I'll take 1956. I like my Godzilla movies dubbed. I'm old-school like that. Plus I liked Raymond Burr's performance in it, in particular his narration of events.
As Dark Wolf says, you do get it, UAG. The wounds of WW2, in which my father sered in the So.Pacific, made this presentation of the movie the practical one. And helped, as you point out, for we Americans to view the Japanese a little more sympathetically. This Godzilla series became rather silly at time later on, but this film is also surprisingly scary in parts, for a film of its era, I think.
Very well done. Especially appreciated the amount of time you devoted to exploring and explaining the US version, the work that went into it, and the intent and use it served. I never understood the ultra-purists' pearl-clutching reaction to it. It is quite watchable and faithful (as you say) to the original. The thing that really strikes me as odd---and something an editor in Japan could've helped with---are the shots of the puppet Godzilla. I never understood why it was even made or why the shots are in the film. They almost all stick out like the proverbial sore thumb. They don't match the "full-size" suit, and, worse, look exactly like what they are: close-ups of a toy. They really stick out especially because the footage of the man in suit Godzilla works so well, conveys immense size and creates a truly nightmarish, hellish feel. (As an aside: When I saw a quick tv trailer on tv for the film when I was all of 6 years old when it came out, I never went to see the film. The trailer included a shot of the puppet chomping on or pushing over the top of a building and I thought it looked terrible. I figured it was just a cheap nothing of a movie, and didn't see it for real until many years later, at which time I was surprised by how well-done it was. End of digression.) I mentioned elsewhere my opinion on your turn to a "funny voice" during the synopsis, so need not comment on that. But now I have to ask, what's with repeatedly cutting in photos of the comedian Steve Martin? Sorry, but...never mind. Better if I just say that things like that only cheapen your otherwise excellent presentation. I don't mean to be insulting, just offering an opinion about the aspect that, to me, is like coming across a piece of porkchop in an ice cream sundae...Just doesn't fit. But, thumbs up anyway!
Yeah, I kind of cringe at that myself nowadays. I was trying a little too hard to fit into the UA-cam mold and wasn’t confident enough in my presentation yet. I still enjoy doing the synopses, but I have been toning them down a little bit lately.
@@TheUnapologeticGeek Well, you have a great voice for these kinds of videos, and a lot of pertinent, well-organized things to say, and you do it in an admirably succinct way. Glad to hear about the "toning down", as, frankly, to me, the "toning up" tends to, uh, bring things down. Sorry. Am enjoying going through your videos. Good wishes.
You make excellent points about the movie and its place in history. TCM pointed out the NY Times called the Godzilla: King of the Monsters "terrible" when it came out. In the 1950s Sci-Fi was dismissed as kids stuff. A giant monster released or created by a nuclear explosion was just a way to toss in an explanation for the plot. Please consider "Godzilla Raids Again". It was released in the states either in the movies or on TV but apparently went off the radar screen until the past few years.
For many years I'd only seen the U.S. version, which didn't impress me. I purchased the Criterion Blu Ray and was stunned by the somber, dark tone of the original film. Seeing the authorities running a geiger counter over the children while the device goes nuts...and the mother telling her children not to worry, they will be their father soon...yikes. Great stuff.
I'm of the opinion a translation should stay as close as possible to the original, both in story and intent. However, I agree such a film would never have had the international impact this one did, both financially and pop-culture content. Personally, when it comes to giant monsters, I'm more fond of Daimajin. In a nutshell, that series takes "It's made of flesh, it's 300 feet tall, and our missiles have no effect!" and turns it to "It's made of stone, it's 30 feet tall, and our spears have no effect!" My suspension of disbelief starts to get wobbly in the former case.
@@TheUnapologeticGeek Eeeee! I can't wait! I have yet to find an outlet that will stream the Millennium series of Godzilla films, as I haven't seen them all. LOVE to get your take on the Monsterverse series of films.
So... how much of this review is you saying your own words, and how much is taken from David Kalat's audio commentary for KOTM 1956? I only ask because, well, so much of what you've been saying in this review is identical to Kalat's sentiments in his own audio commentary, although without the diatribes of only tangentially related material... which DOES make your review MUCH easier to sit through when compared to Kalat's commentary, in all honesty.
I'm not gonna lie. I did get a lot of information from Kalat's commentary--and some things, like the discussion of subtitles versus dubbing, are things I initially learned from it--but I'm careful to ensure that nothing factual I say comes from less than two sources, unless it's something simple like movie credits found on IMDb. That said, there are things I disagree with Kalat on, and there are plenty of things in this video that came from other places, including my own opinions and final analysis. For example, Kalat argues that the changes from the original are far more political than they are, and I bring up Godzilla 85 as a rebuttal to that. Bottom line: Kalat is the foremost expert on Godzilla, and his commentary of KOTM is the definitive discussion of it. It would be very hard to make a video without cribbing at least a little from him, and I don't pretend my little UA-cam video comes anywhere close to his analysis. But thank you for saying it's easier to sit through. :)
@@TheUnapologeticGeek You're welcome. Just as well, I suppose it's impossible for anyone who's read his books or listened to his commentaries to avoid cribbing from the man in some form.
I am glad we have both 1954 and 1956 versions. Take your pick.
1956 and 1954🙂
I’ll just stick to the original cut by Japan.
@@Jonathanest90s Yes, I prefer the original version myself.
Both stand as good Godzilla movies in their own right.
I'll take 1956. I like my Godzilla movies dubbed. I'm old-school like that. Plus I liked Raymond Burr's performance in it, in particular his narration of events.
As Dark Wolf says, you do get it, UAG. The wounds of WW2, in which my father sered in the So.Pacific, made this presentation of the movie the practical one. And helped, as you point out, for we Americans to view the Japanese a little more sympathetically. This Godzilla series became rather silly at time later on, but this film is also surprisingly scary in parts, for a film of its era, I think.
Very well done. Especially appreciated the amount of time you devoted to exploring and explaining the US version, the work that went into it, and the intent and use it served. I never understood the ultra-purists' pearl-clutching reaction to it. It is quite watchable and faithful (as you say) to the original.
The thing that really strikes me as odd---and something an editor in Japan could've helped with---are the shots of the puppet Godzilla. I never understood why it was even made or why the shots are in the film. They almost all stick out like the proverbial sore thumb. They don't match the "full-size" suit, and, worse, look exactly like what they are: close-ups of a toy. They really stick out especially because the footage of the man in suit Godzilla works so well, conveys immense size and creates a truly nightmarish, hellish feel. (As an aside: When I saw a quick tv trailer on tv for the film when I was all of 6 years old when it came out, I never went to see the film. The trailer included a shot of the puppet chomping on or pushing over the top of a building and I thought it looked terrible. I figured it was just a cheap nothing of a movie, and didn't see it for real until many years later, at which time I was surprised by how well-done it was. End of digression.)
I mentioned elsewhere my opinion on your turn to a "funny voice" during the synopsis, so need not comment on that. But now I have to ask, what's with repeatedly cutting in photos of the comedian Steve Martin? Sorry, but...never mind. Better if I just say that things like that only cheapen your otherwise excellent presentation. I don't mean to be insulting, just offering an opinion about the aspect that, to me, is like coming across a piece of porkchop in an ice cream sundae...Just doesn't fit.
But, thumbs up anyway!
Yeah, I kind of cringe at that myself nowadays. I was trying a little too hard to fit into the UA-cam mold and wasn’t confident enough in my presentation yet.
I still enjoy doing the synopses, but I have been toning them down a little bit lately.
@@TheUnapologeticGeek Well, you have a great voice for these kinds of videos, and a lot of pertinent, well-organized things to say, and you do it in an admirably succinct way. Glad to hear about the "toning down", as, frankly, to me, the "toning up" tends to, uh, bring things down. Sorry. Am enjoying going through your videos. Good wishes.
You make excellent points about the movie and its place in history. TCM pointed out the NY Times called the Godzilla: King of the Monsters "terrible" when it came out. In the 1950s Sci-Fi was dismissed as kids stuff. A giant monster released or created by a nuclear explosion was just a way to toss in an explanation for the plot. Please consider "Godzilla Raids Again". It was released in the states either in the movies or on TV but apparently went off the radar screen until the past few years.
It’s on my list. It will probably be the next Godzilla movie I do, since I might as well go in order!
Wow I guess the times really should post a retraction and apologies to the film makers. Never too late
Enjoyed the video but one correction: Raymond Burr was not in Fritz Lang’s M. He was in the 1951 American remake.
Ah, good catch! You are correct, sir.
Thank you for getting it. Tired of the "experts" and the fanboys trashing this version of "Gojira."
Finally someone who gets it.
For many years I'd only seen the U.S. version, which didn't impress me. I purchased the Criterion Blu Ray and was stunned by the somber, dark tone of the original film. Seeing the authorities running a geiger counter over the children while the device goes nuts...and the mother telling her children not to worry, they will be their father soon...yikes. Great stuff.
Ishiro Honda also directed the 1963 film Matango Attack of the Mushroom People.
More Godzilla Please.
Your channel is addictive
Fabulous review of the greatest monster film ever, Raymond Burr did an excellent job in this movie !!!!!
Geek,
Very well done and highly informative.
So glad to have discovered this channel. Excellent analysis
Very nice! My favorite Godzilla movie is Godzilla vs. Megalon, any chance of doing a video on that one?
Good choice! That’s the Godzilla movie I grew up with. We had this beat-up VHS copy, and I’d watch it over and over, much to my brothers’ annoyance.
That's my favorite Godzilla movie too!
The 1954 Gojira is The best version!
I'm of the opinion a translation should stay as close as possible to the original, both in story and intent. However, I agree such a film would never have had the international impact this one did, both financially and pop-culture content.
Personally, when it comes to giant monsters, I'm more fond of Daimajin. In a nutshell, that series takes "It's made of flesh, it's 300 feet tall, and our missiles have no effect!" and turns it to "It's made of stone, it's 30 feet tall, and our spears have no effect!"
My suspension of disbelief starts to get wobbly in the former case.
Very good analysis.
Maybe it would be better if we never saw Godzilla in the US? Huh?
Yes! Yes! Yes! More Godzilla, please?
That's all I need to hear! I will get to work on a new Godzilla movie soon...
@@TheUnapologeticGeek Eeeee! I can't wait! I have yet to find an outlet that will stream the Millennium series of Godzilla films, as I haven't seen them all. LOVE to get your take on the Monsterverse series of films.
Now talk about Shin Godzilla!
Shin Godzilla is incredible. It’s honestly one of my favorite Godzilla movies, which is saying a lot.
Great review
So... how much of this review is you saying your own words, and how much is taken from David Kalat's audio commentary for KOTM 1956? I only ask because, well, so much of what you've been saying in this review is identical to Kalat's sentiments in his own audio commentary, although without the diatribes of only tangentially related material... which DOES make your review MUCH easier to sit through when compared to Kalat's commentary, in all honesty.
I'm not gonna lie. I did get a lot of information from Kalat's commentary--and some things, like the discussion of subtitles versus dubbing, are things I initially learned from it--but I'm careful to ensure that nothing factual I say comes from less than two sources, unless it's something simple like movie credits found on IMDb. That said, there are things I disagree with Kalat on, and there are plenty of things in this video that came from other places, including my own opinions and final analysis. For example, Kalat argues that the changes from the original are far more political than they are, and I bring up Godzilla 85 as a rebuttal to that. Bottom line: Kalat is the foremost expert on Godzilla, and his commentary of KOTM is the definitive discussion of it. It would be very hard to make a video without cribbing at least a little from him, and I don't pretend my little UA-cam video comes anywhere close to his analysis. But thank you for saying it's easier to sit through. :)
@@TheUnapologeticGeek You're welcome. Just as well, I suppose it's impossible for anyone who's read his books or listened to his commentaries to avoid cribbing from the man in some form.