Tag Archives: Godzilla

Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019): Kaiju Free-for-All

Everyone loves a good monster fight and Godzilla: King of the Monsters is the movie to deliver it. Set five years after the 2014 Godzilla, the mysterious organization Monarch is tracking monsters, called Titans, that lay dormant all around the world. Enter Dr. Emma Russell (Vera Farmiga; Up in the Air), a biologist that has developed a device that can mimic Titan sounds in order to control them. When eco-terrorists, led by Charles Dance (Game of Thrones), begin releasing the Titans and causing worldwide catastrophe, Monarch and Dr. Serizawa (Ken Watanabe returning from the previous film) attempt to use Godzilla to protect humanity.

While the kaiju may not have an explicit personality, the film succeeds in giving them some semblance of character. Ghidorah, the three-headed, winged dragon-like creature, is shown as villainous, malicious, and portrayed as a usurper to Godzilla’s throne  The serpentine design of the long necks and the way the heads snap at each other convey a malice that isn’t present with Godzilla. He is shown as humanity’s savior and protector. He repeatedly ignores the vulernable main cast as he chooses to fight Ghidorah instead. Mothra in particular becomes an interesting character. She’s labeled as the “Queen of the Monsters” and becomes an ally to Godzilla and is one of the most likable monsters. Her resilience in fighting creatures like the fire-breathing Rodan, despite her comparatively smaller size, make her one of the most compelling characters in the film.

Dougherty makes bold use of color.

There are moments when the film tries to put forth a deeper message, but doesn’t devote the needed time or effort. The original 1954 Gojira was a parable about the dangers of nuclear weapons. Godzilla was awoken by weapons tests and left damage similar to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This film tries to weave in a similar theme, but this time with climate change. The eco-terrorists claim that the Titans are rising due to humanity’s increasing pollution. They view the destruction caused by the kaiju as a way to reset the balance of the earth and minimize the human population to the point that they can co-exist without harming nature. This may have been an interesting motivation, but when only briefly mentioned and used to justify devastating actions it feels hollow and more than a little silly.

But modern Godzilla isn’t about grand messages. It’s about big monsters fighting each other and this movie has that in spades. The 2014 Godzilla was criticized for withholding its action until the final minutes, but no one could ever make that complaint here. Director and co-writer Michael Dougherty (Krampus) has created gargantuan creatures that move with the heft often missing from CGI. Godzilla’s trademark roar is thundering and the fights between kaiju are intense with arresting use of simple, but effective coloring. Ghidorah’s yellow, Rodan’s red, and Godzilla’s and Mothra’s blue bioluminescence makes for a striking contrast that helps keep the visuals clean and discernable. Dougherty still includes some of the tension building from the previous film. He stages each battle with iconic tableaus of the monsters racing towards each other, igniting  anticipation for the glorious fight to come. The story may not be substantial, but Godzilla: King of the Monsters delivers a kaiju free-for-all in gorgeous detail.

4/5 stars.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

Coming off of the major success of Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Disney followed through with their plan to release spinoffs that would feature new characters and viewpoints within the Star Wars universe. The first of these films is Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, directed by Gareth Edwards (Godzilla). Set prior to the events of the original 1977 film, the plot centers on Jyn Erso (Felicity Jones; The Theory of Everything), the daughter of the architect of the Death Star, who has been captured by rebel forces to help them find a way to destroy the superweapon.

A prequel always creates the urge to heavily reference the existing films, but Rogue One is able to avoid many of those mistakes. When developing the prequel trilogy, series creator George Lucas was unable to resist this temptation. He wrote characters that were either younger versions of existing characters or new ones that were basically stand-ins for those you already knew. The key difference here is that Rogue One answers one of the franchise’s lingering questions: why was there a spot on the Death Star that would immediately destroy it? This necessitates the film to focus on an entirely new cast in a very different situation.

Edwards deliberately separates his film from the mainline entries. Each production detail is selected to contrast with what we expect from the franchise. Camera movements are often shaky and focus on the perspective of the ground troops rather than sweeping shots of the greater battle area. The final action scene has moments that mimic the Normandy Invasion scene from Saving Private Ryan. The lighting also reflects the clandestine nature of the characters. Many rooms are poorly lit, implying these rebels don’t have the money or the time to stay in any location and build a base. Even the normally pristine Stormtroopers are speckled with debris. Everything feels grimy with an air of desperation.

The rebels in Rogue One focus on the end, not the means.
The rebels in Rogue One focus on the end, not the means.

The screenwriters are able break away from traditional formula of the franchise. Previous films focused on the Jedi which made morality simple. There was no question of who to root for when it was the monks versus space fascists, but Rogue One takes a different approach. The rebels fighting here are not waging a war of ideologies, they are the people that need to make the hard decisions to win battles. That means lying and killing if it moves their position forward. The added complexity is refreshing in the otherwise simplistic universe, but, perhaps fearing public reaction, this is relegated to the periphery. The film instead chooses to focus on the action rather than the choices behind it. Exploring this ambiguity would have further distinguished the film and balanced out the pacing that drags early on from the repeated action sequences.

The filmmakers take full advantage of the freedom that not needing the set up future installments affords them. The major downside to the franchises that dominate cinemas today is that they lack tension. Even as characters are shown in perilous situations, it doesn’t produce the intended effect. Why should we be worried when we know that sequels are already in the pipeline? Captain America and Iron Man can’t kill each other when the next Avengers movie is just around the corner, so their battles don’t have any meaning. That is not the case for this spinoff. Characters are expendable and the writers aren’t afraid to prove it. The new perspective and narrative turns make Rogue One an exciting change to the standard Star Wars tropes.

4/5 stars.