When I first heard that we would be watching Godzilla I thought to myself “what does this have to do with the cold war?” After watching the film and reading the material, the symbolism could not be more obvious. Once I got past the cheesy narration in the American remake, I saw the monster as a direct symbol of the bomb itself and perhaps a symbol of the American government as well. Here is this huge terrorist monster destroying the cities of Japan, much like the American government did with the atomic bomb.
One concept that I epically want to bring up is the idea of Godzilla having the capacity to symbolize many different aspects of the cold war. Could the monster alternate identities? One identity of the monster is that of the atomic bomb, while another could be said to be our government. What I’m wondering is if this movie and the monster itself could stand for war in general. A being manifested by chemicals and underground testing, terrorizing the world, destroying cities, and only destroyed through more chemicals and bombs. When thinking about the wars going on all over the world, couldn’t it be said that one of the parties could be playing the “Godzilla role”? May be I’m going way of tangent, but this film just made me think of the other possibilities this monster could represent for our society and the world in general. What are your thoughts?
I also found the differences between the original Japanese film and the American remake to be quite laughable. After watching the original, I almost felt like the American adaptation was mocking what the Japanese film makers were trying to portray. The addition of American dubbed accents and the removal of other key scenes seemed to me like a way to make the film more “American friendly”. The reading explained “the united states release of Godzilla shows two approaches to the radioactive monster (projection and transference) in high-relief… Included in the cuts were direct references to Hiroshima”. I’m wondering what the reason for the cuts were. Did they simply not want the American people to here direct references to the destruction in Japan? If that’s the case, then why even remake the movie when the film itself is a huge symbol for the atomic bomb and its destruction? Why do you think the film chose to cut out these scenes, but to still remake and release the film?
Overall, I really loved the general idea of the film. While the acting might not have been up to par, the idea of this monster being generated and destroyed by our atomic decisions seems quite poetic and very relevant to the cold war. Additionally, the reading helped to reinforce my feelings about what the monster symbolized, in addition to giving an insight into other monster films during that era and the motive behind them. I’m really interested in hearing your thoughts and opinions of the film and whether or not you feel like general views would see it as entertainment or a symbolic representation of the effects of war.
I can kind of see where we would use the "Godzilla role" phrase for those being over zealous in war, but, as we saw in our class, the general American population doesn't seem to be quite aware of the monster being an allegory for America's nuclear power of the post-WWII era. It does seem like a good comparison though to use in that situation.
ReplyDeleteIt seems the reason why the American film cut out the parts that referenced the destruction of Japan is because of the animosity toward America and the nuclear powers the Japanese were trying to convey. Why would the American version want us to look bad? The redubbing seemed to want to show that yes atomic bombs are destructive and bad, but it will save our lives. The Steve Martin character seemed to really be convinced that the destructive weapon the scientist created had to be used for the sake of humanity.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYeah I see where you are coming from. I think it was just harder for me to make sense of because I saw the original and was aware of the circumstances unlike the American people of that era. I do agree with what you believe the message the American version was trying to send.
ReplyDelete[After watching the original, I almost felt like the American adaptation was mocking what the Japanese film makers were trying to portray. The addition of American dubbed accents and the removal of other key scenes seemed to me like a way to make the film more “American friendly”.]
ReplyDeleteI'm really interested in what you said here. I find it so disheartening that in order for this Japanese film to be a "success" in America, serious changes had to be made. It's almost as if the directors assumed Americans could not face the reality of history. Perhaps they thought, "oh no one wants to hear about Hiroshima & Nagasaki anymore, that's the sad past, so we'll refrain from mentioning them, even though the original film is a response to the bombings." As if leaving them out would make more people apt to see it, so they could avoid the pain of remembering the war/real life for awhile.
Actually, I suppose now I'm thinking it added to the "entertainment value". Maybe they wanted the American version to be pure fluff as a means of avoiding bad press/negative connotations with the government's decision to end the war in such a bloody way.
Either way, it's really interesting that you are wondering about that. I am too. I find it funny that in order for something to have mass appeal in this country, it must be "Americanized" or "Westernized". I think we can handle the truth.
Movies are art, and art should sometimes reflect life. "Godzilla" was pretty fascinating in that it really told a story to the viewers, but only half a story. It wasn't meant to be a person's narrative of surviving the atomic bomb (at least I highly doubt it was) but the symbolism is pretty spot on. So whether I look at it as pure entertainment or a serious allegory, I still managed to learn something.
Interesting discussion. Though I'm not sure where the interpretation is coming from that the American version is somehow just entertainment. The anti-nuclear message isn't as explicit, but it's there. Raymond Burr witnessing the attack, and commenting on it, in a way offered Americans a much more sympathetic perspective than they might have had--people were already feeling pretty awful about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the connection was clear enough--Godzilla's radioactive footprints and all.
ReplyDeleteI think you guys are right though that the adaptation makes it less a Japanese and more of an American examination. But I don't see that the changes are as drastic as some of you seem to be implying, or that the American perspective doesn't take the repercussions of nuclear war seriously.