The cultural implications of Godzilla vs Kongs Tropes

[Jetty_Jags]

Back when Godzilla Vs Kong came out, NPR had a discussion about the film (here’s the source -https://www.npr.org/transcripts/982277005). One topic that got particular attention was GvK’s tackles use of specific tropes. While the tonality of an American adaption of a Godzilla film (especially considering the role the us played in the events which lead to the franchise’s origin) is certainly a topic brought up in the discussion (one we’ve had in this website many times), they also raise questions about the following,

You know, should we have a Japanese guy driving a mecha? Should we have a native child who's referred to as an Inuit in the film as this conduit to the great savage beast? Should we still be doing these things in our film? I think we should, in fact, maybe try to do a little bit better.

one other topics that has been brought up elsewhere but I feel is related is the films validation of the conspiracy theorist hero, in an age of increasing misinformation.

So what is the responsibility of the monster verse, GvK, and future Americanizations of tokusatsu properties on handling certain genre tropes?

[Gojira1604]

I hold them responsible to not write in any more fortune cookie jokes.

[Spuro]

I hold them responsible to not write in any more fortune cookie jokes.

Really bad fortune cookie jokes.

[LSD Jellyfish]

I listened to the podcast in it's entirety, and I think Walter Chaw makes a lot of fantastic points. Despite this, I'm not quite sure what he's specifically referring to (in regards to Inuits and Jia). Yeah, Jia is a member of a fictional indigenous tribe, but she's not Kong's friend because she's a magical native; Kong can relate to her because he lost his family too. Likewise, Jia is one of the few people that has compassion for Kong. Chaw brings up Serizawa's son, and in a Japanese context I wouldn't see an issue, but from an American perspective I can see why that might be a bit odd. However, I think he's missing the fact that the character is an insert of a famous Japanese actor to more widely appeal to a Japanese audience. Maybe there's issues with that, I don't know.

Chaw really gets to some of my overarching problem with the Monsterverse, with KOTM's being the worst of it. The MV, despite some of the excellent stuff it does, tries way to hard to be crowd pleasing and mostly avoid a lot of the stuff that the Godzilla franchise actually tries to address. I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but, it's like the fortune cookies and washing Asian identities with a large brush (KOTM) as well as bad takes on nukes (G14, KOTM etc).

However, I don't think any of this was malicious, but Walter Chaw brings up a great point; there's so much world building and exposition. It sort of feels like between these movies, writers were focused far more on that, to varying degrees, and some characters and groups got shafted or mildly stereotyped. One thing that he brings up is how the films never focus on the destruction or the human lives. I think G14 does a lot, but I see that in KOTM and GvK. What Chaw is really speaking to is that the MV totally lacks the human ethos of older Godzilla films. It lacks the ability to really say anything substantial, and is more focused on spectacle than anything, which is fine in some ways. If you watch the Showa films, none of them are overly concerned with lore or history. Yes, we occasionally get snippets of interesting ideas and world building, but mostly it's humans reacting to unknown entities.

For all of it's faults, think about how Godzilla Raids Again takes it's time to establish how people in Japan are horrified with the possibility of the return of Godzilla, and the impact on the fishing industry. Think about how the boss, after everything is destroyed, resounds that he'll rebuild it. I'm not saying the Godzilla series is/needs to be humanistic, but rather it usually takes the time to show the impact these monsters/aliens have on people.

The Monsterverse really lacks that underlying reaction, and it's something I don't expect to improve. I think G14 is the most successful of the bunch philosophically, but it feels afraid, as a modern American blockbuster to dig deeper. Nuclear testing (Marshall Islands), atomic reactors (Janeira), atomic waste sites (Nevada) and the idea of nuclear weapons being an unknown power that humanity can't really control are all floated, but take a backseat to a story about a man trying to save his family and it muddles it's own message often.

[king_ghidorah]

I think Walter Chaw is a pretty hateful, race baiting bigot personally and I don’t put a lot of stock in what he says.

[LSD Jellyfish]

I think Walter Chaw is a pretty hateful, race baiting bigot personally and I don’t put a lot of stock in what he says.

I’m honestly completely unfamiliar with his criticism or takes outside of this specific issue, so maybe you’re right. As said in my message, I took issue with his commentary on Jia, and Ren Serizawa.

But looking beyond those specific, detail oriented, issues of race/whatever, I think there’s a lot of interesting sentiments to be touched upon in regards to his commentary on the series lacking ground-level human destruction and effect.

(Keep in mind while reading I’m not trying to be combative, I listened to an NPR podcast where someone spoke and was given little pushback and I can just appreciate some alternative takes; curious what you all have to say).

[eabaker]

Yeah, Jia is a member of a fictional indigenous tribe, but she's not Kong's friend because she's a magical native; Kong can relate to her because he lost his family too. Likewise, Jia is one of the few people that has compassion for Kong.

Sure, but there's a distinction between in-universe explanations and the extra-textual roots of those story decisions. While the story tells us Kong and Jia connect because they both lost their families, the largely white storytellers still opted to make that character a member of a (fictional) indigenous tribe, which (whether by design or not) plays into the "magical native" trope.

[king_ghidorah]

These are really gross, bad faith readings on popcorn movies in my opinion.

[TheLastGezora]

These are really gross, bad faith readings on popcorn movies in my opinion.

I agree, broadly. I really think you'd have to already be looking for these kinds of issues to find them. It sounds like the commentator just wanted something to be mad about and latched onto these ideas.

Jia can talk to Kong because she's deaf and there's the (perhaps false) perception that Great Apes can communicate through sign language. She has a connection to Kong because she's from the same island as Kong. It isn't a "magical native" trope because there's nothing magic about it.

Also... is it offensive to have a Japanese person piloting a mech? I have literally never heard this trope before. I thought Ren Serizawa's contribution to the plot was lazy and shoehorned but I imagine any decision to have a Japanese mech pilot is just paying homage to the mecha genre's connection to Japan.

[eabaker]

I think any story put out for mass consumption merits some measure of analysis in terms of the themes and conventions it presents. Nobody's condemning the work, just discussing its place in a broader cultural landscape.

[king_ghidorah]

It just seems like stretching and anyone having an issue with the depictions of people in GvK in any broader terms than good guy vs bad guy is probably more indicative of the baggage you’re possibly carrying into the film than it is indicative of society or the film as a whole.

And I’m not saying that looking deeper into art mediums is folly. It can be rich, rewarding and it’s possible to extrapolate a lot about society at times from doing this sort of thing.

But GvK ain’t it in my opinion.

That’s like me writing a treatise on Marxism after watching a Bay Transformers film.

[eabaker]

You don't think that studying the market forces that lead to the creation and the success of the Michael Bay Transformers films could be a window into any kind of insights on contemporary capitalist practices and phenomena?

The ability of the work to reflect and play a role in broader culture is not directly proportional to the depth or artistic aspirations or value of the work. Something incredibly shallow can still carry a message, whether by design or otherwise (see for example 99% of American political discourse). Even if those messages are in a sense mirages created by proximity to cultural events, the fact that those specific mirages appear to us still tells us something about the moment we're living in.

[LSD Jellyfish]

Sure, but there's a distinction between in-universe explanations and the extra-textual roots of those story decisions. While the story tells us Kong and Jia connect because they both lost their families, the largely white storytellers still opted to make that character a member of a (fictional) indigenous tribe, which (whether by design or not) plays into the "magical native" trope.

That’s true.

In response to some of the criticisms/observations by other members, I’d just like to state that at no point does Chaw state,”X is offensive”. He’s just pointing out tropic observations, which I think are totally up for conversation. One thing that’s funny is he pretty much point blank brings up that he liked and had a lot of fun with the film.

It’s also funny because the other speaker, Christina Tucker, brings up a very interesting point that the MV films lack the sadism that other modern monster movies have. Sure, Kong squishes the lady, and MG kills it’s creator, but people aren’t torn apart horrifically like they are in Jurassic World. It’s something I didn’t notice about the MV until she brought it up, and I think this is the power of listening to other peoples observations (regardless of whether you ultimately agree with them or not).

[_JNavs_]

I think Conspiracy theory heroes still have their place in modern society. Especially now where incriminating or downright disgusting information can be hidden through all kinds of means.

Without getting into any political centric conspiracy rabbit holes (as I find them incredibly short-sighted) I believe characters like Rorschach or, to a lesser intensity, like Bernie from GvK show us that there is truth to be discovered even when the big Umbrella corporations (no pun intended) hide it from the masses.

The stereotype will always be "Conspiracy Theorists belong in a psych ward" until it's "Did you see the breaking news last night? Who could've seen that coming?", so I don't think we need to worry about glorifying an already stepped-on societal point of view.

[Major sssspielberg!]

I think that discussions like these are really important. It's a hard process to adapt society to be more inclusive and grow beyond archaic tropes. I think the tropes discussed were done in a relatively benign way in GvK. Focusing on Jia, while it might count as "magical native" that's not what I thought of with her. I was more impressed with their handling of her as a deaf person, down to micing the sounds of sign language. Serizawa Jr. piloting MG was just the logical way to take his story, especially assuming he originally had more meat to his arc.
Either way, the more we talk about things like this, the more the next generation can learn what to do different when they take the reigns of storytelling.

[TheLastGezora]

I think any story put out for mass consumption merits some measure of analysis in terms of the themes and conventions it presents. Nobody's condemning the work, just discussing its place in a broader cultural landscape.

I don't disagree that media deserves analysis but I think there's a difference between analyzing the themes and ideas present in the movie and attempting to root out "problematic content", even where it doesn't necessarily exist, to complain. Saying "I think we can do better" strikes me as being a condemnation, aside from being incredibly smug, and I'd say the base of this argument is built on bad faith.

It’s also funny because the other speaker, Christina Tucker, brings up a very interesting point that the MV films lack the sadism that other modern monster movies have. Sure, Kong squishes the lady, and MG kills it’s creator, but people aren’t torn apart horrifically like they are in Jurassic World. It’s something I didn’t notice about the MV until she brought it up, and I think this is the power of listening to other peoples observations (regardless of whether you ultimately agree with them or not).

I would say the MV does have this, but only in Kong: Skull Island. A man is dismembered by flying pteradon monsters, another is impaled on a spider's leg, several are swallowed whole by the Skullcrawlers, and Kong himself rips out a monster's guts from its mouth. I think it's difficult to convey this sort of violence in the other films because the scale is just so much larger than in K:SI. It's hard to have a monster dismembering a person when that person is smaller than the monster's fingertip.

[UltramanGoji]

I think the more insensitive Native topic to discuss from GVK isn't Jia's character but the fact that an entire population of indigenous peoples that was given a pretty substantial spotlight in a previous film is unceremoniously fridged off-screen for no real apparent reason other than to get Kong off of Skull Island.

[eabaker]

I think any story put out for mass consumption merits some measure of analysis in terms of the themes and conventions it presents. Nobody's condemning the work, just discussing its place in a broader cultural landscape.

I don't disagree that media deserves analysis but I think there's a difference between analyzing the themes and ideas present in the movie and attempting to root out "problematic content", even where it doesn't necessarily exist, to complain. Saying "I think we can do better" strikes me as being a condemnation, aside from being incredibly smug, and I'd say the base of this argument is built on bad faith.

And I think - ironically - that you're reading thing into this analysis (perhaps more in tone than in content?) that isn't there.

[Fermix]

You know, should we have a Japanese guy driving a mecha? Should we have a native child who's referred to as an Inuit in the film as this conduit to the great savage beast?

This reads like someone that has reduced these characters to their racial identity in order to make their point. Jia's people have a historical and spiritual connection with Kong, and Jia serves as the only resemblance of his home throughout this entire ordeal so it makes sense they would develop a relationship. It's harder to make a case justifying Ren since I feel like the movie stomped out most of his backstory, but there is clearly a deep-rooted hatred for Godzilla in this man whether its related to his father's death, or his father's choice to spend more time focused on Godzilla than his own son. Focusing only on their nationality is to miss the forest for the trees.

[king_ghidorah]

I will say it’s really weird for me to see people dismiss the whole movie because of Bernie and the real life connection to conspiracy theorists. That’s pretty indicative of the times….it’s shallow and reeks of tribalism…

In the 90s we had a pop culture phenomenon, the X Files, dedicated to these sorts of self appointed outcasts. It wasn’t dangerous and while real world people of this ilk can be dangerous or off putting, in the context of a film or tv show they can be heroes fighting against the establishment.

I hardly think anyone sees Bernie and decides to take up a real world crusade of arguing the case for an actual Hollow Earth or titans. In the movie, this is all just short hand for the guy is a little out there and unconventional.

Writing him off feels more like the reactionary impulse of a teenager. Someone who sees life in black and white.

And it’s a damned shame that I’ve seen some adults in the room stoop to that level with this movie as well.