So I just saw "Godzilla" and I was pleasantly satisfied.
Now, I use the term satisfied, because it didn't exceed my expectations,
but it didn't really disappoint me, so I'm happy with that.
Now, I don't know about you guys, but I was hoping to walk out of it, saying it was a seven out of ten.
If it were a six or lower, I would have been pretty disappointed, and if I left calling it an eight, I would be pleasantly surprised.
But I'm happy to say that it was pretty much exactly what I was expecting it to be,
and I get the impression that even though not everybdoy might consider it a seven out of ten,
I'm pretty sure most people's expectations will be met.
I mean, there was a lot of hype about this movie,
but I get the impression that the same people who would watch the trailer
and then think that that would be their favorite movie of the year,
will probably the same people leaving the theater and then saying it's their favorite movie of the year.
Now, this film does have quite a few clichés in it that you would expect from a big budget Hollywood production,
but I'm glad to say that for the most part the clichés that existed had reasonable excuses for them to be there.
The excuses that they provided for the conflict to be there seemed to make a reasonable amount of sense,
which is more than you can say about most big budget Hollywood productions.
When plot devices occurred in this film, I did not feel cheated,
and I did not feel as if the director thought I was a fucking moron.
The performances were all great, except for the children who all sucked,
but at least the children didn't get that much screentime, so it was bearable.
Bryan Cranston did a fantastic job playing his character, and in the scenes that allowed his performance to shine,
it became apparent that they weren't just throwing him in to sell movie tickets,
but that he was a very very good choice to play the character he was playing.
He not only sold the performance, but he fit the character very well.
Before the film started, I was talking to a friend about how it can't possibly communicate the exact same tone as the trailer,
unless the trailer's music is actually from the film.
Anyone familiar with "2001: A Space Odyssey" would know that the trailer's music was from that film.
And to my surprise, they actually used that song in the movie.
They kept it quieter and it was a bit more subtle, but I was okay with that.
Now, of course I didn't give it a perfect rating, because it is not a perfect film, so here is my spoiler alert right now.
If you don't want spoilers, you gotta leave, like, now. Seriously now, or now.
Why are you risking it? Why are you still here?
Is it really worth it to have the whole movie spoiled just to hear me keep rambling on like this, like am I actually talking abou-
BRUCE WILLIS IS A GHOST!
Now, for most big budget films that do absolutely nothing to impress me,
when they're inevitably riddled with clichés, it brings down the movie quite a bit for me.
But this film had enough of a steady pulse that although they bothered me,
there were enough intelligent choices to be impressed by that the issues weren't all I was thinking about when I left the theater.
In a typical Hollywood blockbuster action film, casting the main character as mister
"Chiseled jaw clearly lifts man" might seem a little bit convenient for the narrative.
But in this film it makes a bit of sense. Like yeah, he's in the navy, of course he works out.
And this way, when the action is actually happening, the main character can be thrust into it, without it being a series of odd coincidences.
Like "Oh, no! I just so happen to be where shit is going down! How convenient!" There were enough characters
that were in these locations for their own reasons, that there was always somebody to care about when action was happening.
But it does kinda bother me that the one time we cut away to another family so we can experience the tsunami scene,
we're in Japan and it can't be a Japanese family?
Like all of a sudden, we have to cut to hotel where we find a conveniently placed white English speaking family?
It's not like I'm on a crusade saying: "Hey, where's all the racial diversity in films?"
"Let's sacrifice an artist's vision for the sake of being PC!"
But they're in Japan. And this makes it seem as though a sacrifice to artistic integrity was made, but in the other direction.
If it was a Japanese movie filmed in America, and it cut to a random Japanese at a hotel, I would make the exact same complaint.
Like "Oh, how convenient that this family speaks the same language as the intented target audience,
despite not being a citizen of the country they're in."
The fact that they did that implies that they think that we wouldn't be able
to relate to the characters if they're not English-speaking white people.
Like, apparently it would we a huge deal if the two single world lines they delivered were subtitled instead.
Several of the characters are speaking Japanese throughout the film and it's never subtitled,
and I don't really have an issue with that, because we can still understand
what's happening in the story without needing to know the language.
You're other able to pick up on what's happening in the scene anyway
or one of the characters will just repeat it in English for you.
But after a certain point in the film, it felt as though there were artistic sacrifices that were made,
with no other purpose than to have the entire movie be subtitle-free.
Like, this little Japanese kid gets separated from his parents on the train,
and when our main character looks after him to try and resolve the situation, and the train stops and the lights go out,
he tries to comfort the child by telling him that everything will start working again shortly. In ... English.
It is definitely not implied that this child understands English,
and seeing as how our main character was raised in Japan and attended a Japanese school,
I am seriously confused as to why he wouldn't just speak Japanese to this child.
Like, I appreciate this film being partially set in Japan anyway, but parts of it gave me the impression that the studio was like:
"No, you gotta... you still gotta have a white people movie. We're not funding you if people have to read at any point."
I know, minor issue, but also easily fixable. I generally liked the pacing and sequence of events of the intro.
Bryan Cranston's characters birthday was a good excuse to get us to care about the characters really quickly before moving the story along.
And I thought that having Juliette Binoche's character kiled off was a pretty good choice. Like, she was doing a great job,
but it was that type of drama that not only helped bring some emotion,
but it also gave a good excuse for Bryan Cranston's character to be transformed into the sad and desperate character he plays so well.
But unfortunately, as someone who saw the trailer,
as soon as they introduce the fact that she has to run for her life before the doors need to be closed,
the realisation of the outcome was almost immediate.
By not having that shot in the trailer, the trailer would have been slightly worse, but the film would have been slightly better.
But unfortunately, studio films often prioritize selling the ticket over having the best possible film. "Yaaay money!"
Also, when her and the others in the hazmat suits were running away from the deadly gass, something about their running felt awfully staged.
Like, I get it, they're gonna be jogging and not sprinting because we don't know how much those hazmat suits weigh,
but it doesn't bother anybody that the three people running next to each other all have the exact same "Running for their lives" speed?
Clearly, one or more of you is not actually running for their lives and just being really polite.
And with the camera that close in front of them,
it's difficult to imagine it is anything other than their speed being dictated by how fast the cameraman was moving.
When the two navy dudes are walking across the train track bridge,
it kinda bothered me how it was nighttime and they weren't even looking where they were stepping.
When the aerial shots show how much space there is between each track, it becomes obvious
that you would need to be looking at your feet to make it even one step.
Yeah, one of the guys falls eventually, but I don't see how they even made it that far.
It was nighttime and their flashlights were pointed far ahead of them. Like, they weren't even looking at their feet.
Having many of the scenes set at night did provide a good excuse for the computer animation to be a bit more convincing.
Almost every time a monster was shown, it was set at nighttime. And not only does it save money on animation,
but it does help create the illusion that the creatures have a real presence in the environment.
By showing less of something, it's ironically a clever way to get the most out of your computer animation,
and I was pretty much expecting this, considering the exact same technique
was used in the only other film Gareth Edwards has ever directed.
Now, I don't think that "Monsters" is a particularly well-written or acted film,
but his understanding of how to make the best possible set-up for convincing effects is pretty admirable.
And maybe it's the fact that he has already proven his capabilities with computer animation,
but one of those shots in "Godzilla" kinda bugged me.
I mean, it's not biggest deal in the world, but it kinda takes me out of the movie a little when I can tell
that a complete motionless nuclear tower is not even really there.
I mean, I get that it's daytime in this scene, so it's a little more difficult to make it blend in to it's environment,
but it's difficult not to think about when such a simple model seems so fake in comparison to some of the more complicated ones,
because they really hit the nail on the head with the CG in certain points of this film.
The shot with the main character slowly looking overhead with the flashlight
blends in perfectly to the artificial light created in post-production, and that goop sure looked like goop.
So yeah, a minor issue in what was otherwise pretty impressive.
The score for the film didn't particularly wow me, but I did find myself enjoying it's usage.
There were quite a few scenes where I'm glad they didn't force music onto us,
but closer to the end of the film, there were points where the music did seem a bit forced.
And you know, if the film went on for much longer, I don't think I would have thought it was as good.
In a way, this film kinda saved itself by ending when it did.
Because the film didn't necessarily fall apart right before the end,
but the movie did end just as the film was starting to fall apart.
Godzilla had a great buildup throughout the film, because we would only see parts of the creature at any given time.
But when you get closer to the end and you can see Godzilla in it's entirety,
not only did I finally understand why some people were calling this version fat,
but the overall threatening presence of the creature starts to wear away.
The final battle wasn't really all that involving, and it felt almost obligatory in a way.
And it might be added by the fact that the area they're fighting isn't heavily populated anymore,
but it didn't have the same tension as the other destruction scenes in the film.
By this point, the mayhem is over and now, we're just watching to see the outcome,
which is perfectly fine if you're entertained by wondering what will happen,
but once you've seen enough big budget Hollywood films,
it's kinda difficult not to already know exactly what the outcome is going to be.
Like, even when Godzilla pretended to die, there was no question in my mind that it was going to get back up,
and when it got back up second time at the very end, it's not like it really mattered whether it was alive or not.
Now, I understand the ending pissed off a few people, but I can't say that I was really particularly bothered by it.
Maybe if it was a movie that had nothing to do with the specific monster called "Godzilla", then I might be,
but since it is Godzilla specifically, I was not taken out of the film that he was fighting those monsters,
had the ability to breathe fire, and left the city to go back to the ocean at the end without completely destroying everything.
Like, I know it feels kinda stupid and it's not like I was watching those scenes with complete seriousness,
but I didn't really feel cheated, because it was more or less staying true to it's origins.
I mean, it didn't necessarily do that in the original,
but I assumed that it was pretty much common knowledge that that's typically what happens in a Godzilla movie.
If that silliness still bothers you anyway, then sure, I'll accept that as a legitimate complaint,
but as for me, it didn't really bother me and I wasn't the least bit surprised when I saw it happening.
When the film ended, I chuckled and said: "Godzilla is such a bro!"
They didn't really do a good job explaining why Godzilla was fighting these creatures,
but I was at least able to imagine that the characters themselves were probably pondering the specifics of that too.
However, it was still really cheasy when that guy explained that he knew that that was Godzilla's intent.
Like, somebody is rushing to conclusions!
Despite having a few issues with this film, overall I think that it's achievements outweighed them.
If these exact same issues were in a film that didn't as much going for it,
then I probably wouldn't be talking about it in such a positive light.
I ejoyed the references to Hiroshima, especially considering the original film was using Godzilla as a metaphor for the bombs,
and the idea that they consume nuclear energy provided a realy good excuse for conflict that would otherwise seem really forced.
Nuclear electromagnetic pulses are actually real things.
So whereas a different film might force their conflict in by having electrical equipment stop working for no fucking reason,
in this film, they're able to add that conflict in a way that seems reasonable for the story.
I know a lot of people are complaining that Godzilla wasn't shown enough in this movie,
but I'm glad that they chose to show it sparingly.
If they had milked it the whole movie, then it would have gotten stale real fast.
I like how despite this being a giant blockbuster monster movie, the film was able to show a respectable amount of restraint.
Not only were they smart to not milk the Godzilla destruction scenes to death,
but I felt like the "studio-enforced-checklist-of-obligatory-clichés" was less bothersome, because they kept them to be so subtle.
Like, we know for a fact that if the script got handed to Warner Brothers and the main character didn't have a useless child prop,
the script would have been handed right back to them with a memo saying: "No child, no funding!",
because apparently, it's impossible for people who have children to be able to relate to a character that doesn't have children,
but I'm at least glad that they kept his appearances to be minimal, so that his horrible didn't ruin too much of the film.
I also appreciate the restraint shown in the scene where Bryan Cranston's character dies.
There are so many filmmakers out there that would have butchered that and turned it into a clichéd sobfest,
but given the fact that one main character dying in front of another in the same general setup is already pretty clichéd,
I'm glad they kept the scene as a way to continue the story, rather than interrupt it.
Later, when the main character is on the train, and talking about his father's death over the phone,
you can tell that there was emotion in there, but I'm glad that they didn't decide to overkill it.
If the same thing happened to different characters, then I might be complaining that not enough emotion was shown,
but I found it to be extremely fitting, not only because the main character is in the navy,
but they had already established him as losing his mother fifteen years earlier.
And by keeping it subtle, it showed how the character has learned to internalise his sadness over the years.
And by doing that, it actually had more of an effect on me.
It doesn't give off the impression that the decision was made out of laziness,
but instead, it's delivered well as a suitable choice for the character.
And if you're paying attention to his posture and the subtleties in his facial expressions,
you can see in his eyes that the emotions are there, but he's merely trying to hold them back.
Anyway, I got what I expected out of this movie and I would recommend that you check it out for yourselves.
It's definitely not flawless and I don't know when I'll ever see it again, but I felt like I got my money's worth.
It seems as though the help of competent writers and actors really helped Gareth Edwards make a solid film,
and if this was the standard for a typical Hollywood blockbuster,
then maybe people wouldn't think I'm as much of a cynical asshole.
Despite it's flaws, this film left enough to appreciate that I'm giving it a seven out of ten ... but you already knew that!
[Subtitles by Abel Boeschoten]