KENPACHIRO SATSUMA (born YASUAKI MAEDA 1947-Died December 16th 2023,at 76). Japanese actor and stuntman who portrayed Godzilla in the Heisei films, from 1984 to 1995. Born in Kagoshima Prefecture, Satsuma began his acting career in the 1960s with small roles in samurai films. In 1971 he was offered the role of the smog monster antagonist Hedorah in Godzilla vs. Hedorah, opposite Haruo Nakajima as Godzilla. He went on to play Gigan in two further Godzilla films. When Nakajima retired from the Godzilla role in 1972, substitutes were hired between 1973 and 1975 until Satsuma took over permanently in 1984. His portrayal took the character away from the humour of the character's portrayals over the past decades, returning to the more animalistic Godzilla persona of the original 1954 film.Kenpachiro Satsuma - Wikipedia
35 notes
·
View notes
I Have Become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds
(Spoilers for Oppenheimer)
The original 1954 Godzilla can best be described as an anti-nuclear war film...that just happens to have a giant monster in it.
When you get right down to it, Godzilla himself was originally a big metaphor for the atom or hydrogen bomb. A big, unstoppable harbinger of death that once unleashed, it's only a matter of time before destruction follows. And you have to remember, it was made by victims of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings not even a decade after. So any allusions to those attacks are pretty deliberate on their choice. You cannot simply separate Godzilla from the fires that birthed him.
Just like how you can't simply separate J. Robert Oppenheimer from the atrocities his weapons wrecked.
It's become kind of a trend with movie goers to frame Oppenheimer as a pseudo prequel to the Godzilla series. Particularly with the announcement by Toho of Godzilla Minus Zero later this year which deals with the immediate aftermath of the bombings which sounds like a natural continuation of the events of Oppenheimer. Course there's the obvious difference between a biopic and a sci-fi monster movie.
But remember how I mentioned that the original Godzilla was an anti-nuclear war film that happened to have a giant monster? Cause in many ways, that logic does apply here. And as a result, both films do carry a lot of the same themes and tone despite being released over 50 years apart.
For one, there's a sense of dread with both films in regards to the bombings. With Oppenheimer, it's a feeling of unease as the USA pushes for the continuation of the Manhattan Project despite the surrendering of the Nazis. It was always there, but it increases the closer we get to the bombing, such as when Oppenheimer and his staff grow increasingly nervous to the testing, the patriotic fervor that takes over when it goes well, and the shot of the Fat Man and Little Boy being carted of with Oppenheimer and Teller contemplating whether the bombing will truly bring world peace.
Same thing with Godzilla. We have an overpowering sense of dread as the existence of a huge, unstoppable monster begins to dawn on everyone. How nothing seems to work against it and the creeping horror of it coming closer and closer to Japan without any viable solution being found. With Oppenheimer, we know the end story even if the characters don't, and the anticipation comes from the knowledge of the carnage that their actions will bring being at contrast with what's seen on screen. In Godzilla, the dread comes from being the recipient of that horror, and the characters scrambling to find any sort of solution in the face of unrelenting fury.
It comes to a head with the final scenes of the film, with Oppenheimer and Einstein grimly wondering if the invention of the atom bomb might've just spelled the doom for the entire planet, while Dr. Yamane monologuing about how chances are there's another Godzilla out waiting to be awakened by more nuclear testing. It's that sort of apocalyptic dread which binds the two films together, with the different perspectives allowing two different approaches to the same anti-nuclear warfare conclusion. Both from the people who made the bomb, and the people who were bombed.
And the similarities don't end there. We do get a parallel with Oppenheimer and the fictional character of Dr. Serizawa, which perfectly demonstrates the sort of differential approaches both films take. Both view their respective forces (the atom bomb or the Oxygen Destroyer) as having the potential to do so much good, not necessarily for warfare but more as an energy source for the betterment of mankind.
The difference is how both are exposed to World War II. Oppenheimer is distant, never being on the frontlines and only hearing about Hitler's death via the news. As a result (and part of an overarching character flaw), he never really considers the ramifications of building an atomic bomb. He's uneasy with it, but he'll try to justify himself by saying it saved the US a costly invasion and the bombing scaring the rest of the world off from even attempting to replicate his invention (it didn't, much to his horror). Serizawa was a soldier for the Japanese army before becoming a scientist. He's absolutely horrified by his creation, knowing for a damn fact that people will use it for a weapon, that it could possibly cause a devastating arms race, and is determined to keep it under wraps until he can find a nondestructive use for it. He only uses it to destroy Godzilla when the threat of the latter is undeniable, but even then takes his own life lest he risk his knowledge being used to create another one.
Both characters came to the same conclusion: Oppenheimer realizing he may have just doomed the world far too late and Serizawa being wracked with fear of what would happen if the Oxygen Destroyer was deployed too liberally. Again, it's the difference between the two that highlights how each film handles the same message. One only realizes what he's created until it's far too late, the other is filled with dread by the inevitability of that creation being used for lethal purposes.
So in many ways...yeah. Oppenheimer can be seen as a prequel to Godzilla, and both can be viewed as companion pieces towards one another. Of course, one ultimately still is a giant monster film, the other a historical biopic. But when the tones are so similar and themes so consistent, it's quite telling that you can easily see the two as being two sides of the same coin.
After all, the original Godzilla was an anti-nuclear war film that features a giant monster. Oppenheimer is that same premise but without the monster and from the opposite perspective. Yet both share the same apocalyptic message.
70 notes
·
View notes
Hey friends! If you happen to be at Naka-Kon today, stop by my panel KAIJU JEOPARDY! today at 5:30!! Like the name suggests, it’s a game show testing your knowledge of kaiju and the giant monster movie genre! Prizes will be awarded to the contestants! This is my favorite panel to run, so give it a shot!!
It’s on Saturday in Cottonwood 3 at 5:30 pm. It’ll be a blast!!
Kaiju Jeopardy art by Alex Alcanter Illustrations
55 notes
·
View notes