The Atomic Monster

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.

A cup of jo from the Atomic Cafe

I’m already so excited for this class based on the first movie and reading! The documentary “Atomic Café” was a film rich with information about the era of the atomic bomb. As a film major I loved the style of the film, and the film maker’s ability to narrate through images and clips alone. I absolutely loved the films use of contradicting statements and real clips of the atomic bomb exploding, and the effects the explosions had on the people and society as a whole.


My mom was born in 1950, and I remember her telling me about the bomb scare and having to practice “duck and cover” while in school. When we were watching the film, the clips and images made the whole era seem more real to me. At first I couldn’t believe that the American people were so gullible and able to believe that taking these outrageous measures to be safe from the bomb. As the film when on, and I read the reading assignment, I started to think about how I would react if that were to happen today. I would believe what the government said would keep me safe because I would have no other safety. We are all helpless in eyes of war, but having some hope of safety is what kept everyone going.

Another aspect of both the film and the reading that I found to be very interesting was how upbeat and happy going everyone was suppose to be during this time. The reading talked about how the women were expected to keep the idea of normalcy, and I think that most Americans did this through making light of the situation. Watching smiling faces descend into these bomb shelters was both comical and quite sad to me. Like someone in our last discussion stated, these tactics and bomb fashions became pop culture. I believe that for many having these smiling faces and light way of looking at the war was a way to keep their own peace of mind.

I found the reading to be a great support to the film. I especially found the explanation of the underground school to be particularly amusing. I can’t imagine having these fallout shelters around us today. When I think about the era of the bomb scare, it almost feels like it was a whole different world then. While it may have seemed that way, it really isn’t that much different than our lives today. There is still the threat of war, still the possibility that we could be bombed at any moment, but we live our lives anyways. I think it was really important to watch this film and to read the text provided, not only to show us how things were, but to remind us we are the same as we were then, subject to the protection and trust of our government. I am really looking forward to the other films and reading, not only to learn about our past, but to understand our present.