Read these foolish, silent, thoughts of mine.

Preface

I'm going into these “reviews” with the assumption that you've already seen these films, or at the very least know enough of the films. Also, my apologies if these reviews aren't the deepest dive into these films. I want to give you my general thoughts. Also, I won't be discussing 'Godzilla: Singular Point' since I don't believe it's fair to compare film to television.

Part I - The Anime Trilogy

Godzilla: The Planet Eater

This movie is mighty boring. The only highlights of the movie are the beginning and the end. Apart from those scenes, the movie is just non-stop inhumane talking about nothing. The protagonist is the generic angry anime man with a vendetta against a monster. The film honestly is just an hour long 'first act' of a larger movie, which is very silly.

Godzilla: City on the Edge of Battle

What a long title. Nothing much to say about this one either, 'Mechagodzilla City' is a dumb concept, and somehow they made the climax very boring. A positive I can say about the movie is that I like the designs of the 'Mothra twins'.

Godzilla: The Planet Eater

This is where the fun begins. Easily the best of the three, I get the sense that this is the story that the writer and directors wanted to tell. I adore this film's story and themes, it's great to see a Godzilla film have intelligent theological discussions. This movie isn't a bore like the previous two films because characters (for the most part) aren't spouting meaningless exposition. One of my favorite bits of dialogue would be between the main protagonist and one of the mothra twins, when he asks her “Do you hate Godzilla?” and she explains to him that maybe she's afraid of Godzilla, but she doesn't hate him, he's just a part of nature. Again, it feels like the story they actually wanted to tell. With the theological discussion, which can go wrong and very easily devolve into “duhhhhhh religion bad!”, it's handled very well in this film (though I feel like I need to watch that monologue during the climax seven times over to understand it completely, maybe I'll break down its meaning in the future?).

Part II - The Monsterverse Trilogy

Godzilla

Not to give away the final ranking of these movies, but this is (in my opinion) the only good American Godzilla movie. The performance from (waltuh) Bryan Cranston steals the show for the first act. He's probably the greatest Godzilla character. Now, the more controversial part of this movie is how it handles Godzilla himself, which I agree, is a bit odd. The amount of screen time he has is a bit too short, I'm not one of these people who want a two-hour action scene, but I do enjoy those Godzilla scenes, and I'm not sure if there are enough. Though, when Godzilla is on-screen, it's great. I'll never forget those horrific screams in that bus during the Golden Gate Bridge scene. The way the film handles the MUTOs is great, the whole first act building to one of them as a threat is very well done, it's reminiscent of how Hedorah is handled. The real main protagonist is played by Aaorn Taylor-Johnson, who is good now, but at the time was a pretty poopoo actor. I don't think he ruins the film, he barely speaks during the later half of the movie anyway.

Godzilla: King of the Monsters

Such an original title!! This movie is terrible, I don't want to talk about this movie, or think about it. Awful dialogue, worse special effects than the first movie, and terrible pacing. Though, the action is more “fun” and there is more spectacle to behold, whether you enjoy the first film or second in this trilogy depends on your taste. Do you want a movie with few longer action scenes, or a film with many shorter action scenes?

Godzilla vs Kong

The best parts of this film are the opening credits and the fact that it may have the best underwater kaiju action scene. Other than that I don't have much to say, cringeworthy dialogue (great job putting in a 'tide pod challenge' reference in a movie that's meant to take place in 2024) with awful characters plague this movie. One thing that bothers me some, is how Kong is designed. He looks great and the effects on him (for the most part) look good, but something that I really liked about 'Kong: Skull Island' was that Kong was always this strange bipedal ape creature, rather than a tangible large gorilla. It's something that was a conscious decision that the director actually spoke about (I'm paraphrasing, but he said something like “I wanted to get away from that anatomically accurate ape and make him into this god”) but for some reason, this film decided to go away from that. There are quite a few scenes where Kong is prancing around on all fours, and though it looks cool, it's strange to see the sequel abandon that design choice. Oh, one more thing, Godzilla 'laughing' in this movie is one of the most retarded things I've ever seen.

Part III - Shin Godzilla

What a brilliant film, this is what Godzilla is all about. Movies like this, and to an extent 'Planet Eater' are what I want to see more of. Godzilla films that aren't afraid to embrace the strange symbolism of the character into a dramatic story with multiple compelling themes. Before I continue to praise this film, I'll mention something I don't like. The 'American' character is obviously played by someone who doesn't speak English naively, so it takes me out of the movie a bit when she says things in English. The idea of Godzilla being this tragic creature that is in constant pain as it wrestles with why it even exists is a great concept (though, I wish it were handled slightly better than only being a theme hidden in the song 'Who Will Know'. Maybe I missed some dialogue?) it's actually something I've heard one of the Showa Era Godzilla directors mention in a quote (paraphrasing again) “The monsters can't control how large they are, or when they fall into buildings, that is their tragedy”. The human story is also done very well, I'm not familiar with Japanese politics in the slightest, but I can spot the satire (some of it applies to western politics too). “Who decides in your country?” as the fake American says.

Part IV - Final Ranking

Here is how I rank these movies:

1. Shin Godzilla
2. Godzilla 2014
3. Godzilla: The Planet Eater
4. Godzilla vs Kong
5. Godzilla: Planet of Monsters
6. Godzilla: City on the Edge of Battle
7. Godzilla: King of the Monsters

Here's to hoping 'Godzilla: Minus One' will be great, I can't say the same for 'Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire'. I honestly wish that the Monsterverse could just end. Thank you for reading this.

I didn't think I'd write something like this but recently I watched both versions of “King Kong vs Godzilla” from 1962, United States and Japanese, at the same time. I wanted to write this because I found the differences between the two versions to be extremely fascinating, enjoy.

Structure

The main difference between the two films (I say two films because they really aren't the same movie) is the structure. Scenes, going from the original to the US, are placed all over almost. A lot of scenes where we spend more time with the characters, in the original, are replaced with these bland expositional news broadcast scenes which explain what we've already scene in the movie. The pacing overall feels quicker in the US version (which is not usually a good thing for Godzilla films), a key component in this is the fact that Godzilla shows up roughly 15 to 20 minutes earlier in the US version than in the original. Another example is that all of the scenes with the submarine that hits the iceberg, in which Godzilla was frozen in, are all combined into one scene in the US version rather than being spread throughout the first act like in the original. As I mentioned earlier, many scenes focused on the characters are removed in the US version, which is a real shame. The whole opening is an excellent example of this, in the original film it opens with a spinning globe with narration about the Earth and then we see that the scene is just a part of one of the TV shows that Pacific Pharmaceuticals owns and then it cuts to a scene with Mr. Tako speaking to his employees, in the US version it opens with the same spinning globe but with the “there are more things to heaven and earth, heratio” quote (for some reason???) then we fade out of the spinning globe and into one of the many great expositional news broadcast scenes with this first one explaining the red berries that Kong gets wasted off of. One last example is the military operation where they create the trap for Godzilla to fall into. In the original film they build this before King Kong and Godzilla meet, unlike in the US version where they build it after they meet and, shortly after that, have Godzilla fall into it. Also during the scenes where they build the trap, in the US version, the scene is color corrected to look like nighttime. I urge you to watch the original film itself (someone has it uploaded on youtube, yt-dl that asap wink wink wink) so you can see all of those character driven scenes that were missed in the US release, because I'm not going to list them here… It would take too long.



For some strange reason, Universal (the company responsible for the US release) decided to not use the original score and instead play music from their catalog, from films such as “The Wolf Man” and “The Creature from the Black Lagoon”. This, obviously, is infinitely inferior to the original. The best comparison (other than the opening credits, which you should look up for yourself) is the scene where Godzilla breaks free from the iceberg and runs amok. In the original, it plays that classic theme song you all know in love but in the US it plays… nothing, which obliterates the tone. The songs that are used in the US version are fine on their own, but they do not fit the film well, and that is made very clear after watching the Japanese version. To my knowledge, the only songs that carry over from the original to the US version are: “The Natives”, “Thunder and the Devil”, and “The Sleeping Devil”.

Translation

This is the other obvious difference between the two versions, sub vs dub. It's to be expected with any work that is translated multiple times over. Two notable examples of the differences are: when Sakurai and Furue give the native chief a radio and give away cigarettes to all the natives (this sounds so retarded with no context) when they give a cig to one of the children, in the original subbed Sakurai says “Damn-, when it rains it pours” which makes… no sense. However, in the dubbed US version he says “Oh, we forgot to bring candy!” which makes a lot more sense in the scene, one of the view instances of the dub doing something better; During the scenes of the press following and asking questions to the doctor (I honestly forget the character's name) in the original they simply ask what to do about the monsters, how to stop them, and what not. In the US version, for some bizarre reason, in both scenes where the press ask him questions, they ask about the use of the atomic bomb?;. Oh, one more thing, it seems as if the few already english speaking scenes from the original were dubbed over anyway in the US version which is hilarious.

Conclusion

It's so strange to think that, when I was younger and all I saw was the US version, I simply thought that the original was the same movie but without the news scenes and different music. Sure, it has those attributes, but it is much more than that, it's a completely different movie. It is interesting to think of what an “ultimate cut” including all scenes from both versions would look like. It was a very intriguing and enlightening experience watching both versions simultaneously, even after seeing the original film on its own, which is a pretty good film and, of course in my opinion, is better than the more recent “Godzilla vs Kong”.

I often ask myself what the nature of identity is, and what it means to have an identity. What do we align our identity with and what are we 'meant' to align it with? Right away, I don't believe that one should identify with their sexuality, what someone does in bed shouldn't be adorned as a crown. Another thing I don't think should be someone's identity is music, books, film, art, etc. I don't think it's wrong to identify with a work of art, but art that is consumed should not be one's soul identity. That ties in well with clothing, it should be obvious why that shouldn't be someone's identity. Well then, what should someones identity be? In all honesty, I don't have all the answers, but I believe that one's identity is a strange amalgamation of everything. How someone acts, creates, sees, etc. rather than being only one of the things I mentioned previously. Identity is strange to me, and I don't fully understand its nature, I also don't fully understand the nature of culture. Hopefully as I go down this journey of life I will understand them more.

As I continue to search for truth, this thought has nagged me: “If so much of the universe is objective, or at least has a truth, does the beauty in arts have any objectivity?”. I believe that older, more traditional, people would say yes and younger people would say no. The old saying “Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder” comes into play here. Personally, I believe that the saying is true, it is subjective, but I find that some traditionalists think this is foolish. Some may say “If anything can be art then there is no point in striving for beauty”. I think this is a very silly thought to have, just as humans, art is inherently valuable, but that doesn't mean that the art is inherently beautiful or good.

I am disgusted at the thought of owning a pet and treating it as a child, this foolish term that people have created (fur babies, as they are called) concerns me deeply. It makes me think of the old question “if you saw your dog and a strangers baby drowning, which would ye save?”. The answer for most should be to save the child, but it seems that it would be more common to those whom own a dog to rather save their precious “fur baby”. They would betray their own species to save a filthy creature with a quater of their own life span. I pray I am not the only one who sees this stupidity.

I still see so many blinded by what their wordly masters will tell them, and I still do not understand their lack of inquisition. There is no sense of adventure with them, no sense of care for their orgin. They mock the face and name of God, yet they turn to such superficial fickle things and waste their minds and bodies. I see their lack of belief as an excuse to live as animals, they choose to live in their fleshly nature, and deny their divine nature. It is no wonder why we are devolving into the animals that we are.

She told you to drink from her, and you drank. She told you to lay with her, and you laid. She told you the sweetest of things, that you couldn't believe, and yet you believed it anyway. You would turn your back on your kin, your nation, your god, for her; and she dragged you down to tartarus. She made herself into the most sensual snake, whose skin blended so beautifully with the leaves you used to tread. This woman is in you, and regardless of if you now know this woman or not, you still have that piece of your soul and mind that appeals to her appetite.