# Godzilla



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 17, 2014)

A movie with 20 different plots (none are any good)  and a mongers fight somewhere in the background. The monsters are all ninjas.

I was falling asleep during posts of the movie.


----------



## WayneLigon (May 18, 2014)

Absolutely loved it. It's a great movie with exactly the right balance between plot, character, and giant atomic monsters leveling cities.


----------



## Scorpio616 (May 18, 2014)

I enjoyed it, but it could have been FAR better. Felt more like a gamera movie.







WayneLigon said:


> Absolutely loved it. It's a great movie with exactly the right balance between plot, character, and giant atomic monsters leveling cities.



Plot and characters are just chaff in a Godzilla movie.  Walburg's character was the magical amount. His character's son OTOH was given waaay too much screentime.


----------



## RangerWickett (May 18, 2014)

Bryan Cranston's son was played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson (who played Kick-Ass), who will be Quicksilver in Avengers 2.

His character's wife was played by Elizabeth Olsen, who'll play the Scarlet Witch in Avengers 2.

Those who characters are siblings. Odd connection.

I still don't know what you can do with humans in a giant monster movie where they're both relevant and not stealing screen time from the monsters. I dunno, maybe we could have stuck Bryan Cranston in a mecha suit a la Pacific Rim.


----------



## Scorpio616 (May 18, 2014)

RangerWickett said:


> Bryan Cranston's son was played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson (who played Kick-Ass), who will be Quicksilver in Avengers 2.
> 
> His character's wife was played by Elizabeth Olsen, who'll play the Scarlet Witch in Avengers 2.
> 
> Those who characters are siblings. Odd connection.



It makes sense in sickening way.



RangerWickett said:


> I still don't know what you can do with humans in a giant monster movie .



They figure out the origin of the monster, explain it to the audience and then you have them get stepped on.


----------



## trappedslider (May 18, 2014)

Scorpio616 said:


> I
> They figure out the origin of the monster, explain it to the audience and then you have them get stepped on.





 I'm still waiting for this movie lol


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 18, 2014)

Scorpio616 said:


> His character's son OTOH was given waaay too much screentime.



that's probably my biggest problem with the movie. It's a Godzilla movie. Godzilla and the monsters he fights should be front and center. Instead it felt like the movie was about the son, and Godzilla and MUTO were just background scenery. 

Also, I found it ridiculous that Godzilla And MUTO were able to cause so much destruction so quietly.


----------



## Kramodlog (May 19, 2014)

If a kaiju destroys a city when no camera is around, does it make a sound?


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 19, 2014)

goldomark said:


> If a kaiju destroys a city when no camera is around, does it make a sound?




Yes. 

In any case, Godzilla seemed to pop out of a lot of dust clouds while the camera was around. He didn't make a sound like a giant ninja.


----------



## Kramodlog (May 19, 2014)

I just saw it. Pacific Rim had its flaws, but at least it had monsters fighting each other. Sheesh...


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (May 19, 2014)

trappedslider said:


> View attachment 61683 I'm still waiting for this movie lol



I may watch that.


----------



## Hand of Evil (May 19, 2014)

Only the Japanese can make a GOOD Godzilla movie, I was bored and disappointed.


----------



## Kenny the Cabbage (May 19, 2014)

My wife disliked (maybe even hated) the film.

I enjoyed it. Maybe I'm in a mindless frame of mind and don't care about watching films that make no sense...

One thing about the film that might put people off was it had lots of random scenes that told the story through the eyes of different characters.


----------



## RangerWickett (May 19, 2014)

How is Godzilla so quiet? Consider:

1. Here is a sample kaiju statblock. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/magical-beasts/kaiju/kaiju-agyra

2. It colossal, has a Dexterity of 25 (+7 bonus), and has 32 hit dice.

3. The Stealth check penalty for being colossal is -16. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/skills/stealth

4. If it put 32 ranks in Stealth, it would have a +23 Stealth check.


----------



## Zombie_Babies (May 19, 2014)

I honestly can't believe anyone paid to see this.  I guess if you _had _to see it, the big screen would be the only way but why would anyone _have _to see this?  Not one thing was appealing about it in any of the trailers I saw.  Meh, I also thought Pacific Rim would be incredibly terrible (and I avoided it) so maybe I just don't get 'giant is cool' or whatever the thought is.  Oh, and dinosaurs.  I'm not 5 years old anymore so they just don't do anything for me.


----------



## Ahnehnois (May 19, 2014)

I enjoyed it. Not going to change your life, but I thought it was very apt at capturing the appropriate tone, one that feels reverent to cheesy movies of a bygone age but accessible to a modern audience.

And it's been big at the box office, fairly well reviewed, and they've announced plans for a sequel, so clearly somebody liked it.


----------



## trappedslider (May 19, 2014)

http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/godzilla-discussion-continues.html GFR talks about what was right and what wasn't with Godzilla

GFR Talks about the possiblites of the sequel along with making fun of Ken's facial expressions http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/godzilla-sequel-announced-surprising.html


----------



## Abraxas (May 19, 2014)

I thought it was fine. Very entertaining and a good restart to what I hope is a series of Godzilla  movies.


----------



## Zhaleskra (May 19, 2014)

In as much as one can, I think they treated giant atomic monsters realistically. Yes, we already had a kaiju with an EMP in Pacific Rim, but in Godzilla the EMP actually works properly.

Jumping from the up close action to seeing it on TVs was okay once, maybe even twice, but the third time killed it. Also, too much focus on puny human ants.

Other than that it was an enjoyable movie.


----------



## Zombie_Babies (May 20, 2014)

Ahnehnois said:


> I enjoyed it. Not going to change your life, but I thought it was very apt at capturing the appropriate tone, one that feels reverent to cheesy movies of a bygone age but accessible to a modern audience.
> 
> And it's been big at the box office, fairly well reviewed, and they've announced plans for a sequel, so clearly somebody liked it.




I really hate the 'lots of people liked it so it must be good' stuff but I've talked about why a lot already.  So this time I'll just mumble a bit ... Hitler ... Salem ... Crusades ...


----------



## Morrus (May 20, 2014)

I quite enjoyed it.  Hardly film of the year, but a fun monster romp.  And _that_ is how they should do dragon breath in movies!


----------



## Zhaleskra (May 20, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> I really hate the 'lots of people liked it so it must be good' stuff but I've talked about why a lot already.  So this time I'll just mumble a bit ... Hitler ... Salem ... Crusades ...




I agree with you, mostly because I usually disagree with movie critics. Video game critics for that matter too. Box office means nothing, Metascore means nothing. Also, you forgot the Ice Capades. ;-)


----------



## Ahnehnois (May 20, 2014)

I didn't like it _because_ of the reviews or box office numbers though. I liked it because I watched the trailer and thought it looked good, and then I went to the theater and watched it and found it enjoyable.


----------



## Zombie_Babies (May 20, 2014)

Zhaleskra said:


> I agree with you, mostly because I usually disagree with movie critics. Video game critics for that matter too. Box office means nothing, Metascore means nothing. Also, you forgot the Ice Capades. ;-)




Yup.  Ultimately it's an individual thing.  People tend to forget that.  Like, it honestly amazes me that people today like the Beatles or Pink Floyd.  Why?  Cuz they've been told that stuff is the bee's knees since they were kids.  

And how could I forget the Ice Capades?  *shudder*



Ahnehnois said:


> I didn't like it _because_ of the reviews or box office numbers though. I liked it because I watched the trailer and thought it looked good, and then I went to the theater and watched it and found it enjoyable.




Yeah, that's the way it tends to be.  My point is simply that 'a lot of people like it' does not mean it's actually good.  I just don't like critics' reviews or box office numbers cited as a measure of quality or an indication that it's something likable.  You're not a random surveyed person and neither am I.  That stuff doesn't mean much ... unless you've got points in that movie.


----------



## Ahnehnois (May 20, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> Yeah, that's the way it tends to be.  My point is simply that 'a lot of people like it' does not mean it's actually good.  I just don't like critics' reviews or box office numbers cited as a measure of quality or an indication that it's something likable.



I don't like that line of reasoning either. My opinion of its quality and the mass numbers are independent. I think it becomes relevant, however, when you say that you can't believe other people paid to see it, that they did.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 20, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> I honestly can't believe anyone paid to see this.




I liked the old Godzilla movies as a kid. I still like them. They're pure cheese. Monster cheese. This new one, though, want. It was just bad.i was hotel that it would be good in the cheesy way, but it just want. I guess I saw it, and paid for it, because I was going to see something like the old Godzilla movies just with better fx. Also, I was bored, seen ask the other movies I had wanted to see, and had disclosing income I wanted to dispose of.


----------



## Zombie_Babies (May 21, 2014)

Ahnehnois said:


> I don't like that line of reasoning either. My opinion of its quality and the mass numbers are independent. I think it becomes relevant, however, when you say that you can't believe other people paid to see it, that they did.




Not really.  I mean, I value my opinion and all but it's not like I think I'm smarter than the average [insert animal here] or anything so it really _doesn't _make sense to me.  _I _can see it's gonna be garbage so I assume (many) others can as well.



Homicidal_Squirrel said:


> I liked the old Godzilla movies as a kid. I still like them. They're pure cheese. Monster cheese. This new one, though, want. It was just bad.i was hotel that it would be good in the cheesy way, but it just want. I guess I saw it, and paid for it, because I was going to see something like the old Godzilla movies just with better fx. Also, I was bored, seen ask the other movies I had wanted to see, and had disclosing income I wanted to dispose of.




I liked the old ones, too, but I also know there's no way you could go back.  Seeing a new movie for nostalgia's sake is a mistake cuz you'll never recapture that feeling - even if you watch the movies you know you loved as a kid.  I looked at this thing based on this thing alone and, to me, it appeared to be simply an easy way to capitalize on the current audience love affair with all things big and monster-y.  It's just a Michael Bay film with the Transformer wearing a lizard suit.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 21, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> I liked the old ones, too, but I also know there's no way you could go back.  Seeing a new movie for nostalgia's sake is a mistake cuz you'll never recapture that feeling - even if you watch the movies you know you loved as a kid.  I looked at this thing based on this thing alone and, to me, it appeared to be simply an easy way to capitalize on the current audience love affair with all things big and monster-y.



Well, I saw it in part because of nostalgia, and part because I hoped they'd be able to make a good movie. They crushed my nostalgia and pooped on my hope. 







> It's just a Michael Bay film with the Transformer wearing a lizard suit.



How dare you? You could drive a railroad spike, or ten, through Michael Bays skull, and he'd still put out a much better movie.


----------



## Kramodlog (May 21, 2014)

At least with Bay we would have seen kaijus fighting. Sure, blurry esplosions riddled fights, but at least some kaiju fights.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 21, 2014)

goldomark said:


> At least with Bay we would have seen kaijus fighting. Sure, blurry esplosions riddled fights, but at least some kaiju fights.



And massive explosions. It would have been so much better.


----------



## Morrus (May 22, 2014)

Homicidal_Squirrel said:


> i was hotel that it would be good in the cheesy way, but it just want.




I had hotel it would be good, too, but it just want.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 22, 2014)

Morrus said:


> I had hotel it would be good, too, but it just want.



Making fun of a Korean's grasp of English? That's kinda racist.


----------



## Morrus (May 22, 2014)

Homicidal_Squirrel said:


> Making fun of a Korean's grasp of English? That's kinda racist.




That would require me to (a) know the person in question was Korean and (b) not know it was autocorrect. Now, making fun of the ghost of Steve Jobs is something, but probably not racist. Unless "ghost" is a race - but on a D&D board, you can largely be assured it's a monster or a template, not a race.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 22, 2014)

Morrus said:


> That would require me to (a) know the person in question was Korean and (b) not know it was autocorrect. Now, making fun of the ghost of Steve Jobs is something, but probably not racist. Unless "ghost" is a race - but on a D&D board, you can largely be assured it's a monster or a template, not a race.



Well, I was referring to my phone's grasp of English. It's a Samsung, so it's Korean. Why you gotta hate, homie?


----------



## Morrus (May 22, 2014)

Homicidal_Squirrel said:


> Well, I was referring to my phone's grasp of English. It's a Samsung, so it's Korean. Why you gotta hate, homie?




It's autocorrect is probably better than my iPhone's. I swear I have to type everything about 12 times.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 22, 2014)

Morrus said:


> It's autocorrect is probably better than my iPhone's. I swear I have to type everything about 12 times.



Possibly. It does autocorrect "dollar" into "slave," so I guess it's pretty good. The swipe feature is probably the biggest problem. It's fun and easy to use, and makes typing texts quick, but it sometimes gives odd phrases.


----------



## Zombie_Babies (May 22, 2014)

Homicidal_Squirrel said:


> Well, I saw it in part because of nostalgia, and part because I hoped they'd be able to make a good movie. They crushed my nostalgia and pooped on my hope. How dare you? You could drive a railroad spike, or ten, through Michael Bays skull, and he'd still put out a much better movie.




Ouch.  That sounds terrible.



goldomark said:


> At least with Bay we would have seen kaijus fighting. Sure, blurry esplosions riddled fights, but at least some kaiju fights.




_You're_ saying _Bay_ could have done it _better_?  Now I know it's awful.



Homicidal_Squirrel said:


> Possibly. It does autocorrect "dollar" into "slave," so I guess it's pretty good. The swipe feature is probably the biggest problem. It's fun and easy to use, and makes typing texts quick, but it sometimes gives odd phrases.




Shut that swipe off, holmes.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (May 22, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> Ouch.  That sounds terrible.



It was. Worst of all was the money I spent, or wasted, on it. Tickets were about $40. Fortunately I got a decent meal and drinks out of it. Those were an additional $60, though. 


> _You're_ saying _Bay_ could have done it _better_?  Now I know it's awful.



I think Bay was created by scientist to make Godzilla movies. Think about it. Giant monsters fighting, shooting lasers and blowing stuff up. That's how every single Bay movie starts. The best part, he throws in hot girls for the hell of it. Plot? Screw that. Hot girls and explosions! Character development? Only if it means the hot girl wearing less clothing and more explosions going on. Seriously, how is that _not_ perfect for a Godzilla movie?


> Shut that swipe off, holmes.



I'm too lazy to shut it of, and I'm too lazy to type my texts regularly. In other words, your mom!


----------



## Kramodlog (May 22, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> _You're_ saying _Bay_ could have done it _better_?  Now I know it's awful.



The truth, it hurts!


----------



## SkidAce (May 23, 2014)

Just got back from watching it.  I liked it.

Evokes the feeling of the old godzilla movies, which for all their nonsense...I also liked.


----------



## Zombie_Babies (May 23, 2014)

Homicidal_Squirrel said:


> It was. Worst of all was the money I spent, or wasted, on it. Tickets were about $40. Fortunately I got a decent meal and drinks out of it. Those were an additional $60, though.




I gotta find out if we've got one of those places here.  I know that you can get booze and watch a play downtown but I don't know of any movie theaters that serve.



> I think Bay was created by scientist to make Godzilla movies. Think about it. Giant monsters fighting, shooting lasers and blowing stuff up. That's how every single Bay movie starts. The best part, he throws in hot girls for the hell of it. Plot? Screw that. Hot girls and explosions! Character development? Only if it means the hot girl wearing less clothing and more explosions going on. Seriously, how is that _not_ perfect for a Godzilla movie?




He's ... uhh ... good at terrible.



> I'm too lazy to shut it of, and I'm too lazy to type my texts regularly. In other words, your mom!




Oh yeah?  Your cat's mom!



goldomark said:


> The truth, it hurts!




Baysplosions never hurt.


----------



## Umbran (May 27, 2014)

I saw it this weekend, and my basic thought can be expressed as, "Less talk, more monster!"

I have no problem with having weak plot, characterization, or science in a monster movie - but then make it a real monster movie, with lots of monster!  I can even understand using all the mists and smoke to create some tension, but holding off for half the movie before we really see the titular beast does not seem like a good plan, to me.


----------



## gamerprinter (May 27, 2014)

Umbran said:


> but holding off for half the movie before we really see the titular beast does not seem like a good plan, to me.




Honestly, a lot of monster movies do that. Cloverfield was that way. Lots of werewolf movies, you see some monster attacking, but you never get a close up, until the last third of movie and you see the transformation. Seeing the monster (well) in the first half of most monster movies almost never happens.


----------



## Umbran (May 27, 2014)

gamerprinter said:


> Honestly, a lot of monster movies do that. Cloverfield was that way. Lots of werewolf movies....




I admit that I have not taken a stopwatch to other kaiju movies to see how long it takes to see the monster for which the movie is named.  But, in Godzilla, I clearly noted the lack.  The first half of the movie wasn't interesting enough to hold itself up without more monster.

I note that Werewolf movies are not kaiju films.  Werewolves are personal horror movies, not cultural devastation movies.  So I don't know if they are a good basis for comparison.  I think Cloverfield, in shifting the point of view to individuals *not* involved in fighting the monster, converted the film to personal horror.  Godzilla didn't do that (or didn't do it successfully), and so that pacing choice didn't work well, for me.


----------



## gamerprinter (May 27, 2014)

Umbran said:


> I admit that I have not taken a stopwatch to other kaiju movies to see how long it takes to see the monster for which the movie is named.  But, in Godzilla, I clearly noted the lack.  The first half of the movie wasn't interesting enough to hold itself up without more monster.
> 
> I note that Werewolf movies are not kaiju films.  Werewolves are personal horror movies, not cultural devastation movies.  So I don't know if they are a good basis for comparison.  I think Cloverfield, in shifting the point of view to individuals *not* involved in fighting the monster, converted the film to personal horror.  Godzilla didn't do that (or didn't do it successfully), and so that pacing choice didn't work well, for me.




Oh, I freely admit that the premise in a werewolf movie are very different than a Kaiju movie, but really a monster movie is a monster movie, despite various nuances between personal horror and cultural devastation. Really, aside from Cloverfield, I don't really watch much "kaiju", especially the old stuff which is too campy for me - so I haven't really experienced a body of kaiju work to compare it with. Almost all monster movies are built to slowly build up the question of what the monster really is - to build a horror effect. Unless really well done, often the reveal is a let down, so possibly a major reason to not the show the monster fully until well into the movies progress.


----------



## Umbran (May 27, 2014)

gamerprinter said:


> Oh, I freely admit that the premise in a werewolf movie are very different than a Kaiju movie, but really a monster movie is a monster movie, despite various nuances between personal horror and cultural devastation.




Ah,  well, I don't agree on this particular point.  What makes a successful kaiju movie and what makes a successful Werewolf (or other personal horror) film are, to me, rather different things.  So, we'll disagree on assessments beyond that point.


----------



## gamerprinter (May 27, 2014)

Umbran said:


> Ah,  well, I don't agree on this particular point.  What makes a successful kaiju movie and what makes a successful Werewolf (or other personal horror) film are, to me, rather different things.  So, we'll disagree on assessments beyond that point.




I am actually saying that I agree with you, in general, its just I don't watch enough kaiju movies (really nothing more than Cloverfield or King Kong, are the only kaiju movies I have looked at) so I don't have a measuring tool to say what makes a good kaiju movie - I just don't know, and don't have the experience of knowing. Kaiju movies generally don't attract me. I like horror, not Kaiju.


----------



## Joker (May 29, 2014)

Saw it, loved it.

Personally I would classify this as a disaster movie, not a monster flick.  But no matter how you categorize it, humans have to be central to the story in that what happens to them is important to see.  This movie gives us just that.  What happens to us and how we react to disastrous happenings that are completely out of our control.  Seeing giant monsters fight during a two hour movie becomes a dull affair if I don't see what effect it has on bystanders.  If you leave out or gloss over the human element all you've done is scaled up a bar fight.  With the bar turning into a city and the furniture turning into the buildings.

This is why I think that when you compare Godzilla to Pacific Rim, the former is so much the better film.  Great pacing, well and timely delivered action sequences and wonderful set pieces.  I love most about the fights between the monsters is that they're short.  Too often do we see enemies, small and gargantuan, hurl each other through buildings for minutes at a time, completely without effect.  Here, the action is short, bloody and brutal.

The one thing I didn't like about it was the blandness of the lead.  It's become a trend in big budget action flicks to have the male lead portrayed with as little personality as possible.  It has something to do with the male audience members being able to identify with him.  He's like a character sheet of stats without a back story.  Useful and able to the job but missing out on being able to develop.  That's my only qualm.  Other than that, it was a good disaster movie.

8/10


----------



## Nytmare (May 30, 2014)

I'm actually surprised that there are so many positive responses to this movie.  I didn't hate it, but "crushing disappointment" probably sums up my feelings pretty well.

I think a lot of it was because the two trailers I had seen had  convinced me that I was going to be watching a different movie.  I was  expecting a Bryan Cranston lead disaster and horror movie, and I was  super confused when he died instead of springing back so that he could save the day and so that he and his  son could finish patching things up.

I loved the monsters, I loved the fighting, I loved how everything looked (oh my god that opening credit sequence), but every time there was a person on the screen aside from Cranston or his wife, I couldn't figure out why they were there.  The exposition just felt empty, and every time someone explained why they were doing something, it just dragged me kicking and screaming out of the film to wonder why in the hell they'd possibly come to that decision.

Honestly, if the human beings had done absolutely nothing at all the entire movie, everything would have happened exactly the same way except that fewer people would have died or been threatened with death.



Zhaleskra said:


> In as much as one can, I think they treated  giant atomic monsters realistically. Yes, we already had a kaiju with an  EMP in Pacific Rim, but in Godzilla the EMP actually works properly.




Except that it didn't.  I really wish that Hollywood would move away from this version of EMPs.  It doesn't turn off electronics till the monster walks away, it fries electronics and makes them stop working till they get repaired.  And what harm would a realistic EMP have done to this story?  I was expecting them to find a sailboat, not hotwire a fishing boat.

The scifi in this really kept yanking me out of my suspension of disbelief, and it was totally the fault of them trying to explain away something I had already wholly accepted.

These monsters exist because the earth used to be 10 times more radioactive?

They're predators and parasites that don't predate upon or act parasitic on each other?

The thing sprouted wings, why the hell did they keep insisting that it was terrestrial?  It was supposed to be Mothra, right?  Why didn't they start calling it Mothra?

Was there a scene missing or something with a monster caterpillar crawling away from the old Godzilla skeleton and attacking the power station?

Huh this thing is eating radiation, better feed it more.  Oh it hatched into a monster and is still eating radiation, better feed it more.

The MUTO leaves Yucca mountain, which is still absolutely BRIMMING with radioactive waste to eat.  

The military decides to lure all three of the monsters 20 miles off the coast by strapping a bunch of nukes to a train and driving it straight through monster town instead of putting it on a plane and flying around monster town.

Why is the Navy happily sailing alongside Godzilla when they're still operating under the assumption that he's a bad guy monster that they need to kill?

I forget the exact numbers, but he's passed out in a boat that has 5 minutes to sail 20 miles so that San Francisco won't be caught in the blast radius.  That means that the boat has to travel at least 240 miles per hour, right?  WHY PUT NUMBERS THERE IF THEY DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE A MATH PROBLEM!?!

One part of the mishmash of story that really managed to confuse my son is that he is operating under the assumption that the radiation from the power plant somehow turned momma Brody into Godzilla.

In the end, I guess that I'm happy that it was at *least* not as bad as the 1998 Godzilla reboot.


----------



## Umbran (May 30, 2014)

Nytmare said:


> Honestly, if the human beings had done absolutely nothing at all the entire movie, everything would have happened exactly the same way except that fewer people would have died or been threatened with death.




Yep.  I think that makes one of the major points of the film.


----------



## Nytmare (May 30, 2014)

Umbran said:


> Yep.  I think that makes one of the major points of the film.




I can't tell, are you saying that was a message they were trying to get across?

I see that as the end result of having a lousy narrative.


----------



## Umbran (May 30, 2014)

Nytmare said:


> I can't tell, are you saying that was a message they were trying to get across?




Yes.  Not trying too hard, but I think it was there intentionally, just as the original Godzilla was a pretty blatant commentary on nuclear weapons.


----------



## Joker (May 30, 2014)

Nytmare said:


> I can't tell, are you saying that was a message they were trying to get across?
> 
> I see that as the end result of having a lousy narrative.




It was pretty obvious to me.  Humans had no part in this.  These creatures were completely indifferent to us.  They weren't evil, just terribly destructive like a tornado.  We just had to get out of their way.


----------



## Nytmare (May 30, 2014)

Yeah, but that would be a disaster movie, and then all the human characters' activities would have been "these are the things that we are doing to survive."

Tornado movies, earthquakes, meteors, all of the activity is in trying to stay one step ahead, and of getting past the obstacles the disaster is throwing in front of you.

Here, the majority of the obstacles were entirely the fault of the characters "I wonder what happens when we get on a train full of lunch and drive into the monster's mouth?" and then, the way that they overcome the obstacle is to get beaten by it and wait till random chance saves the day.

The original Godzilla was about human beings using weapons that were too powerful for them to control, and about the Japanese feeling of helplessness over having a weapon like that used against them.

This new one is about what?  America being afraid of nuclear waste but knowing that if they sit and do nothing the problem will eventually solve itself?


----------



## trappedslider (May 30, 2014)

Nytmare said:


> The thing sprouted wings, why the hell did they keep insisting that it was terrestrial? It was supposed to be Mothra, right? Why didn't they start calling it Mothra?




No it was never intended to be Mothra



> Was there a scene missing or something with a monster caterpillar crawling away from the old Godzilla skeleton and attacking the power station?



 No




> The MUTO leaves Yucca mountain, which is still absolutely BRIMMING with radioactive waste to eat.




It heard the mating call of the other MUTO...


----------



## Nytmare (May 31, 2014)

trappedslider said:


> No it was never intended to be Mothra, No, It heard the mating call of the other MUTO...




None of these are explanations though.  So an invisible caterpillar spins itself into a cocoon and turns into a giant butterfly monster.  Were there reasons why they decided to make so many parallels and nods to one of the other big Godzilla monsters then?  Why all the foreshadowing of caterpillars and coccoons and "MOTHRA" written on the kid's aquarium when the Brodys go back to their old house?  Are you quoting a source, or stating an opinion?  Did they originally intend for it to be Mothra, and then change their minds after all the footage had already been shot?  Was the editor secretly trying to push his or her own agenda?

[EDIT - inserting playback of my stream of consciousness as to why I thought it was Mothra]

I see a broken monster egg, later I saw that it was totally different  than the other eggs the monsters laid, so I'm kinda confused as to how  that works, but at this point I'm thinking "dead Godzilla, these must be Godzilla eggs, now there's an escaped Godzilla monster out there in the  world."  The power plant gets destroyed, and I'm thinking "Godzilla  destroyed the power plant, neat!"  Years pass, Brody and son go to their old house, they get caught by the secret monster police, and they find...another monster egg.  "Ok I guess, it must have been a mommy Godzilla that hatched and it laid another egg?  Are they going to freaking have Godzuki in this movie?  Oh, that's not Godzilla, it's some other monster?  Oh it has wings!  OH  YEAH!  The group is called Monarch, it was a cocoon, not an egg.  There was that shot of the caterpillar, and the other cocoon and MOTHRA on the aquarium, this must be Mothra!"



trappedslider said:


> No





Did they actually mention the mating call again at any point with regards to why the other MUTO left Yucca Mountain?  I only remember the earlier discussion  and then the explanation that "Now the monsters are looking for food, let's use these little missiles as bait instead of this mountain sized buffet line"

[EDIT #2]

Was the Brody family name a nod to Jaws?

Was General Whatsisface's line about "No more secrets" a nod to Sneakers?

Am I misremembering a shot of a destroyed Statue of Liberty?  Were they in NY at some point and I missed it?


----------



## trappedslider (May 31, 2014)

Nytmare said:


> None of these are explanations though.  So an invisible caterpillar spins itself into a cocoon and turns into a giant butterfly monster.  Were there reasons why they decided to make so many parallels and nods to one of the other big Godzilla monsters then?  Why all the foreshadowing of caterpillars and coccoons and "MOTHRA" written on the kid's aquarium when the Brodys go back to their old house?  Are you quoting a source, or stating an opinion?  Did they originally intend for it to be Mothra, and then change their minds after all the footage had already been shot?  Was the editor secretly trying to push his or her own agenda?
> 
> Did they actually mention the mating call again at any point with regards to why the monster left Yucca Mountain?  I only remember the earlier discussion  and then the explanation that "Now the monsters are looking for food, let's use these little missiles as bait instead of this mountain sized buffet line"




Ever heard of the term "Easter egg"? That's what those references to Mothra were http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Godz...-Mothra-Naval-History-Breaking-Bad-43106.html http://moviepilot.com/posts/2014/05...ssed-1426074?lt_source=external,manual#!SI4G9

As why San Fran  it is a scientific fact that no giant monster can avoid attacking the Golden Gate Bridge...and honestly they were meeting each other and it was in the middle..... Taken from http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Headscratchers/Godzilla2014 which i'm sure will just add mroe to your dislike but i'm sure there's stuff there that you didn't even think about 

 As for the over all message of the movie for those who like that sort of thing :

 Edwards: Godzilla is definitely a representation of the wrath of nature. The theme is man versus nature and Godzilla is certainly the nature side of it. You can't win that fight. Nature's always going to win and that's what the subtext of our movie is about. He's the punishment we deserve.


----------



## Umbran (May 31, 2014)

Nytmare said:


> Here, the majority of the obstacles were entirely the fault of the characters "I wonder what happens when we get on a train full of lunch and drive into the monster's mouth?" and then, the way that they overcome the obstacle is to get beaten by it and wait till random chance saves the day.




No, not random chance.  Ford Brody.  And that's kind of important.



> This new one is about what?  America being afraid of nuclear waste but knowing that if they sit and do nothing the problem will eventually solve itself?




No, not quite.  The metaphor is a little less direct than in the original.  Godzilla is nature.  Nature is self correcting.  However, nature doesn't give a fetid dingo kidney about people, and millions can die in the process of nature self-correcting.  More, if we are really stupid about it.  While humans are going to be helpless in the face of nature, people of strength and determination (like Ford Brody) can help mitigate some of our more egregiously stupid maneuvers.  

Not to take this into the realm of political discussion - where the original was blatantly and explicitly about nuclear weapons, this one is somewhat less blatantly about global warming.


----------



## trappedslider (May 31, 2014)

Nytmare said:


> Was the Brody family name a nod to Jaws?
> 
> Was General Whatsisface's line about "No more secrets" a nod to Sneakers?
> 
> Am I misremembering a shot of a destroyed Statue of Liberty?  Were they in NY at some point and I missed it?




Yes, possibly and There's a statue replica in Vegas


----------

