A week ago Godzilla 2014 hit the theaters Directed by Gareth Edwards, the film marked the return of Godzilla to the big screen in wide release for the first time since the Roland Emmerich abomination back in 1999. So far it is a huge box-office hit (over 200 million in 4 days) and the reviews have been generally good, with the majority liking the film and a smaller minority being indifferent to not liking it. This will be my take on the film. I plan to go from what the film does right to what it does wrong (and there are some things it does do wrong), and then to a conclusion. I hope you enjoy this.
Right thing #1: The Tone
The first thing the film does right I want to point up is setting and keeping Tone. Tone for the uninitiated is the “mood” of a movie, or how it feels. For examples of films that do a very poor job on Tone, look at the Transformers movies, the Star Wars prequels and Man of Steel. All of these films have abrupt tonal shifts from drama to screwball comedy to pseudo horror and others that occur frequently enough to leave the viewer with no real emotional “sense” of the film.
Godzilla, on the other hand, does a brilliant job of setting and holding a foreboding, somewhat ominous tone. This stems from things like scenery selection, subtle bits of acting from Bryan Cranston, the utter helplessness of the defending military and the way destruction is shown – with scenes of the dead and the injured straining medical help past the breaking point. Even the way some of the monster battles are shot lends to this tone as the people are basically insects caught in the middle of a titanic struggle.
Right thing #2: The return of buildup and payoff
Something I have really missed in recent films is the concept of buildup and payoff. In general terms, this is where a particular scene or sequence is actually the payoff to earlier scenes and sequences that built up to it. Recent films have been much more about showing it all almost right away and basically being a soulless CGI orgy thereafter. The notable exception to this rule was Pacific Rim which also seemed to “get” this concept.
In Godzilla, Edwards does buildup and payoff better than we have seen on the big screen since Spielberg was making good films (like Raiders of the Lost Ark which also was great at buildup and payoff). The MUTOs were an excellent example of this but the best was the buildup to Godzilla himself coming on the scene.It added a sense of anticipation that aided in the tone setting mentioned already.
Right Thing #3: Godzilla himself
After the horrid GINO ignuana of Emmerich’s garbage, Kaiju fans were rightly ambivalent about letting another American director at Godzilla. Gareth Edwards, however, is a long time avid fan of Godzilla and Kaiju films. The film that put him on the map was a Kaiju film (Monsters) he made himself on his laptop. His complete lack of experience in big productions was a concern, and to be honest it did manifest itself in other less good ways. However, here it was a benefit.
To be blunt, his Godzilla is faithful to the Toho character. He is BIG, mean, a total boss and really felt like what Ishiro Honda would have made had he had access to modern technology. The nuclear fire breath was extremely well done also, and the roar was amazing in the theater. And the movements and actions were totally Godzilla also.
This love of Kaiju films extended to the rest of the film as well. It is structured like a lot of Toho films, and the big surprise reveal (yes the trailers were recut to give the wrong impression – Godzilla is the hero not the villain) was also pure Toho.
Okay.
Remember I mentioned Gareth Edwards lack of experience in making big films? Here’s where the OTHER side of that coin comes into play:
Wrong thing #1: Pacing
Simply put, a big studio film like this needs a quicker, more even pace. Godzilla felt a bit like a small studio film where the pacing in act 2 was too slow. Ironically, Monsters had the exact same issue. This had the side effect of making Godzilla himself feel like he was on even less than he actually was (the 20 minute figure bandied about is off – I timed it and he was for 36 minutes out of the 120 minute film). Really the film could have been about 15 minutes shorter and lost nothing simply by trimming act 2.
Wrong thing #2: Acting outside of Bryan Cranston and Ken Watanabe
When one actor is flat, I generally lay it on the actor. When more than one is not only flat but the same kind of flat, I look at the director. Cranston and Watanabe did well in their roles. Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elisabeth Olsen were both very muted and dull. Again, go back and watch Monsters and you see the same thing with the human characters – a couple standouts and the rest are kind of human paste in the background.
Conclusion
Sorry this was so long.
Overall, I like this film. Godzilla felt perfect in it and I could forgive the pacing and flattish characters in light of the brilliant work in tone, buildup, payoff and “money scenes”. I even enjoyed the couple of Easter eggs in the film for the avid Toho buffs. While it has a couple of issues they are the marks of an inexperienced director, and I do not expect him to repeat them. I also expect there will be a totally different cast in the sequel, as that is the custom in Godzilla films and the whole ethos of this film was honoring the Godzilla movie.
Right thing #1: The Tone
The first thing the film does right I want to point up is setting and keeping Tone. Tone for the uninitiated is the “mood” of a movie, or how it feels. For examples of films that do a very poor job on Tone, look at the Transformers movies, the Star Wars prequels and Man of Steel. All of these films have abrupt tonal shifts from drama to screwball comedy to pseudo horror and others that occur frequently enough to leave the viewer with no real emotional “sense” of the film.
Godzilla, on the other hand, does a brilliant job of setting and holding a foreboding, somewhat ominous tone. This stems from things like scenery selection, subtle bits of acting from Bryan Cranston, the utter helplessness of the defending military and the way destruction is shown – with scenes of the dead and the injured straining medical help past the breaking point. Even the way some of the monster battles are shot lends to this tone as the people are basically insects caught in the middle of a titanic struggle.
Right thing #2: The return of buildup and payoff
Something I have really missed in recent films is the concept of buildup and payoff. In general terms, this is where a particular scene or sequence is actually the payoff to earlier scenes and sequences that built up to it. Recent films have been much more about showing it all almost right away and basically being a soulless CGI orgy thereafter. The notable exception to this rule was Pacific Rim which also seemed to “get” this concept.
In Godzilla, Edwards does buildup and payoff better than we have seen on the big screen since Spielberg was making good films (like Raiders of the Lost Ark which also was great at buildup and payoff). The MUTOs were an excellent example of this but the best was the buildup to Godzilla himself coming on the scene.It added a sense of anticipation that aided in the tone setting mentioned already.
Right Thing #3: Godzilla himself
After the horrid GINO ignuana of Emmerich’s garbage, Kaiju fans were rightly ambivalent about letting another American director at Godzilla. Gareth Edwards, however, is a long time avid fan of Godzilla and Kaiju films. The film that put him on the map was a Kaiju film (Monsters) he made himself on his laptop. His complete lack of experience in big productions was a concern, and to be honest it did manifest itself in other less good ways. However, here it was a benefit.
To be blunt, his Godzilla is faithful to the Toho character. He is BIG, mean, a total boss and really felt like what Ishiro Honda would have made had he had access to modern technology. The nuclear fire breath was extremely well done also, and the roar was amazing in the theater. And the movements and actions were totally Godzilla also.
This love of Kaiju films extended to the rest of the film as well. It is structured like a lot of Toho films, and the big surprise reveal (yes the trailers were recut to give the wrong impression – Godzilla is the hero not the villain) was also pure Toho.
Okay.
Remember I mentioned Gareth Edwards lack of experience in making big films? Here’s where the OTHER side of that coin comes into play:
Wrong thing #1: Pacing
Simply put, a big studio film like this needs a quicker, more even pace. Godzilla felt a bit like a small studio film where the pacing in act 2 was too slow. Ironically, Monsters had the exact same issue. This had the side effect of making Godzilla himself feel like he was on even less than he actually was (the 20 minute figure bandied about is off – I timed it and he was for 36 minutes out of the 120 minute film). Really the film could have been about 15 minutes shorter and lost nothing simply by trimming act 2.
Wrong thing #2: Acting outside of Bryan Cranston and Ken Watanabe
When one actor is flat, I generally lay it on the actor. When more than one is not only flat but the same kind of flat, I look at the director. Cranston and Watanabe did well in their roles. Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Elisabeth Olsen were both very muted and dull. Again, go back and watch Monsters and you see the same thing with the human characters – a couple standouts and the rest are kind of human paste in the background.
Conclusion
Sorry this was so long.
Overall, I like this film. Godzilla felt perfect in it and I could forgive the pacing and flattish characters in light of the brilliant work in tone, buildup, payoff and “money scenes”. I even enjoyed the couple of Easter eggs in the film for the avid Toho buffs. While it has a couple of issues they are the marks of an inexperienced director, and I do not expect him to repeat them. I also expect there will be a totally different cast in the sequel, as that is the custom in Godzilla films and the whole ethos of this film was honoring the Godzilla movie.