comScore
  1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Maude
  8. The Braiser

What's with the name?

Allow us to explain.

i'll just leave this here

The Godzilla Trailer Has Landed [VIDEO]


With a cast like the one Godzilla has—Bryan Cranston, David Strathairn, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Elizabeth Olsen, Juliette Binoche, Ken Watanabe, Sally Hawkins—I almost don’t care what the movie is. It could be Transformers 6. But it helps that Gareth Edward’s Godzilla reboot looks promising, at least based on this first trailer. And he directed the indie sci-fi flick Monsters, which was quite good, so that’s even better.

We also have the first official synopsis for the movie. Yes, there is more to it than “giant monster!” Check it out behind the jump.

An epic rebirth to Toho’s iconic Godzilla, this spectacular adventure pits the world’s most famous monster against malevolent creatures who, bolstered by humanity’s scientific arrogance, threaten our very existence.

What do you think?

(via: Collider)

Are you following The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?

TAGS: |


  • Anonymous

    Huh. So they’ve confirmed other kaiju. Probably the best play. But this looked appropriately intense. Now we wait for GODZILLA VS. PENTECOST.

  • Anonymous

    That, was bloody incredible and amazing- the music at the start is perfection!

  • Gordon Borland

    Well colour me intrigued.

  • Benjamin Meis

    “malevolent creatures who, bolstered by humanity’s scientific arrogance, threaten our very existence.”
    Really?? Go **** yourself. I am so sick of this as a plot device. A) there is, by definition, no such thing as “scientific arrogance.” A scientist can be arrogant, but that just makes him an a-hole, it says nothing about science itself. B) there is nothing wrong with working to understand the fundamental workings of the universe around us, in and of itself. Yes, bad people can misuse the information, but anything can be misused if desired. A knife can cut both bread and people, it is the intent, the person, behind the action that is good or evil, not the tool. I wouldn’t care if this was monsters released by evil scientists, it’d be a bit cliché, but bad people do bad things. This, however, smacks of “science & technology is bad and we’re all doomed to kill ourselves, boohoo.”
    Okay, rant over. As a last note, I really, really hope I’m wrong and that’s just bad wording for a summary, because I really want to enjoy this.

  • Miss Cephalopod

    I think it’s pretty atmospheric (very impressive sense of scale, for one) but I have two major bones to pick.

    1) The use of the first piece of music. It fits perfectly, but it’s so iconic for its use in “2001″ that it really took me out of the trailer.

    2) Doesn’t this take place in Tokyo? Why is everybody white?

  • f_caus

    I take it you weren’t a fan of Jurassic Park then?

  • f_caus

    Umm, because this is a global event, thus showcasing that multiple cities come under attack by various mosnters? And Ken Wantanabe is white?

  • Natalie Willoughby

    Hmm. I’m pretty sure I would consider genetic manipulation to create the “perfect human” scientific arrogance. I think cloning, nuclear power plants, and the creation of new diseases by combining two already deadly diseases (something China just did by combining H1N1 and bird flu) also qualify.

  • Miss Cephalopod

    Eh, one non-white person in such a “global” event still isn’t very much.

  • Calum Syers

    To me, it seems apparent that whoever is responsible for marketing this film was watching the marketing campaign for “Pacific Rim” very closely, and thought to themselves, “Do the opposite of everything they’re doing to market their big monster movie.” By which I mean, the box-office for “Pacific Rim” was scuppered by a campaign that focused only on big monsters and big robots fighting, until two weeks before the film’s release, and by that point the damage had been done. Here, we have a trailer that focuses almost exclusively on mood and characters in peril, with only a glimpse of the giant monster in the last ten seconds.

    In short, I’m intrigued.

  • f_caus

    But if Godzilla destroys only non-white city, is he a racist monster?

  • Anonymous

    The thing is, there hasn’t been a good Gozilla movie since the first Japanese ones and even then… The balance between creating a tone where a sillly concept like a giant lizard crushing your city is possible, and a tone where the tragedy of people dying is taken seriously, is kind of hard to strike. I have seen my share of end of the world movies and seen enough buildings being destroyed that I will need something else to hook me in.

  • Rebecca Pahle

    I don’t think the city’s been confirmed. It’s originally Tokyo, of course, but didn’t that awful Matthew Broderick reboot change it to New York?

  • Miss Cephalopod

    Wow.

  • Rebecca Pahle

    Looks like the city in the trailer is a major metropolis, likely in America. Sorry I have to say this, but yes, most major American cities aren’t 99% white.

  • Rebecca Pahle

    Ditto.

  • f_caus

    I wasn’t referring to just that one city being shown. The news on this film clearly indicate that it’s going to be more of a global event. I think San Francisco was the one American city confirmed, but considering I’ve never been to SanFran, I can’t really say for sure if that’s the city in the teaser.

  • http://runt.org/ Adrian

    Give me Mothra!

  • Benjamin Meis

    No, that would be HUMAN arrogance. Science is outside of emotion. It is the application of reason to the world around us, arrogance is an emotional motivator. And there is nothing wrong with cloning, genetic manipulation, or especially nuclear power (the safest, cleanest form of power available for mass production, when the protocols are followed), it is people taking shortcuts or making unethical decisions with the available information that cause problems.

  • Miss Cephalopod

    I’m pretty sure that’s the Tokyo skyline we see though? The Tokyo Tower seems to be there.

  • Miss Cephalopod

    I’m gonna leave this discussion for now, I’m having a craptacular day and have to gets tons of work done. Might pop back some later day.

  • Benjamin Meis

    Big fan actually, Michael Crichton was awesome precisely because he made that distinction. As a scientist himself, he warned about taking shortcuts and misusing information and technology (which is bad science) and the dangers therein. Jurassic Park, if you watch the movie or read the book, is about people doing things improperly, and the results thereof, not that technology or science is itself bad or ultimately the downfall of man. They were good cautionary tales (his books in general, that is).

  • Anonymous

    Since Toho Studios used what we now call the Marvel method, I nominate Jeremy Renner for the title role.

  • J Ritchey

    Scientific arrogance is kind of central to Gojira, especially if you’re going to harken back to the franchise’ roots. The original was largely an allegory for the horrors of the Bomb, after all. And if they’re working from the original playbook, that implies “science” isn’t the bad guy–a scientist and his discovery ultimately save everyone in the original. In the Godzilla mythos, scientific arrogance doesn’t mean science is evil; it means that sometimes our knowledge and abilities can exceed what we’re ready to responsibly handle. Trying to understand how to manage the dangers while still progressing is a central theme. It was always about balancing that double edged sword.

  • Zoe

    Godzilla better not bloody die!! She deserves to destroy humanity and whatever else she likes!!!

    You go girl!!

  • Zoe

    …And everyone Non-white claims reverse racism isn’t real. Yeah. Riiiight. Like the Holocaust too eh?

    Being white these days is being a bloody minority but NOBODY is allowed to say so!

    So when white, and black, and every other color has been blended in so everyone is brown, what will you all moan about then? Ratio of foot size to sexual prowess?

    It’s humanities nature as a virus to destroy. Once the planets all bit gone you can continue with killing yourselves. The sooner the better IMHO

  • J Ritchey

    “Scientific arrogance” can (and more often does) mean arrogance in regard to science (basically the exact misuse you describe), not an intrinsic quality to science itself. It can be used the other way, but I wouldn’t jump to the assumption that it is without more context.

  • Benjamin Meis

    As I said, “scientific arrogance” is an impossible term and is usually just a shorthand for people to say science is bad. A story about using power and knowledge (redundant I know, knowledge is power) wisely and responsibly would be awesome if done right; I’m all for that. But the particular phrasing used implies science itself is bad and ultimately flawed. That’s bad, and really not what I’d hope a nerd/geek site would endorse.

  • Anonymous

    I’m cautiously optimistic. From what little I’ve seen it looks like it’ll be a good interpretation of the source material. My major concern is with the Director.

    “Monsters” was a godawful, and if this version of Godzilla attempts the same level of social proselytizing that Monsters did I’m gonna be a bit put off.

    Yes, the original Godzilla had it’s share of allegory vis-a-vis atomic weaponry in general and the Hiroshima/Nagasaki attacks in particular but that was a time and place issue and it was understandable.

    “malevolent creatures who, bolstered by humanity’s scientific arrogance, threaten our very existence.” rings too close to the “We meddled in gods domain” techno-fear that plagues far too many genre stories already.

  • J Ritchey

    See above re: “scientific arrogance.”

  • Benjamin Meis

    I see what you’re trying to say, and I would agree except the particular phrase “scientific arrogance” can only mean one thing. In this case, the adjective scientific means of or pertaining to science (a possessive adjective), which means the phrase means “arrogance of science” which is wrong. If it said a scientist’s arrogance or something else along that sort of line (where the arrogance belonged to some form of human agency – agency in the sense of “capable of acting” not necessarily a group, e.g. CIA), I’d be behind it, but this can only be interpreted one way. It’s one of those little weasely phrases that people use to slip into conversations to shift blame and play on people fears and misconceptions and is, overall, really harmful because it gets accepted without question.

  • J Ritchey

    I would read that as a descriptive or associative adjective rather than possessive. That, however, is a matter of perspective. I can respect how you would see it that way, but I disagree. That’s a hazard of something as ambiguous as language. It is exceedingly rare for any given phrase to have only one possible meaning.

  • Natalie Willoughby

    Jurassic Park (the book) is one of my all time favorites. To me it was less a cautionary tale and more a mathematical story of chaos. It doesn’t give any warnings, because it doesn’t have to. And Crichton was an MD, not a scientist per se.

  • Natalie Willoughby

    Fair enough – especially with regard to arrogance being an emotional motivator. But to me, that’s the same argument as “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” – and I have a hard time with that one too. Sure, there are lots of sick people in the world. But, remove them from the tools of their trade, and you have a safer world. Some fields of science offer too much temptation to bring the worst out in people.

    Incidentally, I believe the risks of (mis)using nuclear power, intentionally or unintentionally, outweigh the benefits with regards to powering a society. Save it for planetary exploration.

  • Benjamin Meis

    Firstly, I do appreciate you responding in a calm intelligent manner, I do like a good exchange and am glad this hasn’t turned all flamey, so thank you. Secondly, I would say that even from the perspective of it as a descriptive or associative adjective, it is still placing the trait as attached or describing science itself, rather than the people involved. But thirdly, and more importantly, I think we agree on the core principal here – as in, blame bad people and their decisions, don’t vilify science itself – and we could probably agree that in the future maybe these people should be more clear and explicit in the phrasing they use to avoid any such confusion and be sure to stack the blame where it belongs. I think that’s all there really is here, any more is just beating a dead horse.

  • Anonymous

    If it’s Los Angeles I’m officially rooting for Godzilla.

  • Benjamin Meis

    Without trying to overdue it on this subject, I must say I respectfully disagree. Always – always – blame the person doing the action, never the tool. Tools are always neutral, neither good nor bad, because they cannot choose to act. Only people can make choices, and only they can be good or evil. That is all I want to say.

  • Rebecca Pahle

    What’s your issue with Miss Cephalopod calling out the film for its lack of diversity? It’s a global film, sure, and we don’t know how the characters are distributed, but it’s still a REALLY white cast.

  • Rebecca Pahle

    A poster has the Golden Gate bridge on it, so at least one city is San Fran. I give up.

  • Miss Cephalopod

    You brought up the Holocaust? Really? (May I mention that, as a German, I’ve been taught about the horrors of the Holocaust every single year between grades 5 and 13, in three different school subjects, and have been to concentration camp sites and memorials. Goddammit, people.)

    Why should non-white racism not be real? South Korea is pretty darn racist towards black people, for example. (Black face in variety shows, etc.) What does that have to do with anything I said?

    “you can continue with killing yourselves”

    Why “you”? Why don’t you include yourself in humanity? Or are only the rest of us supposed to kill ourselves because we’re so horrible? (I also fail to see how this is relevant to the conversation at hand.)

    Whatever, I’m leaving this conversation. I’m not going to ruin my evening talking to somebody that expresses hope for me to kill myself and makes baseless assumptions about my person.

  • Rebecca Pahle

    Look, the world’s a diverse place. This film, like most Hollywood films, is incredibly white. Even if you believe that reverse racism is a thing (which I don’t), where are you seeing it in someone calling out a lack of racial diversity in a film?

  • Miss Cephalopod

    I get that it’s going to be a global event and it makes complete sense. I just find the trailer a bit inconsistent against that background:
    1) the sky line hints strongly at Tokyo, particularly in association with Godzilla’s history with the city
    2) if we want to show how many different (= diverse) citites are being attacked, why not show that diversity by, I don’t know, showing diversity? right now I can only see Tokyo full of white folks, why not show us other skylines too or people of different ethnicities? It feels like the trailer hangs somewhere between “I’m in Tokyo!” and “I’m in America!” but not really committing to either. It just feels confused. The real movie might make it clearer, of course.

    All that said, I’m really looking forward to the film, critique of the first trailer aside. (Hey, it’s only one first look, right?)

  • Natalie Willoughby

    I see what you’re saying now. But in my own defense, I certainly don’t think science is bad. Like, AT ALL. And I know the fine folks here at TMS don’t endorse that at all. Semantics kills us all in the end.

  • Benjamin Meis

    I would say that it was a cautionary tale, myself, (please feel free to interpret the book how you choose, because that’s what good literature is for, to make you think and form your own opinions) because of the primary motivating agents for all the issues boil down to two events: using the other DNA to repair a DNA sequence they didn’t fully understand, i.e. a shortcut and disabling all the security protocols to steal the product, i.e. poor handling of science and simple theft motivated by a desire to reap the rewards of someone else’s work. These two things are absolutely actions that should be avoided, people shouldn’t steal and certainly you shouldn’t take a shortcut you don’t understand to try and hope you get the end result you want, reality doesn’t work that way, there are consequences when you mishandle things. Side note, yes, he was an MD (though never licensed to practice) but that’s what makes him a scientist, i.e. someone who studies or practices science and/or the scientific method. All physicians are scientists, people just don’t necessarily think of them that way.

  • http://www.according2robyn.blogspot.com/ According2Robyn

    “Reverse Racism”: check
    Poor Oppressed White People: check
    Inscrutable Holocaust reference: check
    Hope you all die: check

    Ah, but you forgot to tell us that some of your best friends are minorities. We’ll have to deduct points for that.

    Let me just tally up your score…

    Aww, I’m afraid you didn’t score high enough to qualify for the Racist Crazy Person Team this year. Chin up, though. There’s always next season.

  • Benjamin Meis

    I don’t mean to imply you were necessarily against science, just that this (the original summary) is bad phrasing, which has a nasty habit of insinuating itself into common usage, and, since words form thoughts and thoughts form beliefs, letting these sort of things go by causes a lot of harm because most people won’t think about it and just accept it. That’s also why I used rather intentionally inflammatory language and phrasing in the original post, to show that phrasing changes how people act and react. Plus, TBH, it (the original summary) did rather irritate me.

  • Zoe

    Ha ha ha ha. Way to read from the same old tired script.

    Yawn.

    If any minority of a color that wasn’t white said anything all you politically correct wacko’s would shout loudly in defence and would never even think of calling them racist.

    But when a white person (who has actually experienced racism from non-whites) points out the ‘harsh truth’ i.e. humans of any color are horrible small minded idiots and prefer their own race / religion / dogma to all others, you politically correct nazi’s all cry foul.

    It’s pathetic, trite and arrogant to think you even have a clue about anyone else’s life and experiences, especially about some random commenter on the Internet. It’s so retarded it’s funny!

    If you actually checked your prejudices at the door and entered a logical, reasonable discussion to try and get to the truth of the matter, that would make a refreshing change, and one that might engender change in other people… but no… you resort to purile insults and moronic jibes to bolster your meaningless point of view.

    And I didn’t say ‘hope you all die – except the white’s'… they were included in what I did actually say. Try improving your comprehension skills before commenting on what you clearly know nothing about,

    lol.

  • SuperFubar

    Godzilla vs. Quicksilver and Scarlett Witch

  • Miss Cephalopod

    “think you even have a clue about anyone else’s life and experiences, especially about some random commenter on the Internet”

    After you have made the assumption that I deny the existence of the Holocaust, knowing nothing of my upbringing in Germany. Yeah, you really walk the walk.

    “And I didn’t say ‘hope you all die – except the white’s'… they were included in what I did actually say. Try improving your comprehension skills before commenting on what you clearly know nothing about,”

    How do you even bring skin colour into this one? I was asking why you refer you humanity as “you can continue with killing yourselves”. Why do you address humanity as “you”? You’re a human too. Shouldn’t it be “we”?

  • http://www.according2robyn.blogspot.com/ According2Robyn

    Please respond ASAP with more of your deranged, self-pitying ramblings.

    And if you could mutilate the rules for apostrophe usage while you’re at it, that would be super.

  • John W

    I hope the movies lives up to the trailer because the trailer is AWESOME!

  • Anonymous

    Regarding the discussion I’ve seen in the comments regarding all the white folk in the film: ever seen The Impossible? It’s a film about the Boxing Day Tsunami, where hundreds of thousands of people in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India and a dozen other countries perished in one of the most devastating disasters since records began. More specifically, it’s about how a rich white British family (based on a real Spanish family) managed to overcome the odds and reunite for a sappy happy ending in the middle of all this chaos and destruction in Thailand. “Yeah, that’s a shame for the thousands of Thai people killed, made homeless or destitute, but at least these fictional white people got out ok!” In making a film about the deadliest tsunami in recorded history, they didn’t even see fit to cast people who would have been most affected, instead electing to INVENT a rich white British family who don’t lose their lives, homes or livelihoods.

    This feeds a really insidious phenomenon: that the deaths of foreign non-white people in faraway lands is “sad,” but the deaths of white people in Western society is a *tragedy*. It’s the same thing which had people on Twitter talking about how Rue’s death in The Hunger Games wasn’t as “sad” when they found out she was black: white people dying is seen as more affecting on a visceral level, more tragic, more of a horrible thing. After all, millions of non-Western non-whites die every year of starvation or disease, as you see in those charity adverts for Africa and the Middle-east: in those countries, life expectancy is far lower, and thus not as unexpected – therefore, the twisted logic goes, less tragic. And this extends even in western countries: a black youth dying is just an example of “violent ghetto culture,” a Latino youth dying is just “typical of their background” – not the same sort of tragedy as an affluent white person’s death.

    It’s too early to tell just how “global” this new Godzilla is, but it would be really nice if it acknowledged that the death of human beings is universal and is no more or less tragic by virtue of location, nationality or ethnic background. I don’t see that happening for the promotional campaign, because the people who make trailers and commercials are frequently different from the actual filmmakers, and tend to be somewhat problematic at the best of times – so I don’t see them doing anything different from the norm.

    Because the sad fact is that lots of people are going to look on the deaths of non-Western non-white people in films, even outright disasters, as they do for real life: as sad or upsetting, but not *quite* as upsetting as if it happened to “their” people – even if it takes place in a western city with an ethnic majority. It isn’t cinema’s job to challenge those preconceptions, but cinema is in a strong position to make a difference. Would it really be such a problem for a film to make the “bold” statement that the death of thousands of non-Westerners is just as tragic as the death of thousands of Westerners? Would that really constitute “reverse”-racism? Is that infringing on white people’s representation in the media?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aaron-Elliott/100001081943987 Aeryn Elliott

    I’ve waited so long for this movie and I can’t describe how excited I am. Godzilla fangirl from 3 years old here and I think the tone fits perfectly. Also very happy with the little bit of Godzilla (and absolutely nothing of the other monsters) they’ve shown, giving the film some added mystery.

  • http://whiterosebrian.tumblr.com/ White Rose Brian

    All I can say is that this trailer is promising. Just look
    at those scenes of the dark sky and the ravaged city (clearly drawing inspiration from the tragedy that inspired the original picture’s creation) and the beast in
    the fog! I am disappointed that this apparently isn’t the same trailer that played back in San Diego in 2012.

  • http://whiterosebrian.tumblr.com/ White Rose Brian

    Isn’t it supposed to take place in San Diego?

  • f_caus

    A rush to judgment based on a two minute teaser? And you know, maybe we can this REALLY white cast provided they can act and tell a good story (I’m more interested in seeing Ken Watanabe as Serizawa and how he figures into the reboot because his character is an important figure in Godzilla lore). Of course, I might be biased because I’m Asian but whatevs..

  • KF

    Re: Discussions of an all-white cast. There are non-white actors listed on the film’s imdb page. (Five of the fifteen actors in the short cast list on the main imdb page, a few more beyond that in the full cast list.)

  • Herbert West

    Good thing I wasn’t the only one to get annoyed at “scientific arrogance”.

    I can sort of see what they’re getting at, as far as Gojira is concerned, but it’s very poorly worded, and it reeks of the usual movie tropes of science being a problem somehow.

  • Herbert West

    The IMDB page lists a few japanese (or asian-descendance) actors. I’m thinking the new plot takes place in more than one country, but it may start in Japan and move to the west coast of the US. Go figure.

  • Herbert West

    How do we know there’ll be a lack of racial, cultural, and national diversity in the finished film?

    Granted, it may well turn out to be the case. But can’t we wait until the finished product is out before we start criticizing it? Afaik (from what I’ve read in the few reports on the interwebs), about 1 out of 4 of the actors in that movie are asian; others are black, some are latin, etc. Some of the characters are definitely american, others are french. Looks to me like this movie is a bit more international than it appears at first. So how about we all just wait and see?

  • Anonymous

    This movie had be at ‘Godzilla’

  • Herbert West

    Confirmed another kaiju?

    This Godzilla has been in the works for about 4 years. Way before PacRim drew the spotlight on kaiju again.

  • Anonymous

    Not what I meant. What I was discussing was the confirmation of the presence of another monster in the film. That changes the dynamic a bit — for the better, I think.

  • Anonymous

    Man, everybody gets to trash the Golden Gate these days.

  • Herbert West

    I stand corrected.

  • Mark Matson

    Jurassic Park was cool, but fundamentally flawed. Crichton tried to make it about “scientific arrogance”, but ultimately just wrote a book about bad zoo practices. In reality, no zoo depends upon the power being on to keep the animals locked in.

  • Herbert West

    If you mean the burning city in the dark, it’s not Tokyo. That’s the Transamerica Pyramid.

  • Anonymous

    I think there’s a difference, though, between diversity and equity. If the POC characters are there solely to prop up the white characters, that’s not exactly a step forward.

  • Miss Cephalopod

    Okay, I didn’t know that.

  • KF

    That’s making assumptions about a film that’s not yet out.

    Watanabe is playing Dr. Serizawa. That’s a hugely important role in a Godzilla film. (Takeshi Shimura played the part in the original.)

    A couple of the other actors are playing soldiers, one of them a master sergeant, another a major. Depending on how they go with the military stuff, those could be a significant roles.

    We won’t know until the film is actually out.

  • Rebecca Pahle

    I’m not talking about the teaser. I’m talking about the cast. You’ll note that I’m actually pretty excited about the teaser: It looks like it’s going to be a good film, and I’m not dismissing it.

    I AM saying it’s not diverse enough. A film being good, or looking good, is not exempted from that critique.

  • Anonymous

    I wasn’t expecting to be interested in this at all, but the trailer is well-made, it looks like it’s been shot well, and there may be more to it than just ‘giant monster’ which is appreciated. Put me down as ‘surprised and may actually end up watching it!’

  • Anonymous

    Yes, I know the place of Dr. Serizawa in G-canon, thanks. And saying the military characters could be “significant roles” means absolutely nothing. After all, Tyrese Gibson played a soldier in Michael Bay’s Transformers movies, while constantly being written as second banana to Josh Duhamel’s character.

  • KF

    Interestingly enough, from that perspective, both films are from Legendary Pictures.

  • KF

    Re: Serizawa. Okay. I can’t tell if someone is a G-fan from their username or avatar. A lot of people nowadays aren’t familiar with the original. No offense was meant.

    Re: The military characters. We simply don’t know, either way, until we see the movie. Hence “could be” rather than “will be.” That’s the point I’m trying to make.

    Or to put it another way, all of the speculation in this thread means absolutely nothing, because there’s been nothing more than a brief teaser and a cast list.

    Speaking of which, in the synopsis for the film on the official website, Watanabe is actually listed second among the cast members, before Binoche, Olsen, Hawkins, Straitharn and Cranston. That seems to me a positive sign. Or it may indicate nothing.

    I’d rather wait for the movie to actually come out before I criticize it. Your mileage may vary, of course.

  • Lynda Bowen

    The music in the opening sequence: I believe it was used at the end of 2001. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iVYu5lyX5M

  • Anonymous

    So congratulations. You’ve added nothing to the conversation except defensiveness over very real concerns regarding actors of color and their historical placement in the Hollywood hierarchy.

  • Rebecca Pahle

    “all of the speculation in this thread means absolutely nothing, because there’s been nothing more than a brief teaser and a cast list.”

    ALL WE ARE SAYING is that there’s an imbalance of white people/POC in this movie. And you CAN tell that from the cast list. It has nothing to do with the script, story, characters, etc. No one’s discounting the movie before it comes out. We’re just brining up a valid point of criticism.

  • KF

    There’s no defensiveness in my posts. You’re reading something into it that’s not there. You’re also making assumptions about my feelings about the shortcomings of Hollywood when it comes to actors of color. Which is your right, I guess.

    You’re being oddly hostile, which is also your right.

    I’m simply trying to say discussions about representation are, generally speaking (outside of blatant whitewashing casting) better directed against films that have actually been made and released. When you have more than a minute of footage to look at.

    For example (moving to another area of representation where Hollywood often comes up short), I think the discussions about gender representation in the Catching Fire thread were pretty good, with useful contributions being made from various sides.

    I’m saying we can have a discussion about how well Godzilla actually does once it comes out and we can see how it does.

    I’d like to see the film before I criticize it. That’s it. If you want to call that being defensive, well, okay, that’s your call. As is being hostile to people who agree with you about the issue we’re discussing.

  • KF

    I agree with what people are saying in terms of how it’s looking right now. I agree there’s a clear imbalance.

    I still want to see how they do with the POC actors that are actually in the film, whether they’re leads (like Watanabe) or not (like some of the others on the list) before I decide how the film does in terms of representation. Is that clear? If it wasn’t I apologize for any confusion.

  • Anonymous
  • KF

    You know, I’m not really contributing to the conversation. So I’ll apologize if I distracted or derailed, make one more post to the other guy and bow out of this thread.

    Apologies for any irritation I caused.

  • KF

    I apologize if there was any passive aggressiveness in my last post. I’m not looking to argue with you or escalate things.

    I also should have been more clear in my previous posts. I completely agree that there are issues in Hollywood with regards to the underrepresentation of non-whites. I thought that was implied in my third sentence (when I said you were making assumptions about my feelings on the subject), but I can see how that could be unclear, particularly if you’re assuming I’m hostile to you or your views (which I am not).

    I’ll be bowing out of the conversation in this thread because I don’t wish to derail any discussion about a serious issue. Yes, I am white, but I’m also in a group that is seriously underrepresented in Hollywood (and elsewhere), so I understand the significance of issues of representation (and at the same time acknowledge that I have not experienced the specific effects of having people of skin color like my own underrepresented). And I agree, specifically, that Hollywood needs to do a better job in terms of casting actors of color in lead rolls, particularly in major films like this one. I hope that you can believe me when I say that.

    If I have caused you any irritation today, I apologize.

  • Mark Brown

    Well, Tokyo Tower got the scrap kicked out of it every week for a while. Let some other iconic landmark have a turn.

  • KF

    Sorry, one last comment. What I’d been trying to respond to (apparently poorly), was that comment by aboynamedart that “there’s a difference, though, between diversity and equity.”

    I actually agree with that, and that it’s an important distinction, and a smart observation.

    What I was trying to say in response was that I felt that that’s actually something we can’t completely tell from the cast list itself, that the film itself would be more telling in that regard. My initial post was a result of wondering if Watanabe would be the only POC in the film, and my surprise that he was not. I really meant nothing more than to point that out.

    This is also what I meant my first response to you when I said “how the film does in terms of representation” – I was wondering about quality rather than numbers. Though the numbers are, I agree a valid concern. (You’ll note that I didn’t discount, in any of my posts, that the imbalance was itself a concern.)

    I should have been more clear about that, and I should have been more clear with the phrase “all the speculation in this thread.” I was thinking about how those parts that did have POC actors would be handled, not whether or not there would be more white actors than POC actors. That was in a post that I wrote quickly. I should have taken the time to express myself more clearly.

    But I can see how my earlier posts could be read differently than I’d meant. Particularly when I wrote “I’m saying we can have a discussion” once the film comes out, when I should have written “maybe a discussion about the quality of the roles would be more useful” once the film comes out. That was poorly worded, I agree. I don’t mean to tell anyone what they can or should talk about, particularly on an important subject such as this.

    So, again, apologies for any irritation I caused. Keep fighting the good fight.

  • Ana KH

    KF, I just wanted to say I understand the point you’re making (that if a main character is well written, has their own story arc within the larger movie plot and happens to be a POC, we would call that a win as we did for Pacific Rim), and agree that it’s far, far too early to be able to make that kind of assessment.

    I’m sorry you got a lot of heat for pointing that out.

  • KF

    Thank you.

  • Raiden

    Interesting fact about the original 1950′s Godzilla film, It’s not the original.

    Hollywood didn’t think the original all Japanese movie would sell to a white audience, so they reedited it with new scenes featuring Raymond Burr as the hero. That is the version that most Non-Geek Americans are familiar with.

    I recommend buying the original restored cut from Criterion Collection, it is an infinitely better film, and a commentary on the Atomic Age that is still relevant, even today. Unlike the American cut which is, simply put, so bad its good.