Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Drakyn
Dec 26, 2012



K. Waste posted:

'98 takes place in the U.S., where the monster is still a unique product of nuclear proliferation, but where the characters themselves are the privileged benefactors of that diabolical force. The ending is triumphal not because the humans are righteous or noble. Nobody in the film is portrayed as being as noble as Godzilla. The ending is triumphal because it portends the survival of the oppressed despite everything.

quote:

Godzilla
Pure fuckin' filler
Get your eyes off the real killer
On a tangent to this, the music played as Godzilla is shackled to a bridge and stabbed through the side is, while not exactly 'haunting', definitely not unsympathetic - even before you notice the title. Some weird Passion of the Kaiju poo poo going on here even before you start trying to figure out where the virgin birth fits in.
I've got to say though, in retrospect the film I think Godzilla '98 makes the funniest parallels with is King Kong, which it almost entirely flips. A pregnant single mother leaves her bomb-scarred homeland under her own power in search of a better life, thrives in the big city, and is hunted down alongside her family by the entire military-industrial complex out of desperate fear that she'll replace them as earth's 'dominant species' because she's better-adapted to the modern world than Americans (especially subways, because Americans hate public infrastructure).
Apologies for incoherence, I had a few of these thoughts bounce around my head months ago and you reminded me of them.
ps Kong gets murdered by the Empire State Building; Godzilla gets the military to blow up the Chrysler Building something something castration.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Drakyn
Dec 26, 2012



UmOk posted:

Godzilla fans don't like Godzilla
I would like to hear more about this if it isn't inconvenient, either with more words or links.

Drakyn
Dec 26, 2012



WeedlordGoku69 posted:

it's a SMG meme mostly

the thrust of it is, though, is that fandom doesn't tend to be concerned with the things an original work is itself primarily concerned with, and instead focuses on elements that are more-or-less cruft. with Godzilla, you could make a very strong argument that the monsters themselves and their fights and effects scenes are typically extremely inessential to a Godzilla movie, and that the ones where they are essential are the ones that end up failing to achieve anything beyond light entertainment; Gojira, Godzilla vs. Hedorah, and Shin Godzilla are amazing movies, but you could take all of the monster effects out of all three and still have a very solid movie. meanwhile nobody's going to call Godzilla vs. Megalon unironic cinematic greatness, and even something like Final Wars is pretty much just a bunch of amusing sound and fury that signifies nothing.

so, in essence, G-fans being obsessive about the monsters and monster fights and monster effects, and prioritizing that over having an effective human element in the films, means they're missing the forest for the trees and missing what makes the actual great movies in the series as great as they are.

that said, I'm not really on this page myself, because I'm perfectly fine with a large proportion of kaiju movies existing simply as light entertainment as long as they at least manage to be good at that, and KotM (for example) was totally fine as light entertainment. I'd say it's less that G-fans "don't actually like" Godzilla movies; if you were to take a poll of the fandom as a whole, I suspect the movies that achieve something greater than simple spectacle would end up at the top of a collective ranking, whereas the ones that don't would be closer to the bottom. instead, I'd say it's that G-fans are willing to acknowledge that kaiju films can be something truly great, but are also cynical enough at this point to realize that that's not what we're going to get in 75% of cases, and are perfectly willing to accept something that doesn't achieve that greatness as long as it's at least sufficiently entertaining.

Thank you and everyone else. This is closest to being the direct answer I was looking for but the other commentary wasn't tangential to it and all of it was interesting.

Drakyn
Dec 26, 2012



Hey this seems vaguely applicable to this thread: https://twitter.com/beeragon/status/1276569706573463554

Drakyn
Dec 26, 2012



Just go into it expecting a less racist bizarro-King Kong and I don't see a reason to get too hung up on it. It's a weird diversion from type and probably a very bad movie (I don't trust my 9-year-old-self's memories), but if those things made Godzilla films illegal there wouldn't be nearly as many of them.

Drakyn
Dec 26, 2012



Asterite34 posted:

The Shark from Jaws is also presumably not immune to just being shot.

Bullets don't penetrate water well :smug:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Drakyn
Dec 26, 2012



massive spider posted:

Not that much? We make guesses because we've found the bones but theres always debate about whether it hunted or scavenged, how much fat it had, feathers etc. Pretty mysterous.
I absolutely agree with you on the inherent trickiness of reconstructing extinct animals (and the back and forth on feathers on Tyrannosaurus specifically is a great example of working carefully with limited evidence that keeps changing), but for sheer pedantry I feel obliged to say that the hunter/scavenger thing was mostly just Jack Horner loving with the media and relatively few other paleontologists agreed with him on it, or even thought that there was a real debate to be had on the subject. Quick version:
-There are very, very, very few large tetrapods that actually do nothing but scavenge. Like, the list might just be 'vultures, some of them.' Most carnivores won't pass up a free meal, and very few carnivores pass up a good opportunity to turn something INTO a meal. Setting up a harsh dichotomy between the two isn't very reasonable.
-Vultures have a very specific thing that lets them work, which are that they're incredibly efficient soarers and can survey and cover huge distances in search of carrion very very efficiently and relatively quickly. Tyrannosaurus, although it's got beautiful long runner legs for a theropod its size, does not share this advantage. It's hard to be both fast and energetically efficient while chasing cadavers when you're forty feet long and fifteen feet tall.
-Also there are a fair number of fossils of dinosaurs contemporary with T. rex that have partially-healed bite marks from T. rex teeth in them. So clearly they had no problems biting things that weren't dead yet.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply