But instead it plays it straight from beginning to end. I didn't need comic relief, but some concession of self-awareness would have gone a long way in a film like this.
And spoiler tags are not necessary for this particular film. Nothing in this movie was surprising. Everything is telegraphed to the viewer. There were several moments where I rolled my eyes at the heavy-handed foreshadowing.
Not everything has to be completely spelled out in black and white.
That's the thing. Everything in the film OTHER than interesting themes was spelled out in black and white. All of the obvious, banal aspects of the story, plot, and characters got lots of exposition, explanation, and foreshadowing. All of the more weighty and interesting ideas got sound bites from characters whose roles were severely marginalized.
I made the dreaded "Michael Bay" comparison, and that was slightly unfair. Godzilla wasn't even close to being as bad as the Transformer films, or as heavy-handed. And the 3D designs for the monsters were way better than the cluttered messes in Transformers. And cinematography and shot composition were also much better than Bay's usual fare. But it does suffer from Bay's signature obsession with the United States military.
I did find some enjoyment in Godzilla. For anyone who is a fan of the original Zilla movies this is a must-see. The portrayal of Godzilla himself was quite satisfying, and the battle sequences were very entertaining. I was just left a little disappointed by the squandered potential. This was a decent genre film, especially for monster-movie fans. But it could have easily been a great film. And vast majority of the improvements wouldn't have been expensive, as almost all of them could have been made to the human elements of the film.
Nope
And a Tttttt- what? The 1998 film has a better godzilla and we all complain about it (fans like me). The newer one is similar to the old japanese versions... and meh..
Some photos for the nostalgia.
Yeah I got ya. It wasn't a perfect film, but I think a lot of the faults that you see were things that were necessary for a film like this that is establishing this world and everything. People didn't like how the first Transformers film had an emphasis on the humans as much, but it was something that was necessary to establish the mythos and such to the audience, through the human's eyes (then those films went completely off the rails, but that's another story). With everything in place now, I expect the sequel to completely knock it out of the park even more.
Toho Studios said it best with what they did with the American Godzilla in Godzilla: Final Wars
[ame="
Actually, I think a lot of the faults stem from a desire to cater to a U.S. audience.
The producer's desire to showcase a lot of the U.S. military in this movie also probably hamstrung it, and would explain a lot of the film's narrative failings. In order to get direct access to the U.S. military for the purpose of shooting a film, you have to agree to portray the U.S. military in a positive light. If you put anything derogatory about the military in your film, you lose that access.
This is where the Michael Bay comparison comes in. Michael Bay is notorious for his love of the U.S. military, and his willingness to portray them as heroic exemplars in all his films.
With Godzilla, it really feels like the main character, the portrayal of the military, and the shunting of more interesting characters to the side where all decisions made to appeal to a U.S. audience. And I think all of these hurt the film. Pacific Rim handled this aspect much better. It intentionally marginalized it's U.S. appeal in favor of targeting a broader international market. And in the long run it payed off. Pacific Rim didn't do that well in the U.S., but it did fantastic overseas.
I worry that this iteration of Godzilla might not do as well as it could have because of it's selective U.S. focus. But then, the Transformers movies apparently do really well overseas, so maybe i'm worried for nothing.
- if you want to make a movie where the characters are the focus and not the monster, freaking make the humans actually interesting and make what they do matter.
- dont try to be both pacific rim and clover field at the same time, youl end up in the middle, missing the awesome parts from the two extremes.
Godzilla, Transformers, TMNT, GIJoes... every time its the same thing. We may have grown up with 'em when we were kids, but that doesn't mean it is tailored for us specifically. Every day there are fewer people our age, and more people younger than us. The torch has to be passed on at some point. Sure they could have made a monster movie just for 30-somethings and had actors like Cranston play the hell out of it, but that's obviously not the limited market they're after.
I watched Jaws when I was about seven years old. It was a good movie then. I've watched it numerous times since then. It gets better, every single time I see it. The older I get, the more suited I am to appreciate the subtelty of the performances in that movie. The film was shot and set in the 70s. It is 2014 and it is still a fantastic film. I can watch it right now and enjoy it even more than I did when I first saw it.
That's the halmark of a great film. Some of my favorite genre films fit that mold. Alien, Terminator, The Thing, these are all fine movies that are extremely watchable, even decades after they were produced.
No one is going to be saying that about Godzilla 2014. It will be fondly rembered by Godzilla fans, but no one is going to ever regard it as a timeless classic.
And there is nothing wrong with demanding more of media. Where do you set the bar? I measure most movies by those films that hold up to multiple viewings. If I can watch a film multiple times and not get tired of it, I can be confident that it was a respectable effort. A good film can be made from any subject matter. The subject of the film is no excuse for failings of basic plot, characterization, and themeing.
The relevant part of this quote is here:
Nostalgia is a very powerful filter.
Someone seeing Jaws for the first time today probably wouldn't feel the same way you do about it.
Just before the credits rolled or...
I watched the Transformers cartoons when I was seven years old as well. When I put in the DVDs for those today, they are very hard to watch. Not everything can be dismissed as nostalgia.
Some things can be considered good because we see them as children, and we don't have the maturity or critical analysis necessary to process them. When we grow up, we gain those tools. Quite a bit of the media I consumed and enjoyed as a child does not hold up. I can look at it today and it is not as good. The experience I've gained since I first saw it allows me to see all the cracks.
A young person seeing Jaws for the first time today wouldn't feel the same way about it. But not for the reasons you're citing. The film would seem strange to them because it is set in a world before their time. It would be like me watching a film set in the 1950s. The world being portrayed in the film is one I never lived in. And the original Jaws would not be as immediately accessible to modern children, who have been raised on the kind of brain-dead spectacle that the Transformers film series embodies.
You can't use "targeted at kids" as an excuse either. The best media holds up to the test of time.