Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Like I said, Toho could not tell the TriStar team to scrap everything and do it their way. Yes, they approved the design. That does not mean they asked for it or loved it.
Huh, looks lime emmirich gave the order for fast and agile.
Still, I never understood that hatred for the design itself, yeah, it isnt godzilla, but he looks awesome.
That's the trouble. When you tell someone that a thing is X when it clearly is not X, they tend to find it irritating. This is the point I was getting about with nkelsch's idea about an evil, mind-controlling version of Mothra for the sequel to Godzilla 2014. It's not that a mind-controlling kaiju is a bad idea. Just don't try to tell me it's Mothra.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/22 22:18:04
Whats wrong with reimaginings? What if mothra is just like godzilla, an old protector, but she is concerned that the world is being destroyed by man? So she mind controls high up officials while going after oil platforms and other such things?
"Reimagining" is a marketing term. It tends to mean, capitalize on the existing value of IP without any consideration for what made it valuable in the first place. It is bad because it diminishes the value of the IP. Godzilla 1998 is a great example of what's wrong with reimagining.
As to Mothra: she is the guardian monster. (Godzilla and all the others are more or less ambiguous overall or straight-up evil like Gigan.) More specifically, what makes Mothra interesting is that she is clearly good from a human perspective. This is the point of the Shobijin. Unlike Godzilla and other kaiju, who are vast and unknowable, Mothra has ambassadors -- and in the weirdest way. One of the most striking things about kaiju is obviously their size. But the Shobijin are tiny ladies, much smaller than humans. (To them, humans are kaiju-sized.) What a contrast! In other words, Mothra obviously understands and respects the human scale (and smaller!) perspective. The human characters in Mothra movies can easily be judged by how they treat the Shobijin.
This is why a mind-controlling tyrant Mothra would suck.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/22 22:33:59
It's alright to have changes in reimaginings but if you start to change things that are integral or iconic to the source material then you're probably missing what made the source material appealing in the first place.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/22 22:34:20
I think you are trying to understand the film too literally. Instead, try to understand that the movie is not concerned about realism. Nelson's heartless enslavement of the Shobijin, the murders he commits to do it, his selfish assertion that his personal fortune trumps thousands of lives is one image. Mothra's attacks on Tokyo and New York are another image. In the monster fantasy genre, these images balance each other. That's because the audience knows Nelson stands for the worst aspects of humanity. Mothra stands for divine judgment. Now other kaiju have been interpreted this way as well. What makes Mothra stand out is that she hears our prayers, as it were, and is merciful.
Going back, it seems while mothra is good, she will feth things up in the the name of good.
Besides, what is wrong with a reimagining where mothra is still good, but going about it all wrong?
Also.....Off on a tangeant what could that skeleton could have been? It looked snake like. Any monsters that could fit the bill?
hotsauceman1 wrote: Going back, it seems while mothra is good, she will feth things up in the the name of good.
The original Mothra film is really interesting because it creates a twist on the kaiju genre. At first, nothing seems too out of the ordinary despite the tiny ladies. The tiny ladies seem to just be monster bait. The audience quickly understands that Mothra will pursue the Shobijin. The resulting destruction, however, is ambiguous. Is Mothra consciously punishing humans for kidnapping the Shobijin or just looking for them and incidentally making a terrible mess of city blocks because of her enormous size? It is unclear. Even the Shobijin's warning is ambiguous -- they beg to be freed because good people as well as bad will be caught up in the devastation of Mothra's pursuit. They do not threaten their captor with punishment, however.
So far, this is not too different from the original Godzilla movie, where the characters variously interpret Godzilla as the punishment for their social guilt or just an animal. But there is a huge difference between Godzilla (1954) and Mothra (1961) in that the former film closes with the killing of Godzilla while the latter film has a happy ending with Mothra flying away. That is, Godzilla ends in the ashes of a war. Mothra ends with an affirmation of peace. But that's not even the real twist. What's really interesting about Mothra is that the humans trying to return the Shobijin manage to communicate with her. That is, not through the Shobijin's telepathy but through visual symbols. In other words, Mothra is a being of sentience -- capable of compassion and forgiveness.
Once you realize that, the whole film takes on a different light watching it a second time. You realize that we see Mothra "grow up" over the course of the movie. Maybe baby Mothra, like a human baby, was more animalistic, simply following its instinct. Maybe her attack was a toddler's temper tantrum. What then is the sign of her finally maturing? When she learns to be merciful and restrained. This is further confirmed in later films, where the ultimate expression of Mothra's moral maturity is her willingness to sacrifice her own life for humanity.
I have written a lot more on Dakka about Mothra in case you are interested.
Spoiler:
Manchu wrote: Looking back over 60 years of Godzilla movies, one might assume the franchise always had a sort of inevitable quality. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Although the first Godzilla film was a big success, its immediate sequel Godzilla Raids Again (1955) failed to establish a firm basis for what would become the Godzilla franchise -- and this despite employing for the first time that magic formula of pitting Godzilla against another kaiju (in that case, Anguirus).
What happened? Audiences were certainly not already tired of kaiju. The 1956 re-release of RKO's King Kong did big business around the world. Toho Studios achieved further success with Rodan in 1956 and Varan in 1958. And Mothra first appeared in her own eponymous feature in 1961, seven years after Godzilla's own first appearance and six years since Godzilla had at that point last appeared on the big screen.
I think the problem was Anguirus. Whatever interesting facets he might later develop, Anguirus originally had no other purpose than to lose a fight with Godzilla. He even had the same back story as Godzilla, effectively making him "Godzilla except not as good." In other words, Anguirus was just "supporting cast" when what Toho really needed was a "guest star" crossover battle. It finally came together in 1962 with the smash hit King Kong v. Godzilla. And the very next Godzilla film? Mothra v. Godzilla in 1964. Starting with the Mothra crossover, Toho would release a Godzilla picture every year but one for the next decade.
In a way, it's no surprise that King Kong launched the Godzilla franchise. He had been a global superstar since 1933, after all. By contrast, Mothra was a nobody. And yet it was her fight with Godzilla that really cemented the franchise. Why? Simply put, because she was so interesting. Unlike Godzilla or Anguirus, who basically just came out of nowhere, Mothra is situated in a relatively dense narrative. She is the protector goddess of an ancient race of deminiutive humans who live on a strange island amid mutated flora and fauna. Also unlike Godzilla, we are aware of Mothra's rich inner life thanks to her Shobijin worshipers. Her essential benevolence is apparent from the start, in contrast to greedy, oppressive human antagonists.
Godzilla, meanwhile, is a much more ambiguous character in 1964. In Mothra v. Godzilla, he just sort of shows up without much preamble and starts kicking the gak out of Japan per usual. This happens right after the human bad guys get busy trying to exploit the hapless Shobijin, giving the impression that Godzilla is punishing humanity for its myriad faults. Mothra, on the other hand, favors humanity's capacity for goodness and comes to the aid of Japan in driving off Godzilla although she is ultimately overwhelmed by his raw power.
Keep in mind that Mothra was not the first kaiju killed by Godzilla. He had already baked Anguirus in the ruins of Osaka Castle nine years earlier. But that titanic first kaiju v. kaiju battle resolved basically nothing about the movie's plot. It was just kind of something that was also happening while the main issue was Godzilla attacking Japan again. Mothra's death is completely different: she dies defending the people from Godzilla. Her death scene is full of pathos precisely because she is a character rather than a monstrous prop like poor Anguirus. Indeed, her last act is to put her wing over her egg.
Her death scene of course paves the way for another iconic aspect of Mothra: the theme of resurrection. Although Mothra did not die in her own 1961 film, Christian imagery plays a very large role. Mothra's own symbol is a kind of cross and in the movie the protagonists, after seeing a heavenly backlit cross on a church steeple, decide to attract Mothra by painting a giant cross on a runway and ringing church bells at 3PM, which as it happens is traditionally believed to be the hour of Christ's death. The good guy humans reunite Mothra with the Shobijin, whereupon Mothra leaves and the world is saved, showing that the key to peace is compassion and goodness. Similarly, in the 1964 film, Mothra sacrifices her own life to help humanity.
All of this is kind of surprising considering she's a big bug. I don't think people usually associate insects with benevolence and love. Design-wise, Godzilla and most other kaiju are a lot more obvious. Of course a giant dinosaur would tear up buildings and smash stuff. But why would a giant insect care about protecting human beings? It's a very weird idea and weird is good when you're making kaiju films.
These factors don't just make Mothra herself an interesting character as far as kaiju go. Her character is also a great foil for Godzilla and makes him, and by association his whole world, more interesting. I think Mothra is a big part of why this franchise has lasted so long -- and why it got started in the first place.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/05/22 23:18:28
hotsauceman1 wrote: Huh, looks lime emmirich gave the order for fast and agile.
Still, I never understood that hatred for the design itself, yeah, it isnt godzilla, but he looks awesome.
No, he looks 90's to the max, dude. Like a Liefeld drawing of a velociraptor. The 90's were all about the massive square jaws and chin.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Huh, looks lime emmirich gave the order for fast and agile.
Still, I never understood that hatred for the design itself, yeah, it isnt godzilla, but he looks awesome.
No, he looks 90's to the max, dude. Like a Liefeld drawing of a velociraptor. The 90's were all about the massive square jaws and chin.
I'm with hotsauce here. I will go as far as saying that I preferred the 98' movie over this one except for the one fight at the end in the new one. (mainly because I have a mancrush on Jean Reno) But I actually love the 98 design. I don't care if it's godzilla or not (I will never watch the old movies, dudes in suits lost their alure around the time I stopped watching the original power rangers). I'll be honest, even in the newest form, I still think Godzilla himself looks pretty dumb and hell, in this movie, most of his behaviour reminded me of a gorilla, snorting included.