Godzilla was sixty years old in 2014, and there’s likely no
better birthday gift for the long-lived atomic lizard (or his devoted fans…) than
Gareth Edwards’ impressive film. The
2014 Godzilla
treats the sturdy old creature and his franchise with abundant respect, and
perhaps more importantly, with a sense of ingenuity and even love.
Because of Edwards’ meticulous care and devoted attention, Godzilla
likely qualifies as one of the best Hollywood blockbusters made this
decade. Furthermore, Godzilla is constructed with an eye
towards character and human-sized thrills rather than CGI special effects or
monumental set-pieces.
And commendably, the film’s narrative actually makes sense…a
factor one can’t actually take for granted in the age of turgid, over-stuffed,
“synergistic” summer blockbusters.
One critic, Salon's Andrew O'Hehir has even termed Godzilla the best action movie since Jaws (1975). He writes of Godzilla: "This is a movie of tremendous visual daring, magnificent special-effects work and surprising moral gravity."
That comparison to Jaws may be a bit of an over-statement, but there are
points of comparison worth making, and O'Hehir's description of Godzilla's virtues are right on the money.
Jaws,
of course, was the very first “summer” blockbuster and Godzilla is the latest,
but the connection between films run deeper than that, and deeper, even, than
the fact that both film feature protagonists named “Brody.”
This Godzilla thoroughly impresses based, to a great degree, on its
careful generation of suspense, and Edwards’ insistence on providing a “human
eye” perspective to the kaiju-sized action. One might make the same statement regarding
Spielberg’s classic. There, the human story about Brody, Hooper and Quint was
just as captivating as the death scenes with the great white shark, if not more
so when one considers the power of the Indianapolis sequence aboard the Orca.
And just as in Jaws you don’t see the great white
shark for long spells there are times in Godzilla wherein the story moves
along quite nicely without giant monsters wrecking national monuments on
screen.
The film’s prologue in Japan is absolutely riveting by itself, even
outside the giant monster milieu. And
this has precisely nothing to do with scale, special effects or disaster movie
clichés, but rather the fact that the scene involves two people the audience cares
for trapped in a terrifying and tragic situation.
In total, there are likely four crucial factors that come into
play when considering the success or failure of any Godzilla film, and
Edwards’ 2014 fresh take on the material absolutely runs the table. It aces the checklist.
I’ll discuss each of the four factors in turn -- and in detail
-- after the synopsis below.
In the year 1999, Dr. Serizawa (Ken
Watanabe) makes a strange discovery in the Philippines: the egg-sac of some
giant, unknown and apparently recently-dormant creature. Unfortunately, the prehistoric being is now awake
but gone…having escaped to the sea.
Soon after this unique discovery,
something strange occurs at the Janjira Nuclear Facility in Japan. An engineer,
Joe Brody (Bryan Cranston) has detected strange readings emanating from the
plant, and he sends his wife, a scientist (Juliette Binoche), to discover their
source. Disaster strikes however, and
Janjira is evacuated as the nuclear reactor apparently goes into meltdown.
In 2014, Joe’s grown son, Ford (Aaron
Taylor-Johnson), a U.S. soldier and expert in explosives, is called to Japan to
bail his Dad out of prison. Unable to
put down his obsession with the 1999 incident, Joe is convinced that the
government and nuclear plant company are hiding something dangerous inside the
Janjira facility.
Joe’s suspicions prove correct, and at
the facility, Ford and Joe witness the awakening of a horrible creature: a
giant creature called MUTO (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organism). It destroys most of the plant, kills several
people, and flies away. Joe is injured during the incident.
Later, Ford teams up with Dr. Serizawa
aboard the air-craft carrier U.S.S. Saratoga, a vessel which is attempting to
pursue the monster. Serizawa reveals
that this creature is not alone, however.
In fact, another beast -- which Serizawa
dubs “Godzilla” -- was awakened by nuclear testing in 1954 and is now pursuing
the MUTO. Serizawa believes Godzilla,
nature’s alpha predator, is hunting the newly-awakened monster, and attempting
to restore the Earth’s sense of balance.
Before long, another MUTO rears its head
in Nevada, near Yucca Mountain, and the U.S. military is faced with the
possibility of three giant monsters on its soil. Worse, the MUTOs are preparing to reproduce…
In my introduction above, I mentioned a checklist consisting of
four boxes, and noted that Godzilla marks each one
successfully. I want to discuss these
four qualities in detail now.
First, does the film feature -- and successfully express -- a viewpoint about Godzilla?
This is the arena where the 1998 version of the material failed
most egregiously.
The Roland Emmerich film had no notion about why Godzilla is
special, or why people should care about him or his story.
Was he a villain? A mere
animal? A hero?
The film never decided.
In fact, the 1998 film never even gave serious thought about answering
the question.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter much if Godzilla is portrayed as
Terror Personified (as was the case in the Ishiro Honda original of 1954) or as
a stalwart friend to mankind (as in Godzilla vs. Hedorah [1972] for
instance.)
Instead, what matters is that the filmmakers possess a clear concept of and opinion about
Godzilla, so they can capably transmit it to audiences.
On this front, Godzilla (2014) succeeds
marvelously. The new film contextualizes the giant beast as a kind of “alpha
predator” whose main purpose is to balance out-of-whack nature.
Long-time fans of Godzilla films will recognize this approach as
seeming rather Mothra-esque (think: Godzilla vs. Mothra: Battle for the Earth
[1992]). Yet it certainly works in terms of Godzilla and our understanding of
him. We have seen Godzilla as an Earth defender before, in the aforementioned
Hedorah film, and also in efforts such as Godzilla vs. Gigan (1972). Even in Godzilla
vs. SpaceGodzilla (1995), Godzilla was our champion (perhaps
reluctant…) against more ravenous, horrible monsters.
But this Godzilla of 2014 is a hero, and the filmmakers realize
it. They humanize their hero by giving him soulful, old eyes, and letting our
human hero, Ford, register them. This is
no mere “wild” animal, no mere berserker.
No, this Godzilla is not a monster at all…but a God who walks among
men.
And judging by this Godzilla’s gait and lumber, he has seen
quite a few fights too. There is
something wise, deliberate and, again, soulful
about this creature. I would even
state that at times he seems somewhat gentle (particularly during his
evacuation from San Francisco).
And indeed, that’s how the movie understands, recognizes and
treats Godzilla for the audience’s benefit.
If Godzilla is an avatar of nature, then he can be both dangerous and
beautiful, and Godzilla 2014 nails that duality.
Second on the checklist: Godzilla films function best,
universally, when the giant monsters serve as avatars for man’s misuse of the
Earth or Earth’s environment.
In Godzilla (1954), of course, Godzilla represented the bugaboo of
atomic bombs, and atomic testing in the Pacific by the United States.
In the aforementioned Godzilla vs. Hedorah, the “smog
monster” was an alien who thrived on pollution, and mankind provided more than
enough sewage and garbage to allow him to rise up and challenge the human race
and the king of monsters.
And Godzilla 2000 explicitly compared Godzilla to a tornado: a
natural force without malice, but with great destructive capability,
nonetheless.
Again, Godzilla (2014) satisfies regarding
this expectation, or artistic comparison.
Many critics have read the film as an anti-global warming tract, and
that seems, at least, a borderline legitimate reading.
However, the film hits many environmental notes -- and ones
across the board -- in terms of modern environmentalism. To wit, the film opens in 1999 in the Philippines
in the aftermath of a mining disaster. It is that mining disaster that leads
promptly to a nuclear disaster in Janjira, Japan.
The MUTO -- a formerly dormant giant monster -- is awakened by
man’s destructive hand at this particular mine, and so it is not impossible to
see Godzilla
as a commentary on fracking.
That mining technique is the source of many environmental risks,
including contamination of the air, noise pollution, and the bringing up of
(unhealthy) chemicals to Earth’s surface.
Clearly, the MUTO is comparable in terms of noise pollution (!) and was
brought up from beneath the Earth’s surface with very unhealthy consequences
for man. The MUTO can thus be interpreted as an avatar for man’s greed in
plundering the resources beneath our soil.
Similarly, the anti-nukes metaphor from the original Honda film
is updated masterfully here, if that is the aspect of the film one chooses to
concentrate on. Godzilla’s opening scene,
about a pseudo-meltdown at the Janjira nuclear plant is frighteningly plausible,
and brings back all-too-vivid memories of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
disaster of March 2011, which is still being cleaned u even as I write this
review.
But in Godzilla, man knowingly nurtures the
MUTO at the Janjira facility, nursing it, essentially on a diet of nuclear
waste or nuclear energy. This facet of
the MUTO implies that man is a self-destructive organism who courts disaster by
continuing to “feed” technologies that are dangerous, and which could radically
recreate the environment.
In the movie, fortunately, Mother Nature “summons” Godzilla --
the restorer of balance -- to set things right.
In real life, as I informed my son, Joel, we are not so lucky as
to have a Godzilla on our side, and it seems we often don’t possess the wisdom
to respond well when we create an imbalance.
This facet of man’s nature is diagrammed in the film by the U.S. military
force, which wants to detonate more nukes in order to stop a creature that
actually feeds on nukes…a terribly reckless and poorly-considered notion.
There’s an old saying that man proposes and God disposes. In a very real way, Godzilla concerns what
happens when nature must correct damage that man has created. Regardless if one focuses on the mining
aspect or the nuclear aspect of Godzilla’s
narrative, it is plain that Gareth Edwards’ film concerns, often deeply, the
idea that when man errs catastrophically, nature will respond, and not always
in a manner that directly benefits us, or our civilization.
By focusing intently on this subject -- that man is a fool to believe he can control nature -- Edwards’ Godzilla
absolutely lives up to the noble and pro-social meaning of Toho’s Godzilla
film series. The very existence
of Godzilla reminds one that man is not, necessarily, at the top of the food
chain on Earth.
Thirdly, in terms of the Godzilla movie checklist: do the human beings who move the story forward
do more than merely serve the plot, and actually enhance the film as a
narrative and as an experience?
Again, I’d suggest that the answer is strongly affirmative.
Bryan Cranston and Juliette Binoche vet powerful supporting
roles early in the film, and almost instantly establish that there is a strong
emotional and human under-current to this Godzilla film. Again, a contrast to the 1998 film seems to
be in order.
There, the characters were one-note jokes (remember Mayor Ebert
and the Tatapoulos joke?), and some characters were so unlikable, so
disconnected from the experience of being in a world with Godzilla, that you
actually found yourself wishing they would get killed by the giant iguana.
Not so here. The new Godzilla not only opens strongly
with Cranston and Binoche as a doomed and tragic couple, but features a cerebral
Godzilla “advocate” in the form of Dr. Serizawa (Ken Watanabe), a man who has
seen precisely how man can imbalance nature through his father’s experience at
Hiroshima in 1945.
This new Dr. Serizawa essentially fulfills the role of Miki
Saegusa in the Heisei Era of Godzilla films, feeling and expressing a kind of
emotional connection to this “alpha predator.”
Everyone else sees Godzilla as a monster, but Serizawa see him
as something more…something remarkable.
In terms of the action, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, playing Ford, is
asked to carry the greatest burden, and he does a fine job of establishing a
character who is contending with less-than-ideal circumstances.
Ford encounters the MUTO in close-quarters twice, and sees
Godzilla close-up at least once, but Taylor-Johnson doesn’t reach for irony or
humor, instead embodying a brand of wide-eyed operational-intelligence, or
survival mode instincts. Dropped into
the frying pan, he’s constantly figuring out how not to get burned. The character need not do more than that,
especially since he is also well-defined by the film as a good son, a good
father, and a loving husband.
But importantly, Edwards permits us to see through Ford’s human
eyes on multiple occasions. The air jump scene is one example that allows us to
experience his point of view in visceral terms.
And when Ford sees Godzilla relatively close-up, as I noted above, we
see with him. We see the “monster’s”
eyes through the man’s eyes.
This is Gareth Edwards’ greatest gift as a filmmaker: he is able
to keep a strong focus on the human and the individual, even in moments that
could seem unbelievable, or far-out. He
grounds everything in the human experience, and the result -- as was also the
case with Monsters (2010) -- often proves staggering.
Last but not least vis-à-vis the checklist: any Godzilla movie
worth its weight in lizard scales needs to feature great monster fights.
Here, again, the film does not disappoint.
Edwards plays against expectations and reveals only glimpses of
the first MUTO vs. Godzilla encounter.
He holds his fire as long as possible before showing us the Full Monty,
as it were. This reserved approach works
effectively because suspense is generated, and we mustn’t suffer through a
continuous orgy of destructive, non-stop special effects. Man of Steel (2013), j’accuse.
That film gave up plot, characterization -- everything -- for an
hour of city-destroying action that ultimately had no visceral impact. A lot of CGI doesn’t have tremendously more
impact than a little CGI, and Edwards seems to understand that lesson.
Godzilla doesn’t go there, and gives us a great final scene. Had the battle occurred at Honolulu mid-way
through, the battle royale would not have succeeded.
Instead, the final battle between monsters in San Francisco
proves a wonderful catharsis, and it lasts just long enough so that we don’t
have to ask questions about Godzilla’s capabilities (such as: why didn’t he use
his atomic fire breath in Hawaii). By
keeping that battle largely off-screen, Edwards avoids a lot of questions about
how and why things go down.
The final battle is extraordinary in Godzilla, so much so that
the audience I watched the film roared, clapped and hollered in joy when the
giant green monster powered up and fired his atomic breath for the first
time.
Everyone was waiting for that precise moment -- a moment that
Emmerich’s film studiously avoided because it wasn’t “realistic,” I guess --
and the moment here truly plays as cathartic, and if truth be told, rousing.
Godzilla also lands a brilliant death blow on the last MUTO, and one
that recalls, nicely, a similar move involving Orga in Godzilla 2000. As a monster, Godzilla has always been a
slugger. He’s not always the strongest
monster, and he doesn’t always have the most impressive powers, but he learns
from each encounter and devises a strategy to win. That idea plays out in the film’s climactic
encounter.
This Godzilla is truly a king of monsters (and monster films), and it
could be the savior not just of the summer box-office, but of a certain style
of blockbuster film-making; one where we care about the people and the narrative outcome as
much as we do about the special effects, and plugs for upcoming franchise
films.
Always respect your analysis of these films.
ReplyDeleteYou've kind of sold me on checking out Shin Godzilla. I'm a fan of Anno so maybe I will enjoy it.
Truth be told, I wasn't a fan of the Edwards' film.
Clearly you enjoy each of the Godzilla films on their own merits and on their own terms.
So, I'm not asking you to compare because they are different films from different filmmakers etc..
But which film did you prefer? Shin Godzilla or Edward Godzilla?
And do you think, while a gargantuan task, you might list your ten favorite Godzilla films in a future post? Thank you.