Review: Godzilla

Year: 2014
Director: Gareth Edwards
Screenplay: Max Borenstein
Starring: Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Ken Watanabe, Elizabeth Olsen, Juliette Binoche, Sally Hawkins, David Strathairn, Bryan Cranston

Synopsis is here

I found myself grappling with my thoughts on this latest rendition Godzilla since my viewing last Friday. I had more than enough time to piece a review together since then, but I wanted to figure out if my thoughts of the film would develop into something more than just "fine". As a big fan of Edwards last feature; Monsters (2010), I had some high hopes for whatever project would come the young director's way and while a $100millon plus blockbuster was possibly not what I was thinking, but I was more than willing to see what he would do with Japan's iconic, atomic beast.

Edward's Godzilla feels less like Roland Emmerich's flat 1998 adaptation of the material, yet it struggles to bring across the gloomy, tragic tone of the 1954 original. The film stumbles somewhere along the middle of both. Doing its best to project the huge amount of money spent on it and fumbling a plot that has a refreshing change of pace in comparison with other blockbusters, in terms of structure and themes, yet no interesting human characters to engage with. Edward's film excels when Godzilla makes its appearances in the film, but most of the films downtime is spent with people that hold no real interest. Edwards clearly likes to display the idea that when such creatures appear on earth, we are of little significance, and I enjoy how his displays this in such moments as the glorious skydiving set piece. If we are to spend so much time with its human characters, however, I would not mind some emotional connection.

The 1954 original film cleverly used the Japan as a collective source of character, utilizing isolating moments of terror and despair and unifying them as an emotionally connective tissue. There is no main character because Japan is the main character. 2014's Godzilla decides to lump its heavy weight upon Aaron Taylor Johnson, whose board shoulders aren't strong enough to carry it. Johnson plays the role barrel chested but cardboard faced. Other actors I expected more from (Olsen, Binoche, and Hawkins) are either bland info-dumping mouth pieces are unfortunately shoved into either dull homely or info-dump characters. This is the second film to place a female character within a uniform of a nurse and believe that's enough to sell the idea of the character (see also The Amazing Spiderman 2). Bryan Cranston tries hard to inject the kind of energy we expect from such a film, as yet another pent-up father figure, while Ken Watanabe is allowed inform us of the nature of the beast, yet the amount of screen time they are given to place any gravitas, is limited. A strong international cast is wasted, while we wait for what we actually came for.

Edward does deliver when it comes to the film's scale. The film generally feels large. We witness helicopters appear as mere specks on landscapes of foliage. Watching landscape shots of soldiers against the sheer size of the mutated monster only amplifies the feelings of insignificance of the human species as the rampage of the creatures takes place. Edwards also nods back to his first feature (as well the Godzilla franchise) with a solid sense of wit. Meanwhile cinematographer Seamus McGarvey's beautifully ashen cinematography and Alexandre Desplat winking score sets the right tone.

Godzilla 2014 tries hard to juggle a few pies in the air and only manages to a few of them up. Edward's film is making a summer blockbuster with very particular B-movie-like undertones. But while the original film smartly captures a country's pain with a sense of melancholy, Godzilla fumbles its human story with unengaging characters. The film really hits its stride when it all kicks off, but I would happily be calling the film great if the film's quieter moments had anything approaching the subtly affecting Mexican vigil scene found in Monsters. Godzilla is best viewed for its splashes of spectacle only.

Review: Pacific Rim

Year: 2013

Director: Guillermo del Toro 

Screenplay: Travis Beacham, Guillermo del Toro 

Starring: Charlie Hunnam, Idris Elba, Rinko Kikuchi, Charlie Day

Synopsis is here:

For me Pacific Rim works because its director,Guillermo del Toro, knows how to economise storytelling. The film rattles along at great speed, but we never lose sight of anything. We feel more to be done to fill in the gaps, and yet throughout, the dynamics between characters are solid, the set pieces never feel extraneous (in fact the detail is often gorgeous) and the absurd story still manages to stay intact. Tropes and iffy dialogue are a plenty, yet the execution of it all side-swipes such issues like an elbow rocket.

For a film that is effectively Robots (Jaegers) smashing the scales off Monsters (Kaiju) it sweats out reference out of every orifice. Anime fans may mention Evangelion, Sci-fi fans can spy Godzilla. Gamers could smile at the Shadow of the Colossus feel, while guys like me may very well find themselves transported back when they first watched (and fell in love with) Independence Day (aged 12). The wealth of pop culture that seeps through scene after scene I found astonishing.

But its how all these references are stitched together which I found so appealing. The template is telling. Yet the beauty of the visuals, the spunk and energy of the performances and the boisterous thuds and clunks of mecha on flesh held my interest. Del Toro’s strength here is in taking a platter of well known aspects and rearranging them to feel fun again. The action loses the hyper active editing; we can see what’s happening. The length of the film is much shorter than some of the more hyped movies released besides it. It simply says what it needs to and doesn’t push for time to give the pretence of “epic” storytelling. The film feels big on its own regard, because of the films eye meltingly gorgeous design.

But while I found the look of the film often breath-taking (it ranks with Avatar for me as some of the best CGI), the actors that helped me suck up some air and kept me fighting the good fight. Charlie Hunnam gives an earnest display as Relight Beckett. Idris Elba channels Richard Crenna in First Blood and chomps at scenery.  Rinko Kikuchi bypasses some of the issues that have kept some of the other female characters from being anything interesting (thank god for the screenplay giving a damn). Meanwhile Charlie Day’s performance is not only welcomed by the fact that I’ve been binging on It’s always Sunny in Philadelphia, but by giving a performance that strangely reminds me of Rick Morris in Ghostbusters. That can only be a pleasant thing.

But Pacific Rim is full of such pleasant things and I don’t need my blockbusters to reinvent wheels when released (say that three times). But I do want that sense of fun that can be found. Pacific Rim doesn’t feature the comic book anxieties and origin stories that have almost become a mainstay during the summer period. It also doesn’t rely on name brand nostalgia to make an appearance of being decent. There’s none of the grubby “humour” that litters the likes of Transformers and thank goodness. Del Toro’s ability to see his blockbuster ideas through the prism of a small kid is important here. Pacific Rim manages to capture some of that imaginative feeling before cynicism set in. All Transformers seemed willing to give you is Megan Fox giving you a blank stare and a humping Robot.

Review: Monsters

Year: 2010
Director: Garteh Edwards
Screenplay: Garteh Edwards
Starring: Scoot McNairy, Whitney Able

Synopsis is here

I know someone, somewhere is whining about Monsters because "there's hardly any monsters!". To that person I say read film reviews. So many people love to gripe about film reviews because "they have their own opinion" However, other than the fact that reading others view can re-enforce your own conceptions and understanding on matters (be it politics or films), they also warn about certain things like THAT TITLE I ALLEGORY AND THAT TRAILER IS LIES! Ahem, sorry.

Yes once again, the trailer of the film is used to try and sell something it's not and those looking for the next Cloverfield may find themselves a little confused. The title is one of those blatant misleads that reminds one of those old twilight zone episodes. Oh yes there are monsters....and they ain't who you think! etc. Such a tactic may be seen a mile off for a disgruntled cynical cinephile; but with that said, Monsters has more to say than a slight nod to old school sci-fi. It is an interesting movie that helps continue this trend of recent sci-fi that not only utilizes it's CGI in an interesting (and cheap) way but presents an thoughtful (although slightly obvious) metaphor about how we view the alien other.

Much has said about the films cost and it's computer graphics so I'll be brief with this. The film not only looks gorgeous but just just as expensive as say War of the Worlds. Monsters cost $500,000 while Spielberg's 2005 feature cost $130 million but at times you'll be hard pressed to see how big that gulf really is. It is quite clear that Visual effects artist-cum Director Gareth Edwards knows what he's doing with CGI, with his digital shots looking better than some of the weaker efforts seen in other films. But what sets Edwards apart is he has a good hold a certain amount of cinematic language. His shots of the (rarely seen) aliens are mostly at night; not only show the capability of his CGI, But to remind us that it's things that bump in the night that still unsettle us the most. His use of location is also well considered. Like District 9 (2007), the film is enhanced by it's setting. It's not a typical urban landscape that we see constantly in films like this, but something that is also still quite alien to those who may or may not watch art-house features which delve into the central Americas more than often.

It is the location that sets up the metaphor splendidly. At a time when certain voices are highlighting that a change in ethnicity may approaching the U.K and the U.S.  It's pretty revealing that Edwards decides that it is in Mexico (where recent troubles have reared their head involving the state of Arizona) that no only the majority of the film takes place but also where we as an audience discover the the conflicting nature of these beings. I won't say any more, but think of it like Solaris (1972 & 2002) where intent to harm collides with communication.

Lets not get this ahead of ourselves however, as in some ways comparing Edwards to Tarkovskiy is extraordinarily naive. But while there films bounce around in a similar ballpark at points, Edwards is a filmmaker who is seemingly more in touch with his contemporaries than anyone else. All this talk about aliens and least we forget that this is really a romantic road movie, with it's use of setting and characters feeling more a mixture Y Tu Mama Tambien and Lost in Translation more than anything else. When Edwards' camera is focused on the smaller moments (a visit to a 400 year old church is nicely put together) these particles of culture and character work extremely well. These creatures no longer cause large impact on the world, they have been assimilated into part of it. These two leads are now finding new parts of themselves within this  background and the combination of the old and new shows the film at it's most watchable.

It's a shame that while these moments stand out Edwards shows that he is more than a little rough around the edges with other aspects. Monsters (mostly improvised) screenplay is full of forced dialogue with one unfortunate moment having the lead spell out much of underlying subtext upon viewing America's new great wall. Also as a romance I can't say that the meandering pace of the love story and the small chit chat make me believe in the central relationship much. This may be because I've been forced fed sickly sweet rom-coms since mainstream cinema gave up on trying to give us anything different, but with all that said, I didn't just truly buy it.

This is not due to the two wide eye performances of the leads with Scoot McNairy being the standout. It is his character that is given the most development and he runs with it well, with the films more emotional moments stemming from him. This is not to say that Whitney Able's role isn't any less important, it is merely more subdued. The two are more than natural in front of the camera it's just together in this vicinity the real life couple are just a tad too restrained when together.

But this doesn't distract Monsters from being a eye-opening opener. It is beautiful to look at and the film's commentary is not only topical but competently placed through out. Edwards has come out alongside Duncan Jones (Moon) as a Brit director whose view on the sci-fi aesthetic is more than the mere superficial. Whether or not or not a mainstream audience can look beyond the title is a different story.