GOJIRA NI-SEN MIRENIAMU (a.k.a. GODZILLA 2000)
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Capsule: : This is the first Godzilla movie
to get a wide American release since GODZILLA
'85. And it is no bargain. The plot is poorly
constructed and things happen for no apparent
reason. The effects are better than in the
past, but still occasionally cheesy. Godzilla
has a new look that makes him resemble more a
martial arts weapon than a giant dinosaur.
Still this film is fun for Godzilla fans who
rarely get a chance to see the big guy on the
big screen. Non-fans are unlikely find much to
enjoy. Rating: 6 (0 to 10), high +1 (-4 to +4)
What can I say? For the sort of viewer who enjoys seeing two men in rubber monster suits battle over a city that looks like cardboard boxes, this might be the film for you. I liked it. Godzilla got to me at an early age and I am too old to become objective about Godzilla films now. As I said in the capsule, there is not a lot done really well in this film, but it is a lot of fun for people who like Godzilla films. There is a certain thrill of anticipation in seeing the Toho Films banner at the beginning. Even the best are crudely made and often a little incoherent, but they are also a good time. Non-fans can be assured that they will not be much impressed by GODZILLA 2000 and can tune out of this review at this point.
Plot? Well, truth be known, there is not a whole lot of plot. Scientist Yuji Shinoda left the employ of the Japanese government and formed the minuscule Godzilla Prediction Network, a startup that predicts where and when Godzilla will show up and strike next. Yuji does the science and Yuji's ten-year-old daughter does the financial work. They are joined on a Godzilla hunt by Yuki Ichinose, a photojournalist looking for a story. Together they discover that finding Godzilla can be a big mistake.
At the same time some scientists have found an odd rock, 600 feet across, in the ocean of Japan. Because it shows some intriguing abnormalities they decide to bring the rock to the surface where it can be studied, lifting it with floats. Oddly the rock seems more enthusiastic about reaching the surface than can be explained as it rises up past the floats. It then hangs over the water and waits for sunshine to activate it. It seems under the stone shell is an alien craft that has been waiting 60 million years to come back to life so it can complete its mission. It would be telling to say what its mission is, except that logical or not, there will of course be another monster for Godzilla to fight. (And of course it will be just roughly Godzilla's height. Godzilla never has any fifty-foot monsters to fight.)
Word on the street has been that the new film is intended to come right after the original Godzilla film in its own new series. That was true of the film we call GODZILLA '85, which did spawn its own separate series of Godzilla films in the 1980s and 1990s. (To save confusion I will use American titles.) That second series repeated many of the same mistakes that the first series did, but it was aimed at a higher level. The rumor has been that like GODZILLA '85 (and of course the film we call GIGANTIS, THE FIRE MONSTER), GODZILLA 2000 is a direct successor to the original GODZILLA, KING OF THE MONSTERS. However, a cursory look at the film tells us this is simply not true. Godzilla died in the first film and all other films are supposed to feature a second very similar Godzilla beast. Yet in GODZILLA 2000, attacks by Godzilla are taken to be a periodic phenomenon. There is even a Godzilla Prediction Network. At the end of the film there is a comment about all of Godzilla's attacks in the past have taught lessons. None of this would make sense if only the events of the first film and this one had taken place. The second series apparently ended with the death of the second Godzilla and his replacement by his son, just reaching maturity. Logically it would make sense to say that the new Godzilla is really the son from the second series. But so much logic is probably more than the series can reasonably be expected to bear.
Godzilla is like James Bond. His looks change but the character himself is timeless. His face had a very lumpy appearance and buck teeth in the earliest film and then became more dinosaur- like for KING KONG VRS. GODZILLA. As the series became more childish and aimed at younger children his features became rounder and less frightening. In the second series he looked a lot better and consistent from to film, but just a bit rubbery. His looks never changed. For GODZILLA 2000 again his looks have been modified to please the younger set. This time, however, it is a younger set brought up on NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET and FRIDAY THE 13TH. The new Godzilla has sharper teeth with four canines regularly spaced on each side. His back fins are more jagged, sharp, and vicious- looking. It looks like they crossed the traditional Godzilla with a punk rocker.
Toho Studios from the beginning did excellent work with labor- intensive special effects. But not every effects problem could be solved with inexpensive labor. Visually their films were always very nice, but their special effects were not always very convincing. As time went by their visual effects got better. This film really represents a big jump in the quality of their effects. There are many very nice images. And what attracts people to a Godzilla film has got to be the visuals. It certainly is not the writing. Toho films can usually be counted on for nicely composed scenes with good use of color. Where possible in the new film Godzilla is shown from a low angle to accentuate the height. A low angle camera was used in the first film and then abandoned for most of the first series. It was used sparingly in the second series. Here again the camera creates an illusion of great size by shooting upward, in fact he looks larger than he ever has before. Several new compositions of shots give this film a look that is unique for the series. For those who like to just stare in awe of the size the mega-saurian, this is the film.
The writing however, is not the best of the series and has some strange touches. There are some half-hearted attempts at humor that seem thrown in as an after-thought. There is one short sequence of slapstick comedy, in this case almost literally slapstick, and it seems like it belonged in another movie. There are some allusions to JURASSIC PARK, DR. STRANGELOVE, and perhaps a few other films. (By the way, the film scene someone is watching on TV when we can hear only the dialog is Morris Ankrum being interrogated by aliens in EARTH VS. THE FLYING SAUCERS. I wonder what film was used in the Japanese-language version.) I have never been quite able to make out if the writing in these films is out of kilter or if it just works better in Japanese. But the final scene, like the writing in several of the situations, just does not work. It almost seems to be rooting for Godzilla as he destroys Tokyo.
The musical score by Takayuki Hattori is a little too polished and Western for a Godzilla film. Godzilla films usually have Japanese military marches and brash brassy music. Much of that feel is missing here. The film is released by Tristar who hopefully have learned to leave Godzilla films to the experts after their own attempt to make a Godzilla film ended up with something of a monstrosity. (Though rumor has it that their own attempt to make a Godzilla film failed in large part because of constraints placed on them by Toho executives.)
Even for Godzilla fans, this could have been a better film. It is only mid-range in the quality of films in the second series. Still as he approaches fifty years old, it is good to know the big guy still looks good on the silver screen and in some ways better than ever before. I rate this GODZILLA 2000 a 6 on the 0 to 10 scale and a high +1 on the -4 to +4 scale. It will be interesting to see if its sequels will get an American theatrical release.
Mark R. Leeper
mleeper@lucent.com
Copyright 2000 Mark R. Leeper
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews