Noah

-->

DIRECTOR: Darren Aronofsky  LEAD CAST: Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Emma Watson, Ray Wi nstone, Logan Lerman, Anthony Hopkins, Douglas Booth, Leo McHugh Carroll  SCREENWRITER:  Darren Aronofsky, Ari Handel  PRODUCER:  Scott Franlin, Darren Aronosky, Mary Parent, Arnon Milchan  EDITOR:  Andrew Weisblum

MUSICAL DIRECTOR:  Clint Mansell  GENRE: Drama, Classics, Biblical Epic  CINEMATOGRAPHER:  Matthew Libatique  DISTRIBUTOR: Paramount Pictures  LOCATION:  United States, Iceland, Mexico  RUNNING TIME:  138 minutes

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT:  4                

MORAL ASSESSMENT:   3                  

MTRCB RATING:  R-13

CINEMA RATING:  A 14

“He speaks to you. You have to trust that he speaks in a way that you can understand.”

If you are expecting a peaceful, colourful, biblical story of your childhood, do not go see Noah, the 2014 movie.   Noah (Russell Crowe) is a good family man who is disturbed by dreams about the destruction of the world. He seeks his grandfather Methuselah (Anthony Hopkins) who tells him that the Creator has chosen him for a special task. “He speaks to you. You have to trust that he speaks in a way that you can understand.” What he understood was man has become so wicked that the Creator wants to annihilate humanity and he has to save the innocent. He builds an ark, with his wife Naameh (Jennifer Connelly), his three sons Ham (Logan Lerman), Shem (Douglas Booth), Japheth (Leo McHugh Carroll), and adopted daughter Ila (Emma Watson). As the ark they are building nears its completion, with the help of the Watchers, heavenly beings doomed to the earth because of their disobedience, various animal species enter the ark. Tubal-Cain (Ray Winstone) arrives with his followers demanding they be allowed on board. The rains come in torrents, and the flood waters rise with the animals and Noah’s family safe in the ark, but the drama does not end.

Noah is a biblical epic, but it is a dark, brooding opus typical of Darren Aronofsky (see Black Swan, etc.). Aronofsky combines good biblical research, masterful storytelling and effective CGIs: the miraculous forest, the animals coming in droves to the ark, the terrifying but majestic waters of the Flood! Cinematography is at times visually stunning. The actors do not disappoint either. Russell Crowe inhabits Noah’s skin and exhibits his versatility as a tender father, a driven hero, a villain fighting his own demons, and trying to fulfil his mission as he understood it. Jennifer Connelly complements Crowe with her presence and heart. Anthony Hopkins still manages to deliver a believable Methuselah. Emma Watson and the young actors adequately portray their roles. Aronofsky takes a story we all know and presents it in a language 21^st century men and women can grasp. He has been accused of taking so much liberty with the Bible account. His critics forget that the story of the flood was passed on from one generation to another orally before it was ever written with all the embellishments at each retelling.

Aronofsky’s latest work is a Noah story for adults because it challenges you to think. The recurring flashback montage of creation confronts the viewer with the wickedness of humans. And this wickedness, this sin, is shown as the cause of all the sufferings in the world, personified by Tubal-cain and his army. Noah comes face to face with this evil reflected in his own heart. And yet he has been given the sacred trust to care for the earth and to serve the justice of the Creator. So focused was he on obeying this mission that he is willing to sacrifice not only himself but everything, including the love and lives of his family. Although God is never mentioned in the film (he is called Creator), he is present and involved in the lives of his people: he guides, provides for and saves them. Despairing of what he thought was a failed mission, Noah discovers the Creator as a God not only of justice but of mercy and second chances, of forgiveness and new beginnings.

The overtly environmentalist message is another criticism. But what is wrong about the reminder to “take only what we need”? Can we not see the rape of nature currently happening in this day and age?  Are the extreme violence in the fight scenes and intense emotional confrontations in the movie alien to our reality? Or is it because we do not want to listen? We so bombard our ears, our eyes, our minds, our hearts with what we want that we cannot perceive the new life offered to us: peace, freedom, joy? Maybe, this is the flood story that we need to hear.

Would that Ila’s words to Noah resonate in the hearts of all: “He chose you for a reason. The choice was put in your hands for a reason.”

Maybe this time

DIRECTOR: Jerry Lopez-Sineneng  LEAD CAST: Sarah Geronimo, Coco Martin, Ruffa Gutierrez

SCREENWRITER: Melai Mongue and Anton Santamaria  PRODUCER:  Star Cinema  GENRE: Romantic Comedy  LOCATION:  Antipolo/ Manila  RUNNING TIME:   1 hour: 55 mins.

Technical assessment: 2

Moral assessment: 3

CINEMA rating: V 13 (For viewers 13 years old and below with parental guidance)

                                                           

Magkakatagpo ang landas nina Steph (Sarah Geronimo) at Tonio (Coco Martin) isang tag-araw ng mag-volunteer si Steph sa isang outreach project sa baryo nila Tonio. Bagama’t hindi kaaya-aya sa simula ang kanilang pagtatagpo, unti-unti pa rin silang magkakapalagayan ng loob hanggang sa tuluyan silang ma-in love sa isa’t-isa. Ngunit sa di-inaasahang pagkakataon ay bigla na lamang maglalaho si Tonio nang walang paalam kay Steph. Mangingiibang-bayan pala ito para magtrabaho. Maiiwang wasak ang puso ni Steph ngunit ipagpapatuloy pa rin niya ang buhay at magiging matagumpay siyang executive sa Maynila. Makalipas ang halos pitong taon, hindi niya akalain na magtatagpong muli ang kanilang landas. Maaatasan si Steph  na ihanda si Tonio para bumagay sa mundo ni Monica (Ruffa Gutierrez), ang boss ni Steph na siya na ngayong kasintahan ni Tonio.

Isang pelikulang naka-kahon sa formula ng Star Cinema romantic comedy ang Maybe This Time. Kitang-kita ang kamay ng produksyon sa pagpapatakbo ng kuwento at tila hindi na kelangan pang tapusin ang pelikula at alam na ng manonood ang kakahinatnan ng kuwento. Walang gaanong bigat sa mga karakter. Hindi ang karakter ang naging sentro ng pelikula kundi ang mga artista mismo. Halatang ibinagay lahat sa kanila ang kuwento pero ang naging resulta pa rin ay isang kuwentong pinilit gawing bagay ang mga artista at karakter na hindi bagay sa isa’t-isa. Bagama’t pasado naman ang pag-arte ng mga pangunahing tauhan, hindi maitatangging maraming eksensang pawang alangan ang mga karakter sa isa’t-isa. Sa kabuuan, walang gaanong mararamdaman sa pelikula dahil hindi nito nahalukay ang mga tunay na damdamin ng mga tauhan. Ang lahat ay nasa alaala at dayalogo na lang. Hindi gaanong ramdam ang kilig dahil pawang pilit ang pagtatambal sa mga tauhan, pati ang mga sitwasyong kanilang ginagawalan ay pawang mga hindi naka-angkla sa matibay na realidad.  Salamat na lang sa ilang masasaya at nakakatuwang eksena. Kahit paano, may kaunting aliw pa rin itong naidulot sa manonood.

Ang Maybe This Time ay sumasalamin sa maraming komplikasyon ng pag-ibig. Pinaka-sentro ng pelikula ay ang mga nakapaligid sa dalawang taong nagmamahalan. Laging sinasabi ng pelikula na hindi sapat ang pagmamahal sa isa’t-isa ngunit dapat ding isaalang-alang ang lipunang madalas ay pumupuna at nanghuhusga. Maaring ito ay totoong nangyayari at tunay nga namang hindi nararapat sa lahat ng pagkakataon. Maliwanag ang mensahe ng pelikula kung  ang usapin ng mapagmatang lipunan ang titingnan. Hindi rin naman maaaring husgasan ang kahinaan ng mga karakter sa pagdedesisyon lalo pa’t ito ay idikta ng lipunan at mga taong itinuturing na nakatataas tulad ng magulang at amo. Ngunit kahanga-hanga pa rin ang pagsunod ng mga tauhan sa ngalan ng wagas na pagmamahal. Kita namang malinis ang mga hangarin nila sa pag-ibig…at madalas din ay isinasa-isang-tabi nila ang kanilang sarili alang-alang sa pamilya. Marahil ang nais lang sabihin ng pelikula ay isang simpleng mensahe na ang tunay na pag-ibig ay nakapaghihintay ng tamang panahon at pagkakataon.

The fault in our stars

DIRECTOR: Josh Boone  LEAD CAST:  Shailene Woodley, Ansel Elgort, Nat Wolff, Laura Dern, Sam Trammell, Willem Dafoe  SCREENWRITER:  Scott Neustadter, Michael H. Weber  PRODUCER:  Wyck Godfrey, Marty Bowen  EDITOR:  Robb Sullivan  MUSICAL DIRECTOR:  Mike Mogis, Nate Walcott  GENRE:  Drama, Comedy  CINEMATOGRAPHER:  Ben Richardson  DISTRIBUTOR:  20^th Century Fox  LOCATION:  United States, Amsterdam  RUNNING TIME:  126 minutes

Technical assessment:  3.5

Moral assessment:  3

MTRCB rating:  PG

CINEMA rating:  V 14

Sixteen-year-old Hazel Grace Lancaster (Shailene Woodley) suffers from thyroid cancer and lugs around an oxygen tank connected to the tube in her nose.  She doesn’t look like she’s dying tomorrow, and in fact is the least sick-looking person in the church-run support group of fellow cancer patients her mother (Laura Dern) insists she attend.  In one of those group sessions she dutifully drags herself to each week, she (literally) bumps into Augustus Waters (Ansel Elgort), himself in remission since he lost one leg to osteosarcoma.  Augustus is there to accompany and support his one-eyed buddy Isaac, in danger of also losing the other eye to cancer.  For self-confident total charmer Gus, it’s probably love at first sight, but the sensible and cautious Hazel will not warm up until after a few meetings.  Just as when the sun is shining on Hazel and Gus’s world, a thunderstorm strikes and dark clouds form.  Sounds corny?

A wag once called The fault in our stars “Twilight on chemo”, it being an ill-starred romance between two cancer-stricken teenaged virgins whose optimism no cancer can corrupt.  To use-your-head viewers, the story is too good to be real or believed in, even manipulative in its attempt to capture its target demographics—not cancer patients but adolescent girls. To use-your-heart moviegoers, it’s a story movies need to tell and people ought to believe in nowadays.  From the sniffling going on inside the theater it seems there are more “hearts” than “heads” in the audience.  Credit is due to the convincing performances of Woodley and Elgort (sister and brother in Divergent), and the all-too-powerful portrayal by Willem Dafoe (as author Van Houten) for giving this midyear tear-jerker its unique selling point as it competes against biggies and heavies (Maleficent, Noah, Edge of Tomorrow, How to train your dragon 2, Blended) for the multiplex crowd’s attention.

Hazel, who does not want anyone to fall in love with her lest her early demise hurt that person, ends up (spoiler coming) grieving over a loss.  “It not fair,” she cries.  As though having terminal cancer weren’t bad enough, these young lovers must be heartbroken, too?  But even though cancer sufferers may never find physical healing, The fault in the stars shows there is another kind of healing to be found in the devotion and support of parents, in the sympathy of the community, and—with the stars cooperating—in the love of the one person who’ll make the greatest difference in one’s short life.  The director’s depiction of the well-intentioned but rather contrived approach of the church group in extending support to Hazel and other terminally ill patients presents a challenge to mission-oriented church organizations to examine why their act fall short of expectations.  Parents are cautioned, too, to be armed with answers in case their teenagers ask about the two virgins pursuing the innocent first kiss to its logical conclusion without the benefit of marriage.  

How to train your dragon 2

Direction: Dean DeBlois;  Cast: Jay Banuchel, Cate Blanchett, Gerard Butler, Craig Ferguson, America Ferrera, Jonah Hill  Screenplay: Dean DebLois; Based on the book of Cressida Cowell  Producer: Bonnie Arnold;  Genre: Adventure/ Animation; Music: John Powell;  Distributor: Dreamworks Animation; Location: Berk Village  Running Time: 102 minutes 

Technical Aasessment:  4 

Moral assessment:  4  

MTRCB rating:  G 

CINEMA rating:  VA (Viewers of all ages) 

 

Five years after Hiccup (Jay Banuchel) has shown the Berks that men and dragons can peacefully co-exist as companions and friends, he faces the challenge of Stoick (Gerard Butler), chief of the tribe and father to him, to take over the leadership of his village. But Hiccup doubts he can handle the responsibility and prefers to explore the world with his dragon friend Toothless. In one of his adventures, Hiccup and his girlfriend, Astrid (Ferrera), stumble upon Eret (Kit Harrington) and his group of dragon trappers. The duo learn that Eret works for Drago, a cruel Viking who wants to take over Berk by assembling an army of dragons. Wanting to avoid conflict and protect the dragons, Hiccup ventures to confront Drago and talk him out of his plan amidst the objections of everyone else. Along the way, Hiccup is captured by Valka, a skilled dragon rider and tamer, who eventually happens to also be his long lost mother. As the story of Valka is revealed, so is Drago’s evil plans to conquer not only Berk but the entire mankind. When Stoick is accidentally killed by a hypnotized Toothless, Hiccup realizes he must stand up against Drago to fight for Berk, for the dragons and for peace. 

How to train your dragon 2 surpasses its predecessor in visual feats and animated action. The recreated world of dragons and Berk are such spectacular joys. John Powell’s scoring, although not as dynamic as the first movie, still brings shivers with the triumph and excitement of his powerful and playful music. While it is contextually deeper and more grounded, the pacing at times moves a little too slow—probably to allow the audience to digest the emotions served in family reunions and display of bravery. While it gave the storytelling intensity, it took away a pinch of fluidity into the action sequences. Valka’s character was supposed to provide the narrative highlight but her motivations and portrayal feel damp and underdeveloped.  However, the movie’s clever comedy and lovable characters makes it worth the hour’s queuing at the ticket booth. 

The movie offers so much inspiring moral worldviews. It tackles leadership and responsibility with Hiccup’s initial hesitation to fill in Stoick’s shoes and eventual realization that choices made for service and common good is what a true leader really is. Family plays a dominant theme in the film as well. We see a better father figure now in Stoick who accepts and respects his son’s choices although he still would defend and protect him at all cost. Bravery and selflessness is redefined with a father offering his life for his family and the people he serves. We see a loving and forgiving husband in him as well when without question or anger, he lets his love for his wife resurface after almost 20 years. And like its predecessor, the themes of peaceful co-existence and respect for others prevail. It reinforces that neither hostility nor domination over God’s creation are acceptable. We are all called to be stewards and to love unconditionally so that we can experience prosperity and peace as did the Berk’s when they learned to care for the dragons. However, parents are cautioned against bringing their very young children because some actions and dragons might be too scary for them. 

X-Men Days of Future Past

Director: Bryan Singer  Lead cast:  Hugh Jackman, Michael Fassbender, Peter Dinklage, Jennifer Lawrence, James McAvoy, Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart, Nicholas Hoult, Anna Paquin, Ellen Page  Screenplay:  Simon Kinberg  Music:  John Ottman Cinematography:  Newton Thomas Sigel Editor: John Ottman  Genre: Action, adventure, sci-fi, fantasy Distributor: 20^th Century Fox Location:  China, Paris, Washington DC  Running time: 131

Technical assessment:  3

Moral assessment:  3

MTRCB rating: PG

CINEMA Rating:  V14 

Kitty Pride (Ellen Page) uses her ability to project a person’s mind back in time to launch a  mission of changing the course of events that could have determined the fate of X-Men eternally.  One crucial step of the mission is to prevent Raven/Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from assassinating Sentinel leader Trask (Peter Dinklage) and not to make him a martyr for manipulating the future of mutants. This mission sends Logan’s (Hugh Jackman) consciousness back in time from 2023 to 1973.  Logan seeks and convinces Charles to cooperate in freeing Magneto (Michael Fassbender/Ian McKellen) from prison and be part of the mission.  With the help of fast-moving mutant Maximoff /Quicksilver (Evan Peters) who penetrates the prison cell in The Pentagon, Magneto is freed.  In Paris where the negotiation to end the Vietnam war is taking place, Raven impersonates a Vietnamese officer in order to kill Trask. 

            X-Men Days of the Future Past is a spectacular movie that offers exciting effects to the thrills of the viewers. The idea of travelling back in time has always been a treat to moviegoers. The plot development struggles a bit as always the problem with multiple characters. However, it still succeeds in keeping the focus of the story which is the mission.  The movie successfully weaves into a fresh conflict previous installment plots which rationally allows the resurrection of old characters. It helps if a viewer has seen the previous X-Men movies so they can build on the storyline of each character. There is not much to commend in acting except for Lawrence's flawless portrayal of an indignant woman searching for retribution and Dinklage’s depiction of a scientist consumed by the desire to eliminate those who are different. Viewers celebrate the charismatic connection between past and present Professor X and Magneto in McCoy and Fassbender (the younger version) and Stewart and Mckellan (the older versions). The director is an emotional storyteller with a keen sense of balancing post production techniques with the narrative.

            If there is one thing that works in this genre, it is the ability to explore the struggle to be human. There is tenderness and vulnerability as it outstandingly portrays heroism, wit, friendship and survival interjected in historical events; humor is also injected through the blindingly fast moves of Peters’ character, Quicksilver.  Amidst the consecutive superhero movies, this reimaging of X-Mens delightfully reminds viewers how overpowering this genre is.  Trust amidst betrayal, self-sacrifice against self-preservation, heroism in the face of extinction. These are some of the more prominent themes the film delivers.  But more importantly, it emphasizes that trust, sacrifice and heroism are weapons we can use to make our future better.  We might not have the capability of going back in time to rewrite history but destiny is not a pre-determined course.  Every single day, through our choices, we have the ability to redeem ourselves and make the world better for everyone. Charles Xavier beautifully says that no person is permanently evil as long as he has the desire and will to reform his life. While there are flawed moral discourses both on insisting on diplomacy, human nature and survival, the overall message drives home a strong point. The film has several scenes and material inappropriate for children below 13, parents are advised to provide adequate guidance.

Maleficent

Direction: Robert Stromberg;  Cast: Angelina Jolie, Elle Fanning, Sharlito Copley, Sam Riley, ; Story : based on Little Briar Rose by The Brothers Grimm; Screenplay: Linda Woolverton; Cinematography: Dean Semler;  Editing: Chris Lebenzon, Richard Pearson;  Music: James Newton Howard; Producers: Angelina Jolie, Joe Roth; Genre: Fantasy;  Location: Earth; Distributor: Walt Disney Motion Pictures Running Time: 97 minutes;

Technical Assessment : 3.5

Moral Assessment : 4

MTRCB Rating : G

Cinema Rating :  V 13 (Age 13 and below with Parental Guidance)

Young Maleficent is a sweet-natured powerful fairy protector of the magical creatures (Moors).  She befriends Stefan, a human boy who tries to steal a jewel from her world.  Although ambitious in his single minded desire to live in the king’s castle when he grows up, Stefan shows concern for Maleficent when he throws away his ring, his only possession, so he can touch her hand.  Over the years, Maleficent and Stefan grow closer.  He supposedly gives her a true love’s kiss before he disappears.  Meanwhile, the world of men and world of Moors coexisted until King Henry decided he needed to squelch the growing powers of the fairies.  An older Maleficent (Jolie) with her Moor allies stand up against the human army and mortally wounds King Henry. In retribution, the king decrees that anyone who kills Maleficent will inherit the throne. Apparently, Stefan (Copley) has found a way in the King’s court and betrays his old friend Maleficent so he can become king. Wounded emotionally and physically, Maleficent with the aide of Diaval (Riley) attends Stefan’s daughter’s christening to curse the infant as her revenge. Stefan asks the three pixies to hide Princess Aurora in the woods until her 16th birthday so she can outlive the curse. Meanwhile, Maleficent closely watches Aurora growing up. Eventually her hardened heart melts in fondness for the young girl’s innocence and kindness. Unfortunately, even she cannot lift the curse bestowed upon Aurora.  In her desire to save Aurora, she braves the iron thorns King Stefan has built around his castle to bring Prince Philip whom she believes will give true love’s kiss. But what is true love?

While professional movie critics complain about the flimsiness of the storyline, the movie remains powerfully engaging if only because of Jolie’s strong performance. Jolie owned Maleficent, as only she can be convincingly dark and light, cruel and loving, spiteful and selfless. Needless to say, all other portrayals paled in comparison. As delightful as Jolie’s interpretation of a betrayed woman whose heart is slowly turning to stone, are the visual effects and production design of the film. Seamless and imaginative, it recreates a magical yet disturbing world. Of course, the lazy narrative cannot be overlooked as it lends too many unanswered question on the characters and motives (How did Stefan manage to be in line for the throne? How dutiful is King Henry’s daughter that she needed to be her father’s successor’s wife? Why did Maleficent not use her magic to retrieve her wings?) But this is meant to be an adult interpretation of a fairy tale so certain narrative lapses can be tolerated in favor of the overall impact of the film.  Besides, how many times are the antagonists of literature given a chance to air their side of the story?  The movie tried to tone down violence but certain scenes may be scary for audiences below 7.

People who are consumed by their negative emotions eventually lose who they are. Even the purest, the most gentle or kindest, once hurt, can transform into a monster.  People in pain regress, withdraw and pretentiously revel in the misery they cause unto the people who hurt them. But they are not happy.  King Stefan and Maleficent represent pent up anger, bitterness and hatred.  While Stefan spiraled down desperation and mistrust, Maleficent opened up her heart and allowed love to heal her.  Cliché as it may sound, but truly love heals all wounds—even those that run deep and wide.  We only have to let go of the pain and learn from past mistakes. Maleficent even learned something more—the meaning of true love—a love that made her willing not only to lift her own curse but also stake her life just to save a loved one. It is also a refreshing statement that true love is not the feeling after meeting a good looking person for the first time but the willingness to change, to sacrifice and to be good looking in the inside for the sake of the beloved. While Maleficent may not become a cinematic classic, it still delivers strong messages on love, redemption and, of course, peaceful co-existence between humankind and nature.

Godzilla

Direction: Gareth Edwards; Cast: Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Ken Watanabe, Elizabeth Olsen, Juliette Binoche; Story : David Callaham; Screenplay: Max Borenstein; Cinematography: Seamus McGarvey;  Editing: Bob Ducsay;  Music: Alexandre Desplat; Producers: Thomas Tull, Jon Jashni; Genre: Action, Sci-Fi, ;  Location: Japan, USA; Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures Running Time: 123 minutes

Technical assessment:  3

Moral assessment:  3

MTRCB rating:  PG

Cinema rating:  V14

Sometime in the 50s, a hugged spiked creature rises from the waters as a bomb detonates. In 1999, an unknown skeleton of a huge creature and two hatched eggs are being investigated by Serizawa (Watanabe) and Graham (Hawkins) in a mining site in the Philippines. Then after, a series of seismic radioactivities has been observed in Japan. Power plant supervisor Joe Brody (Cranston) asks a team, led by his wife Sandra (Binoche), to investigate the activity, which unfortunately turns disastrous and kills the entire team. Fifteen years after, Joe’s son, Ford (Taylor-Johnson), an explosive officer of the US Navy, goes to Japan to bail his father out of prison after trespassing in his former plant which is now part of the quarantined area.  They discover that the quarantine is actually a cover up for a creature hatching inside a chrysalis and feeding off radiation. The chrysalis hatches and from it emerges a MUTO. (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organism) which apparently has been in communication with another creature in San Francisco. Meanwhile, Godzilla, the gigantic creature present during the 1954 bomb explosion, travels to the US to hunt the MUTOs.  Amidst an impending nuclear strike aimed to kill the three monsters before they create further damage, Ford tries to destroy the MUTO’s nest to allow Godzilla to successfully fight them.

While sci-fi disaster movies tend to bank on a human-interest story, Godzilla fails to connect its lead characters to its viewers mainly because of the stiff performances, one-dimensional characters and dreary script. What makes up for this is the brilliant art direction responsible for the creature design, special effects and monster fighting. Although director Edwards succeeds in keeping the suspense by showing only glimpses of the monsters until the 2^nd half, it lacks the tension of a monster-disaster movie.  Despite providing the mandatory large-scale destruction, the action is basically extended, repetitive and feels worn-out.  Godzilla tried but failed to offer anything new after six decades of countless remakes.

Godzilla presents two main themes: family and the consequences of abusing nature.  Family relationship is a primary motivating factor to survive and help others. Moreover, the welfare of the family becomes the ultimate goal in the decisions and actions of a person. In times of crisis, a person can forgo his personal motives and sacrifice for the sake of the ones he loves. On the other hand, the repercussions of human irresponsibility and greed results in monster-like situations that come back to bite society. More often, every single disaster and calamity is a direct cause of hunger for wealth and power. The movie reiterates that man will always lose against the wrath of nature. While Godzilla in this version is presented as a savior against the MUTO, he does so with much violence and gore with so many minutes dedicated to repeated destruction, explosion and human casualties.