Godzilla (2014) ***½ /5: Interpretation of the Godzilla character not radical (or extensive) enough. Godzilla should not have a moral compass if he is a force of nature. Glad that they acknowledged Godzilla's roots in parts.

Godzilla has gone back to his roots in this current release and it is for the better. I wanted to like the film more than I actually did because of the buildup however there were times when this felt like just a visual upgrade of the mighty king of the monsters. As a monster movie however there is none better out there at the moment however this film does not surpass Peter Jackson’s King Kong (2005) which is/was an upgrade and remake of the 1933 original. It is/was a much better film or a better monster movie. I refer to Jackson’s remake because it was released in the modern era. The 1933 version will not appeal visually to a majority of the 21^st century generation. With that said this film, Godzilla, is well made and promises a lot in terms of sequels. The main element here, as in all other monster movies, is that Godzilla is a force of nature. The monsters he battles are also forces of nature. Godzilla is sent to maintain natural balance or order in the face of destruction. Is he a savior or just a beast pursuing his prey? The movie is caught in two minds here.  The character of Godzilla is not developed sufficiently to give us an accurate picture about his intentions as an individual. What we do get, however, is a human story and so Godzilla is drawn based on how humans would perceive him. This makes sense because you won’t be clamouring for grand exclamations about his birth or his family. It is a matter of perception and how do you fit the pieces together to get a more accurate description of this monster who seems to only appear when some great bat like or insect like, radioactive feasting monsters decide to mate and lay a nest in the middle of San Francisco. This great monster then returns to the ocean when all is said and done. 

This film is about people coming to terms with the fact that there are monsters that roam the earth from the underground. Two bat like or insect like radioactive feasting monsters, both male and female, are seeking to create an area in San Francisco to nestle their offspring. They are called MUTOs.They can only be stopped if the legendary Godzilla can restore the balance by killing them so that he can remain king. The human story, which is a mere sideshow, centres on Ford Brody (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) whose mother (Juliete Binoche) was killed in Japan (where his parents worked as engineers) when a nuclear power plant was mysteriously destroyed from underground when he was young. It haunts both him and his father, Joe Brody (Bryan Cranston), who spends 15 years trying to unravel the mystery behind the plant’s destruction even though he is considered crazy. When the mystery is unraveled it’s monster time.

Positives

The primary positive is the mystery surrounding the gigantic forces of nature that come into contact with minuscule humans that are so reliant on technology to survive. This is not a unique theme and it has been developed before in other great monster movies such as King Kong (1933 & 2005). The forces of nature also correspond to the deep natural history of the earth we live in. We all know that there were dinosaurs but could we really come to grips with seeing such giants face to face. The earth can come to grips with these animals because it will outlast us as human beings regardless of our grand structures that are designed primarily for our benefit.  These large animals came from the earth and are its natural embodiments whereas in our world it is not necessarily so although we too are products of nature. Monster movies like Godzilla reminds us of nature’s strength and depth although they are mere exaggerations. These films seem more like a reaction to our dependence on technology and in order for nature to assert herself in she must come back in larger and in more grotesque forms  as a reminder. I admired the film for trying to remind us in dramatic fashion about the forces of nature although there are constant reminders in the forms of earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, etc.

I liked the explanation about the origins of the species which Godzilla belongs to and the idea that the level of radioactivity on the earth was much higher than it is today. It is believable because there was a time when, it is claimed by science, where there was no grass on earth. It was a more barren environment. With this decline in the levels of radioactivity they retreated to the depths of the ocean closer to the planets core. He responds to nuclear radioactivity although it is not clear how he feeds otherwise. I don’t know any natural animal that feeds solely on radioactive energy. It seems more like a creation of man than one of nature.  They also tried to tie in the actual history of nuclear testing to say that these were attempts to kill Godzilla in the 50s. It is interesting especially when these creatures are tied into the various nuclear plants around the world or our history of nuclear development. The focus is primarily on Japan,  Hawaii, San Francisco, California and Nevada. Godzilla and these other mega monsters seem to be tied only into our nuclear history. There does not seem to be anything beyond that apart from a few sightings. This seems to be in keeping with the origins story of the original Japanese version of Godzilla which is tied into nuclear warfare; the only known use of nuclear bombs in war was by the US military in WW2 when they dropped bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I liked that they went back to the origin stories of Godzilla although they did not apply extensively to Godzilla and focused more on the MUTOs. The 1998 version was trying to do away with the history of the character and so revamp completely without a foundation. This film modernizes Godzilla yet acknowledges the influence of the Japanese creators particularly with the roar. The role played by ken Watanabe as Dr. Ishiro Seriwaza is no fluke. He is a Japanese representative amongst the various white (and black in one case) scientists, engineers and military personnel. Why couldn’t the Brody’s be Japanese? Well that would be an interesting answer.

Another positive about this film is the human element. We must understand that the perception of Godzilla in this film is how we would perceive the character as human beings. How would we react if we saw this giant lizard rampaging through a city fighting giant bat like or insect like monsters? The human element does distract from Godzilla as the epicenter and is content to let him remain a legendary figure. The question remains can such a larger than life lizard remain the epicenter of a film when there is not much to him apart from fighting other large monsters? Such a creature cannot really be explained. When the actual monster fights do come there is nothing much in it really. If Godzilla was to be the epicenter they would not have the MUTOs. Godzilla would be the rampaging behemoth. This is a problem with the film because they seem to want to portray Godzilla as some sort of savior while at the same time portraying him as a force nature. The two are not compatible on a moral basis.

The special effects were good and the destruction was epic in scale.  The fights were not as remarkable however.

Negatives

The primary negative is that Godzilla is not the epicenter of the film. While watching the early scenes of the film, having not watched any trailers, I thought that the discoveries of 1999 were tied into Godzilla. I was surprised that the big reveal were these bat like or insect like behemoths  called MUTOs and not the King himself . I was disappointed from then on and so the movie became a drag as I watched these MUTO’s rampaging across the world. It was not remarkable to watch.  Making Godzilla the epicenter would not necessarily mean you have to explain his origins as a beast to any great extent but those patterns and discoveries associated with the MUTO’s could have been applied to him instead and would not take away from the mysterious nature. It could also go back to the original premise regarding Godzilla as a product of our nuclear activity although the species itself existed from the time of the dinosaurs. He would have been mutated by various nuclear activities and would act as a reminder or a warning about our nuclear agenda. Whatever does not kill you mutates you. This is what the 1998 film was trying to achieve but fell flat in its execution because it ignored its foundations and went too far in trying to sensationalize the product. Anyone looking at Godzilla would know that he is some hybrid of various reptilian creatures and is so designed to achieve mammoth proportions. Why not stay true to that. The explanation about his species is acceptable but Godzilla himself needed to establish more of a presence to resonate apart from his famous roar and fire breathing potential. He must be the only creature in history that can breath fire and this must be as a result of his exposure to nuclear energy. How does he feed? Are there more Godzillas out there? Is he the last of his kind like King Kong?

The mystery of Godzilla should have been the starting point for this reboot of the series. By the end even with him standing tall he is still just appears as a visual upgrade and nothing more. What a thing if they could have tracked his  movements by simply placing a tracking device on him. The mystery from the beginning should have led to the big structure we see before us. A testament to man and nature. If he was created from nuclear energy then he would be a tortured animal coming to grips with his own existence. The movie should have been a discovery so that towards the end we would know more about him and not treat him as some legend from the depths of the ocean. He was not designed that way. You see Godzilla in flashes however you are supposed to see him emerge in  such a fashion that we are the observers, the creators and the potential destroyers.  The primary role was the one played by Godzilla in his many incarnations: Godzilla vs….. it seems the next sequel will have to find another big monster to fight and then another until box office receipts make it clear that it’s time to wrap up. The human element would not be lost because a love hate relationship between Godzilla and brody could have been developed if Godzilla was the main cause of his mother’s death. I thought that was how they were going to tie Godzilla to the main characters. He would have been the first signed up to kill it. The rise of Godzilla would be a more fitting title.

I was expecting a more radical interpretation of Godzilla than the tame one that is presented here. Imagine a scenario when nuclear energy has created several monsters who fight it out in order to see who remains supreme. It would be a series of events when the world would be on the brink of destruction and the world of man would be driven underground because of nuclear radioactivity and the only individuals that can coexist on the surface are these mega monsters.  The humans would still be only witnesses however their primary role would be to coax Godzilla into being a force for their cause in defeating all of the elements associated with nuclear energy especially the other monsters.  Godzilla would be on the human’s side because he was someone’s pet before he mutated. It sounds like B movie  material but it would be much more exciting for me because man would be truly subject to the domination of nature in a more grotesque form. One could also imagine Godzilla as a true force of nature who destroys the world of man as he goes along. We would try to stop him but are instead defeated and so he reigns supreme. The main issue being look at what we have created. The chickens have come home to roost sort of thing. We would be forced to destroy him. Godzilla in this case would have be a force of nature and not necessarily a villain. He would not be defeated but merely retreat to the ocean floor making people wonder whether or not they will see him again. Other questions could then be asked if this nuclear energy created Godzilla who is to say more monsters are not out there. This would tie into a sequel.

Those were my b movie alternatives however in this film the interpretation is too tame because a moral nature is not compatible with a force of nature. Nature restores balance because one force must be cooled by another however one force is the basis for the other one. They are both compatible and incompatible. There is therefore an unequal exchange where one must benefit or thrive at the expense of another.  The reason why there is such a balance is because each force of nature is compatible or incompatible with the next. One is a positive and the other is a negative and vice versa. They must be  elements of the whole. Godzilla does not make sense as a savior of humanity. The film seems to be stuck in two minds. At once he is perceived as a force of nature and in the other he is seen as a savior. In one scene he even shares a look with Brody in order that people can become sympathetic. In reality, however, Godzilla should be capable of the destruction wreaked by the MUTOs . He should have been in their place. If he was a force of nature he would not hesitate to attack the ships that initiated an assault. Just like a tornado does not ask for sympathy  Godzilla should not be presented as any heroic figure despite being a force of nature. A force of nature does not have any sympathy for humans it does not know or identify with. If there is one Godzilla there should be others. The original films understood this; it is not right to portray him as some omnipotent being. He only maintains balance by satisfying his own need not because he sees or senses other monsters.  It is by satisfying our own specific needs that we come into contact with other satisfying their own needs. This leads to conflict or conciliation based on the situation.  In nature various species come into contact violently  for various reasons not just to maintain balance. Nature is not as equal as people presume and it is prone to be very unequal.  What nature does acknowledge however is that anything too extreme will not reappear as often as lesser beings. Godzilla is probably such an extreme being but he exists now and so do you preserve this creature or seek to destroy it. There must be others of his kind if he is a product of nature and has survived since the age of dinosaurs.  

Lastly, I understood why they acknowledged the fact that Godzilla originated in japan but it is a flimsy acknowledgement. What a coincidence that the leading engineer who is on to something happens to be a white, American engineer in Japan. Why could it not be discovered by Japanese scientists and so forth? It only should become international when Japan enlists the aid of other nations or it is recognized that these monsters cannot be tamed by local forces. Why does the story happen to be centred on a white American family? Why would the MUTOs not go to Russia but go to Nevada? In other words why does it have to be so American centric? There is an aside where a Japanese boy goes missing and is reunited with his parents; that could easily be at the heart of the story instead of a white, American  bomb disposal expert seeking to reunite with his family. I suppose who funds the project must get due recognition.