How Should Godzilla be Portrayed

[Kaiju_Sensai]

I'm not talking design here but more his origins, his powers, his reason for being, etc.

As much as nuclear weapons are a part of Godzilla's lore personally I'd like to see Godzilla not be a radioactive mutant this time around. For mainstream America atomic mutations just aren't in anymore. I'd actually like to see him portrayed as something like a primordial god (maybe connected to nature or the Earth or something like that) or an ancient destroyer of worlds, not that radiation or nuclear weapons can't be the catalyst behind his reemergence. Especially with environmental thrillers all the rage today in Hollywood.

[BS Digital Q]

I agree. Godzilla's origins simply do not work anymore. We are a completely different culture from Japan. The threat of a "true" nuclear attack hasn't been in the popular media consciousness since what, the eighties?

Personally, I'd like his origins to be vague. As far as I'm concerned, Godzilla simply "is." When you've got a creature whose very existence ****s with the laws of nature, all manner of plausability goes out the window.

[Movie-Brat]

Maybe as an undiscovered creature? Ancient indestructable beast, perhaps?

[Movie-Brat]

Originally Posted by BS Digital Q

Personally, I'd like his origins to be vague. As far as I'm concerned, Godzilla simply "is." When you've got a creature whose very existence ****s with the laws of nature, all manner of plausability goes out the window.

That I agree with though.

[Mecha74]

Originally Posted by BS Digital Q

I agree. Godzilla's origins simply do not work anymore. We are a completely different culture from Japan. The threat of a "true" nuclear attack hasn't been in the popular media consciousness since what, the eighties?

Personally, I'd like his origins to be vague. As far as I'm concerned, Godzilla simply "is." When you've got a creature whose very existence ****s with the laws of nature, all manner of plausability goes out the window.

Damn. That does sound pretty good.

[Morgoth]

Sorry, I'm in the other crowd. He needs to still have the nuclear connection - otherwise you get everybody complaining as per GMK

Seriously, if the threat of nuclear weapons isn't relvent anymore, that is because people are willfully ignorant about it. We're actually in more danger since the collapse of the USSR than during the Cold War. Nutwack nations like North Korea have the bomb and full-on psychotic nations like Iran are a heartbeat from having the bomb. What'll make nukes relevant to Johnny Idiot? When Tel Aviv vanishes in a mushroom cloud?

[Zigra]

I'm with Morgoth, here. Just because the threat of a nuclear holocaust isn't in the mind of our popular culture doesn't mean it isn't relevant. In fact, as Morgoth pointed out, it's probably more relevant now than it actually was during the Cold War. If our society has its head buried in the sand over the threat of nuclear weapons, then maybe what it needs is a good movie to give us the proper kick in the butt.

Besides, regardless of his origins, Godzilla needs some sort of nuclear attributes. If we get a Godzilla who just breaths normal fire, or worse yet, ignitable gas breath, I'm gonna be very ticked.

[Movie-Brat]

Okay, maybe the origin would be that Godzilla's an ancient dinosaur-like beast that was affected by nuclear radiation back in the 50's which garnered him his nuclear blasts.

But still, the nuclear origin wouldn't work anymore. I prefer that origin but keep in mind, America is a different culture from Japan.

[BS Digital Q]

Originally Posted by Movie-Brat

America is a different culture from Japan.

This is exactly my point. Regardless of whether nuclear weapons are a greater threat than before, the simple fact is that with the fall of the Soviet Union, the threat of nuclear annihilation has simply fallen by the wayside now in the eyes of popular culture. I highly doubt folks are concerned about nuclear annihilation in the same way they were at the height of the Cold War, or are schools still teaching those drills involving getting under tables that people from my parent's generation? When they talk about it, there is a sense of gravitas to it. It was a shadow. Not anymore.

Additionally, we as a society are completely different from the Japanese in one key respect: we have never had a nuclear attack on our soil. Hiroshima and Nagasaki has defined Japanese culture for the past seventy years like no other single event. If not for that, Godzilla would not exist as we know him today.

Now, I think it should go without saying that this movie is being made for an American/western audience. We don't have the same kind of perspective the Japanese do. Read some testimonies. Watch movies like Hiroshima Mon Amour. There is a deeply haunting familiarity there that no one in the Western hemisphere can hope to achieve. Even during the Cold War, our fear of the bomb was second hand.

The generations that have grown up for the last fifteen years or so have done so without the near omnipresent shadow of another power equal to our own constantly in the public consciousness, antagonistic to our own, with the power to obliterate us with ease. The enemy as defined in our popular cultural consciousness is more nebulous. They are not a single enemy, but many. The closest thing to a single threat they pose is their religious belief system they all adhere to, genuinely or not. The terrorists are a very different sort of enemy than the one we had. And while I have no doubt that between them and other enemies like North Korea posing a nuclear threat, the fact remains that as far as the culture and our popular consciousness is concerned, mass annihilation by nuclear attack is a thing of the past.

You can argue that that doesn't make sense, that nuclear weapons are a greater threat than ever. But that doesn't define what is deemed relevant. Like it or not, that is the way things are. If you saddle Godzilla with an explicit or even implied connection to the power of nuclear annihilation, to the rest of our culture you are only making him an anachronism. He needs to move on. I don't necessarily believe he should be "relevant." But frankly, Godzilla is immortal. He is an icon. Godzilla should simply "be." He simply "is." Origin should have no play with him. He is above and beyond that. He's already flipped the bird at science. I see no reason to give a reason for why an impossible being should exist.

I reiterate: Godzilla "is." 'nuff said.

[darthzilla99]

Make a third here on Nuclear orgins. I disagree with the whole "America is a different culture than Japan and won't accept nuclear orgins" deal here. In fact, I think Mainstream America would be more upset with Godzilla not having nuclear orgins than the fans would IMO and start calling this Godzilla movie GINO. Every single person who I have talked to that are not godzilla fans know and expect him being a reptile mutated by radition. These include various friends in school over the years, friends from my time as a Missionary in Colorado, ect... I mean, if the Incredible Hulk movie can still have the hulk mutated by Gamma radition, I think Godzilla can still be from an atomic exsplosion.

My take is they should do something along the lines of the Incredible Hulk, The Tim Burton Batman movie or the New Superman Man of steel movie being made where they just assume Godzilla is a creature mutated by radition and do not spend alot of time detailing his orgins. I would like where Godzilla is been around for a long time and has fought monsters dozens of times before in this setting. That way, this movie not only sets up for sequels but also prequels as well.

[Movie-Brat]

Originally Posted by BS Digital Q

This is exactly my point. Regardless of whether nuclear weapons are a greater threat than before, the simple fact is that with the fall of the Soviet Union, the threat of nuclear annihilation has simply fallen by the wayside now in the eyes of popular culture. I highly doubt folks are concerned about nuclear annihilation in the same way they were at the height of the Cold War, or are schools still teaching those drills involving getting under tables that people from my parent's generation? When they talk about it, there is a sense of gravitas to it. It was a shadow. Not anymore.

Additionally, we as a society are completely different from the Japanese in one key respect: we have never had a nuclear attack on our soil. Hiroshima and Nagasaki has defined Japanese culture for the past seventy years like no other single event. If not for that, Godzilla would not exist as we know him today.

Now, I think it should go without saying that this movie is being made for an American/western audience. We don't have the same kind of perspective the Japanese do. Read some testimonies. Watch movies like Hiroshima Mon Amour. There is a deeply haunting familiarity there that no one in the Western hemisphere can hope to achieve. Even during the Cold War, our fear of the bomb was second hand.

The generations that have grown up for the last fifteen years or so have done so without the near omnipresent shadow of another power equal to our own constantly in the public consciousness, antagonistic to our own, with the power to obliterate us with ease. The enemy as defined in our popular cultural consciousness is more nebulous. They are not a single enemy, but many. The closest thing to a single threat they pose is their religious belief system they all adhere to, genuinely or not. The terrorists are a very different sort of enemy than the one we had. And while I have no doubt that between them and other enemies like North Korea posing a nuclear threat, the fact remains that as far as the culture and our popular consciousness is concerned, mass annihilation by nuclear attack is a thing of the past.

You can argue that that doesn't make sense, that nuclear weapons are a greater threat than ever. But that doesn't define what is deemed relevant. Like it or not, that is the way things are. If you saddle Godzilla with an explicit or even implied connection to the power of nuclear annihilation, to the rest of our culture you are only making him an anachronism. He needs to move on. I don't necessarily believe he should be "relevant." But frankly, Godzilla is immortal. He is an icon. Godzilla should simply "be." He simply "is." Origin should have no play with him. He is above and beyond that. He's already flipped the bird at science. I see no reason to give a reason for why an impossible being should exist.

I reiterate: Godzilla "is." 'nuff said.

This.

Seriously, well said dude. Quite frankly, they shouldn't give him an origin. Just have him rise out of the ground and that's it. Give him an origin especially related to nuclear radiation, you're not going to satisfy anyone not even the fans.

[Zigra]

You know what I say? F*** popular culture! When you have a movie that conforms to what is "popular", you get garbage like G98 and GFW. Think back to some of the greatest films of all time- the original King Kong, the original Star Wars (a touchy subject, I know), the Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Dark Knight. These films didn't conform to popular culture. No, they blew apart people's sensibilities and gave them something unlike anything they've seen before. And, dammit, this movie should do the same!

Now, as far the issue of nuclear weapons in the modern American mindset, the fact that modern Americans ignore the threat of nuclear holocaust is irrelevant to the fact that that threat is greater now than it ever was in the past. People need to be made aware of this, and a Godzilla movie, done well enough, would be just the thing to do so. Now, Godzilla need not have nuclear origins (I rather like BSDQ's idea of him being a creature of mysterious origins), but he should at least be a symbol of nuclear horror, and should maintain his nuclear attributes (i.e., thermonuclear breath, a radioactive body, etc.). Show audiences people getting vaporized by Godzilla's breath. Showing them people dying of radiation poisoning. If people see just how horrifying nuclear energy unleashed can be, then maybe, just maybe, they'll take certain events unfolding in the world a little more seriously.

[Tomzilla]

Revolutionary films typically don't follow the mainstream mindset. They usually speak to what you're keeping locked away in your mind. This is usually meant to spur you to quit beating around the bush, step up, and solve your problems instead of waiting for 'em to get worse.

Nuclear weapons will always be a threat. People simply aren't too bothered because they're human. We're hardwired to adapt. It's in our DNA. But the fear? That emotion that makes us sweat, our heart pound a hundred beats per second, and run for the hills? That will always be lurking within us. In other words, nuclear weapons still continue to scare the **** out of people. And if I'm wrong? People need to be reminded. If it takes a giant monster movie to do it, so be it.


How should Godzilla be portrayed? There are two different ways I'd do it (hell, I'd combine them).

1) Symbolism. Godzilla represents not only the horrors of nuclear war, but the horrors of humanity in general. He channels our rage, our fears, and our hatred. He is what we all want: power. Godzilla has the power to destroy cities, armies, and billions of lives. But power comes at a price. He is the last of his kind (maybe he killed them off himself). He will always be alone. And he will always be hunted down.

Godzilla is the embodiment of Mankind's greatest fears made flesh. That's what makes him so tragic. Did he choose this fate or did fate choose to curse him? Godzilla has lived for many years. He is what every other life form is trying to evolve itself into: an immortal, nigh-invincible organism. But he doesn't want to be this. He wants to rest at the ocean floor and dream about his previous life, when times were less harsh, and he wasn't an outcast. But with fear comes hope. Although Godzilla's life is a living hell, he does have the power to do what so few are capable of doing: uniting humanity against a common foe. Eventually, humanity will destroy itself unless it sheds its own demons. Godzilla can help us by uniting us against him. He's doing this unwillingly/unknowingly, of course.

Long story short, Godzilla is the final messenger. His message is very clear and straightforward: unite or die.

Of course, Godzilla is different than humanity. While we have the potential to change and become a benevolent singular force, it's unlikely. Godzilla, however, represents change itself. And what is change? Unpredictable. What he once was, what he currently is, and what he'll one day become will always keep us guessing.

2) In the past, Godzilla has been portrayed as a living nuclear weapon. This is good. This should always be the case. However, what if he was as ruthless as North Korea and Iran's dictators? These so called leaders are terrifying. Having nuclear weapons only makes 'em worse. So the idea of a homicidal nuclear giant capable of striking unexpectedly at any given moment scares the crap out of me.

[Da_Jinx]

I like the idea of having Godzilla as a Nuclear mystery, he pops out of nowhere and he is on a path of destruction like a hurricane but he is radioactive. So that even after he leaves an area, there are long lasting ramifications to every place he touched.

No one knows who was responsible for creating this creature, either directly or indirectly and there could be a lot of finger-pointing among nations but no one wants to claim responsibility.

[Movie-Brat]

Shouldn't he portrayed as an destructive force without an origin? Either origin might not work with anyone.

[mecha-kumonga]

Ok I've read a few times on here that "Japanese and American culture are different so they shouldn't use the same creation story." I'm sorry but thats bull the kind of bull that helped create GINO (speaking of the look/change of powers/all the little kids).

All the Godzilla movies you love are a direct result of Japanese Culture, From Gojira to Final Wars (minus of course GINO 98) all of them have roots in Japanese Culture, believes, and sociality. If you change this you change the nature of Godzilla therefore you change most of what makes him great. I'd prefer that not happen again.

Cloverfield was a smash hit in the US. JJ Abrams was and still is loved for this movie. Watch it again or for the 1st time. What he did was he melded the two. He took what worked for Godzilla, and mixed it in with what worked for Jaws (namely building suspense by not showing the monster more than quick hard to see flashes till about the end of the film), then added his own twist (the so called youtube style). Thats the way to do a Kajiu film in the States. Thats what needs to be done. A mix of what American culture with what has made the movies great, Japanese culture.

No to directly address the subject at hand: He should be a radioactive monster born of the atomic era. This is for multiple reasons: 1. Thats Godzilla. There are hardcore fans like us ok I'll admit I wouldn't mind seeing something different, Godzilla here for another reason, not a force of nature or a statement on atomic power but I've seen all that. I have friends that aren't huge hard core fans but they enjoy Godzilla from time to time as the Radioactive Monster. There's one of me 15 of them. Without the Radioactive Monster part they might just turn away from it, Legendary Pictures needs to put this out to as many people as possible. Completely changing Godzilla's essence won't do that. And we all want a Sequel if its good right? That means you need to get as many people into the theaters as possible. 2. They can't anger the fans. I will admit when I heard that they changed Godzilla's body and such for GINO 98 I was ecstatic. Jurassic Park meets Godzilla is how I remember it being touted and oh it excited me. Then I saw it. It was a decent monster movie but it should never have had the name Godzilla attached to it. So I didn't see it again, and when Godzilla 200 came out I was so happy that there would never be a sequel to GINO. Point is you might think its a good idea now but when you see it how will you react. What happens when you tick off the fans? Well look at GINO, The Punisher, Hulk, etc etc etc.

Now should there be some changes of course, when ever you do a remake you make changes...update. Hell theres a A-Team movie coming out where the "crimes" they committed was during the current war not Vietnam. Its ok to change things like that as long as you don't change what people think makes it great, or at least good. I think a terrorist attempting to steal nuclear weapons goes wrong and... bam Godzilla or a Terrorist dirty bomb attack... bam Godzilla. Would be a great way to update it. People aren't afraid of hundred of weapons falling out of the sky but most now a days are afraid of terrorists with dirty bombs. I think that would be a great way to go.

[BS Digital Q]

Ugh, here comes the hardcore uneducated fanboy idiocy.

Seriously, why don't ya go ahead and just remake Hiroshima Mon Amour with kaiju while you're at it?

[Movie-Brat]

Originally Posted by mecha-kumonga

Ok I've read a few times on here that "Japanese and American culture are different so they shouldn't use the same creation story." I'm sorry but thats bull the kind of bull that helped create GINO (speaking of the look/change of powers/all the little kids).

The 1998 Godzilla movie was a result of incompentence. They didn't care for the original material.

Plus, didn't Zilla had a nuclear-radiation related origin as well? It shows that it doesn't work in U.S. movies anymore.

That's why his origins should be vague in the new movie but still keep his traits being a destructive force and all.

[mecha-kumonga]

Well thank you for the uneducated fan boy line. I guess an MS in Film from Boston University makes me "uneducated" As for the fan boy part... no I'm a just fan. If you look at my post I'm not talking about adding Kajiu to a great love story. I'm talking about using what works when making a Kajiu movie. There seems to be a big difference there.

Also I'm not saying they need to come up with how he was created. I'm saying don't throw out the radioactive part, as it was suggested. I actually tend to agree, a radioactive monster out of no where with no solid origin story is a good idea. It worked well on Cloverfield with just hints at an origin.

[Tomzilla]

Originally Posted by BS Digital Q

Ugh, here comes the hardcore uneducated fanboy idiocy.

Seriously, why don't ya go ahead and just remake Hiroshima Mon Amour with kaiju while you're at it?

These responses are unnecessary and will not be tolerated.

Don't do it again.

[BS Digital Q]

There are things I loath in life Tom. This is one of those things. Normally I'd respect you, but right now I don't give a damn. As expected certain elements have begun to appear that I've harbored a hatred of for a looong time. Its only natural I want to give vent to these feelings for the first time in a long time. So I don't care.

[mecha-kumonga]

I understand your position Tom. And yes BS did annoy me with his comment but don't hit him on this one. I understand where he's coming from. He may have jumped the gun at assuming who I was but I'd give him I haven't logged on in a long time. I am active with another forum and Fan boy spamming drive me nuts there. Let him vent on this one.

On the other hand BS reacting that way just because I disagree with you well... don't. Attack the ideas not the person. So then what do you disagree with me on?

[Morgoth]

Here's another reason why they shouldn't screw with Godzilla's origins: what do you think will be top of the list for a new reason for Godzilla to be romping around? Given the politics of Hollywood, you better believe it's Man-Bear-Pig... I mean Global Warming. I don't want to see Godzilla made over as poster child for kook-fringe politics, granola-eating hippies and bad science (there's already enough bad science in these movies, the message doesn't need to be another instance). And I think regardless of how well everything else in the movie is done, that kind of **** is going to turn people away in droves. Actually, i rather hope it would to be honest. I know it would sure as hell kill any interest in the movie on my part.

As for using GINO as an example for 'the atomic metaphor doesn't work' - I call major shenanigans here. If you think THAT was what made that ******* ****-stain movie the colossal pap it is, reviled by anything with half a brain, then you are seriously delusional and probably wouldn't know what a real Godzilla movie looks like if it danced naked on your coffee table singing 'Godzilla movie dancing on your coffee table' at the top of its lungs while hacking your grandmother to bits with a chainsaw and urinating on your collection of Abba CDs.

Here's a start for what went wrong with GINO: two spastic retards with delusions that they are cinematic geniuses lied and deceived two major film studios to the point where they got carte blanche to make a steaming pile of crap without any oversight at all.

Oh... and the French.

[BS Digital Q]

I was mostly reacting at how your entire post resembled essentially a far lengtheir version of Godzilla fanboy rants I despise. But especially the first few lines, which, lemme just tell ya, I consider utter bullshit. Then again, I've already explained my thoughts at length already, and they were not made without knowledge and prior experience. Y'see, a number of courses I've taken have given me a fair amount of insight into both American and popular culture beliefs and trends. In particular I've been doing a course in marketing. Normally I hate marketing, but after working in that I've gotten a look at how those folks view things. And well, everything I see over here is far less true than I thought.

I agree I jumped the gun a bit, but only because your first few lines are the stuff of my hatred. Aside from a few other points you make that I heavily disagree with (but with less vitriol), I generally agree with some of those ideas you mentioned toward the end.

[Morgoth]

I see where you are coming from BS, but I have to say, movie-making by market teams and appealing to the lowest common demographic is why 90% of the stuff coming out is ****. The movies that tend to say the hell with it and keep true to the source material are the ones that are both successful and respected. Just contrast Nolan's Batman movies with the Schumacher ones, which were very much in the 'bigger and better and lots of shooty effects' sphere that tends to be the way Hollywood considers they can entertain people.

Then again, Transformers would pretty much negate my position $5 to whoever brings me the head of Michael Bay so I can have a Michael Bay skull-keg party. $20 for the scalp of Steven Sommers to wipe up any vomit resulting from said skull-keg party.