Blue Christmas (1978)

[Major sssspielberg!]

Does anyone know where I could find a link to this flick? I've been wanting to see Blue Christmas for like 10 years. I'm willing to do manual labor, chauffeur duties, and/or crappy backup vocals on your next Christmas OR Chanukah album (but not both)

PM me. I will upload it for you.

Since there is no legal way of watching this film in the West, I have no remorse sharing a link. Same goes for every Toho movie that falls into that category (so like 90% of their catalogue).

Thank you, somebody just shot me the link but I really appreciate your willingness to help a guy out.

[Omegazilla]

Looks like a pretentious bore that servers to only arouse ignorant virtue signalers. The theme of using aliens as an allegory for discrimination has been done to death.I'd watch it to confirm my beliefs if it wasn't so hard to find.

Sorry, but a really shitty take, especially considering you haven’t seen the movie. There’s a fair amount of drama and mystery, none of which is too hard to follow, or like “omg look how special we are for having this message” so it’s incorrect to call it pretentious. As a straight alone drama film, ignoring some of my own analyses it works well as a film with a build up of plot and conclusion to said plot. It’s also well-shot and looks visually nice, and has some great acting and music.

In addition, while I made modern references to current events, considering things like McCarthyism, Japanese Internment Camps, the holocaust, the stuff with unit 713 and many other atrocities, it’s not like the film is portraying some event that is clearly solely fictional and beyond something that’s capable of happening in order to push some sort of “agenda”. Considering most art if reflective of society, I don’t understand where this modern mindset of “film was inspired by real life events, or may actually tie into something”=bad.

You are in no position to dictate what is a "shitty" take or not. I made no secret I haven't seen this movie but would like to. There are movies with boring themes that I still can like over all because they excel in other areas which I already listed earlier and this very well could be one of them if somebody could provide a link to see it because it seems near impossible to find. Some of your references to today are unjustified but I understand that is not this movie's fault. The movie very clearly has an agenda to some degree by invoking Adolf Hitler. How much more obvious than that can you get? Perhaps I am just biased because Hitler is overused to unjustified comparisons in modernity but it is still cheap and says a lot about the theme.

I'm sure Ishiro Honda was just "virtue signaling" everybody with the original Godzilla, The Mysterians and etc.

That being said, it's nice being in the club of actually having seen the movie

No Godzilla was actually relatively original at the time. While I don't find it "deep" or "philosophical" like some do, it definitely works from a thematic standpoint. It didn't do anything glaringly obvious like invoke Adolf Hitler or show Hiroshima or Nagasaki after they got nuked either. When you try to shove obvious real life catastrophies that lack subtlety it crosses the line between subtle and clever allegories to preaching.

[Space Hunter M]

You are in no position to dictate what is a "shitty" take or not.

Says the person who uses the dog whistle term "virtue signaling" unironically.

And don't tell me the "radioactive tuna" line in the original Godzilla had nothing to do with the Lucky Dragon No. 5 incident just eight months earlier. Or the woman talking directly about Nagasaki in the same breath.

But I'm sure Honda wasn't pushing an agenda.

[Omegazilla]

You are in no position to dictate what is a "shitty" take or not.

Says the person who uses the dog whistle term "virtue signaling" unironically.

And don't tell me the "radioactive tuna" line in the original Godzilla had nothing to do with the Lucky Dragon No. 5 incident just eight months earlier. Or the woman talking directly about Nagasaki in the same breath.

But I'm sure Honda wasn't pushing an agenda.

Truth hurts eh? This is starting to veer off-topic so when it comes to Godzilla I'll keep it very brief. I don't think you understood my last post so I'll requote it so you can better understand what I meant. Godzilla was subtle in that it didn't

show Hiroshima or Nagasaki after they got nuked either. When you try to shove obvious real life catastrophies that lack subtlety it crosses the line between subtle and clever allegories to preaching.

Also I never said Honda wasn't pushing an agenda, he clearly was. The film was clearly anti nuclear weapon themed, but I don't mind it because it was done very well. Guess what, I enjoy Gojira a lot, even though I disagree with it's main theme. I don't see how Blue Christmas is an exception either once I get to see it (and possibly enjoy it) in the near future. So to sum it up while I can't say I enjoy "having an agenda" that doesn't mean the movie is garbage if it does, and can in fact be the opposite.

Not sure why some of you are getting defensive on my views on the "discriminated aliens" themes. That was always a pervasive Science Fiction theme and always will be. So often it is stale from my perspective. I've even enjoyed quite a few examples of movies/shows and all that have that theme because it seemed to be done better. Better meaning as in more subtle and not invoking the big bad Adolf Hitler in a movie where people that are "different" appear to be getting rounded up. So I guess I should be more clear, it isn't the fact that aliens are being used as an allegory in of itself that I facepalm at. More like how it is juxtaposed with such an obvious real world example and alongside the fact that the theme itself has been overused even before 1978. It is basically telling me "See? These people are acting like Adolf Hitler! Hitler did the same thing that is being depicted here! You got that audience?" Now if that doesn't bother you, great, more power to you, but I don't like it when blatant statements like that are shoved in my face because it comes off as preachy and detracts from the movie itself. As for the other content in the movie I can't really say much more than what I already have until I get to see it (which is hopefully soon), and get to see more than just what the theme or overall plot is. It definitely seems interesting enough to at the very least give it a full watch.

[Space Hunter M]

Guess what, I enjoy Gojira a lot, even though I disagree with it's main theme.

So it's fine to let science build superweapons that enable the easy massacre of millions. Gotcha.

[Voyager]

Watching arguements over Virtue signalling and Japanese movies is really fun.

[Omegazilla]

Guess what, I enjoy Gojira a lot, even though I disagree with it's main theme.

So it's fine to let science build superweapons that enable the easy massacre of millions. Gotcha.

If you wanna make a thread about "should the atomic bomb have been used" be my guest as you probably don't understand the context on how desperate things were as much as you think you do.

I can see how my original post could be misinterpreted for for attacking the movie after rereading it. I will admit I worded it very poorly in a rush. It does seem to give off the vibe dismissing the whole movie, which is not what I wanted to convey. The mere fact there is even a discussion about this means the film likely accomplished some degree of what it wanted in discussing this stuff. It also has me wanting to watch it and the fact I am even bothering discussing it right now shows that it does have that allure going for it. However, until then all I can really say about it is that is uses an obvious juxtaposition that sounds too preachy and that the premise of its narrative is how something as odd as having blue blood should be handled by society. I know the OP suggested it hints with ambiguity opposing viewpoints like thinking the government is justified but from what I am gathering invoking Hitler and the Holocaust accentuates one side of the equation. Something like that doesn't mean it is bad, but it is enough for me to want to take off points until I see it and post an actual review and/or an updated take on it.

So to elaborate why I want to "take off points" over something like that , suppose for a moment this movie was nonfiction and this were to happen in real life. How should a government respond to a situation like that? Do nothing because it is unfair to the "victims" with different blood colour? How would you know it isn't indicative of a biological disease or another unseen threat that seems harmless? For example, what if it were the first symptom that is seemingly benign but actually is very deadly and could possibly wipe out all life on the planet after a certain period of time? There's a fine line between concentration camps and dangerous passivity on a potential threat. This is what I mean when I say I don't like an obvious stance shoved in my face. Instead of letting you fill in the blanks and consider stuff like that it narrows the topic down to a single view point. Whereas if there were more subtlety, they can suggest a certain viewpoint or certainly lean one way, but it could be interpreted multiple ways and you can make the connection yourself. For example, Shin Godzilla didn't shove Fukishima down my throat, yet it clearly had a message about the Japanese government and how they handled disasters. Despite this, it didn't directly cite something obvious like the Fukishima disaster itself or the government officials that were involved in the response to it in order to make you think one way about them. Instead it took it's stance with dialogue and other exposition. Again that doesn't mean the movie as a whole is bad, it is just a major con for me, a pet peeve if you will especially with the likes of Adolf Hitler.

Watching arguements over Virtue signalling and Japanese movies is really run.

I am going to agree with that. Or else I wouldn't be here.

[LSD Jellyfish]

Jesus, are you still on about a movie you haven’t seen? You realize how much of a big clown you look like right?

[Voyager]

Is Omega getting clowned on? I gotta see this.

[LSD Jellyfish]

Is Omega getting clowned on? I gotta see this.

I mean it seems incredibly foolish to keep arguing and engage in an argument about something you haven’t seen. If he watched it and didn’t like it, that would be fine, but it just seems like he got triggered by something alluding to hitler.

Btw, VoyagerGoji, I think if you can find it, I highly recommend Blue Christmas, or any of the other non-Godzilla/kaiju films that are starting to be more Wiesel talked about.

Also, going back to the actual film Blue a Christmas, I wanted to talk about how great Katsuno Hiroshi is. He doesn’t have much dialogue, but all his mannerisms and facial expressions are perfect, and work well to the gradual build up of his downfall. It’s funny because he’s in Deathquake/Earthquake 7.9, and in that film he takes on a role as a really concerned scientist.

[MaxRebo320]

I'm just happy the thread for this great movie is getting more traction! If only the same could happen for more Okamoto (Or other non-Toku titles) movies I've made threads for...

[Voyager]

Btw, VoyagerGoji, I think if you can find it, I highly recommend Blue Christmas, or any of the other non-Godzilla/kaiju films that are starting to be more Wiesel talked about.

Thanks, I’ll take the film into consideration. I’m trying to find Submersion of Japan (1973), so I’ll put Blue Christmas on my waiting list.

[Omegazilla]

Well you are about to get even more butthurt because guess what? I just saw it and like it or not here's my diagnosis.

That's right, thanks to a kind soul I have seen this movie. While it is good in some areas, it is mediocre overall and falls flat in several areas. The quality kind of sucks but I was able to see enough to see what was getting on. If someone can send me a better copy please do.

Anyways I'll start with what the movie excels in. The raw premise. A UFO sighting seems to spark a surge of cases of blue blooded people. Oddly enough they are also calmer and practically incapable of getting angry. So yeah that in of itself is different. This film definitely seemed to be inspired more by alien films like Close Encounters of the Third Kind, which I got a feeling of watching this. I'm not a particular fan of that style of Sci-fi to begin with. The acting is pretty damn good as well as the special effects. This is not a special effects heavy film for sure, for what you do get, it works. Not groundbreaking or anything but it gets the job done. Finally the thing that this movie nails more than anything else is the atmosphere. The atmosphere is VERY good at timesand thick with paranoia and conspiracy. You don't really know what is going to happen next but you know it is going to be bad. The movie's tone is very grounded and dark, and it almost feels like a documentary. Why do I say that? Well, the references to Hitler are definitely obvious as holy Hell. Which leads me to the bad...

Yeah I've already made what I think about the use of Hitler (more than once too it happens) but I'll summarize it again. It is cheap, and distracting from the fictional narrative because it is blatantly try to connect the fictional narrative with the overused Hitler invocation. We even have a scene with English dialogue of an agent directly comparing what they were discussing to what Adolf Hitler did and asked if it was necessary to do what he did. If you are a leftist that only thinks genocidal atrocities can occur by right wing dictators than Hitler you might find this "deep and philosophical" but otherwise you will find it distracting from the overarching narrative. The political overtones in this movie hearken back to US or German WW2 propaganda in terms of how devoid of subtlety they are. Another severe problem is the editing and pacing. This movie is just all over the damn place. The editing in particular is awful and the jump cuts are innumerable. Which leads me to the length of the movie. Normally a long movie over two hours would suit the serious tone and narrative driven story that we get, but it does not in this case, mainly due to the editing. Scenes shift very rapidly and you are given a lot of exposition in a short period of time. If you did not like how Shin Godzilla handled exposition via dialogue, you are not going to like this movie very much. It would probably do better if it either cut the running time by a bit or extended some of the scenes. Most of the time a scene does not stay in one place very long before shifting to somewhere totally different. The scene jumping can literally be comical and nonsensical due to its brevity at times. The characters are just plain bland, which is a shame because the acting was great. Oki and Saeko feel like robots they are so devoid of personality. Not to mention some of the government agents we get who are one dimensional cutout villains that you can easily predict what they are going to do. Okamoto and some of the other agents frequently get into lengthy, rapid shot arguments with each other and they get old very fast which left me bored throughout a good portion of the film combined with its long runtime. You are also bombarded with subplots like with "The Humanoids" that don't even further the plot until they get offed. Thanks to the rapid scene jumping we get visits to other countries like the US and France alongside more stale acting via laughing or staring by citizens getting asked about aliens and it comes across as just plain awkward. Was there supposed to be a message in this? People being rude to outsiders perhaps? That is definitely the theme of the movie so that would not surprise me in the slightest. The ending is especially all over the place because we get rapid fire action (in more ways than one) all over the world.

Would I recommend this movie? Well that depends. Do you not like sci-fi movies that are more grounded and realistic? Do stale and obvious references to Hitler peppered throughout the movie bother you? If you answer no to these give it a watch at least you might like it, otherwise you will probably be bored. This definitely isn't for the average modern moviegoer either that's for sure. So if you can only watch movies that are loaded with green screen special effects sequences this is not for you either. There is definitely an audience for this, albeit a niche audience, which is fine as some of the most overlooked movies have that trait. The best advice I could give is ask yourself what you think of Close Encounters of the Third Kind. If you liked that movie, you probably would like this. I would that is what this movie feels most like just with a darker and more political theme pervasive throughout.

[LSD Jellyfish]

Well you are about to get even more butthurt because guess what? I just saw it and like it or not here's my diagnosis.

This is just you putting your own weird spin on things, no one is butthurt and actually I'm glad you watched the movie.

Anyways I'll start with what the movie excels in. The raw premise. A UFO sighting seems to spark a surge of cases of blue blooded people. Oddly enough they are also calmer and practically incapable of getting angry. So yeah that in of itself is different. This film definitely seemed to be inspired more by alien films like Close Encounters of the Third Kind, which I got a feeling of watching this. I'm not a particular fan of that style of Sci-fi to begin with. The acting is pretty damn good as well as the special effects. This is not a special effects heavy film for sure, for what you do get, it works. Not groundbreaking or anything but it gets the job done. Finally the thing that this movie nails more than anything else is the atmosphere. The atmosphere is VERY good at timesand thick with paranoia and conspiracy. You don't really know what is going to happen next but you know it is going to be bad. The movie's tone is very grounded and dark, and it almost feels like a documentary. Why do I say that? Well, the references to Hitler are definitely obvious as holy Hell. Which leads me to the bad...

Pretty much agreed on everything said here.

Yeah I've already made what I think about the use of Hitler (more than once too it happens) but I'll summarize it again. It is cheap, and distracting from the fictional narrative because it is blatantly try to connect the fictional narrative with the overused Hitler invocation.We even have a scene with English dialogue of an agent directly comparing what they were discussing to what Adolf Hitler did and asked if it was necessary to do what he did. If you are a leftist that only thinks genocidal atrocities can occur by right wing dictators than Hitler you might find this "deep and philosophical" but otherwise you will find it distracting from the overarching narrative.

Sorry, but the italicized is purely you inserting your own ideas/beliefs into the movie. It's transplanting your own ideas into a left vs. right wing debate, when there isn't one. Genocide and dehumanization can happen irregardless of political ideology, and I still find it strange that you're viewing this solely as a "leftist" movie, just because I said the film was still relevant and watchable because of how current trends in both China and America continue to this day. You can debate with whether a films relevancy equates to it's quality, and that's fine.

The political overtones in this movie hearken back to US or German WW2 propaganda in terms of how devoid of subtlety they are.

I would agree, with you there, but I think the reason why it didn't bother me so much is that it's one of the rare insights that we have to such a dark topic from a Japanese perspective. Obviously this is a big budget film with globe-trotting and foreign actors, but it's still a Japanese-centric movie. It's not the United States kidnapping Japanese locals and performing experiments on them, it's Japanese nationals discriminating and incriminating Japanese nationals. It's one of the few big budget Japanese movies that addresses the build up towards facism in WW2, from a Japanese perspective, rather than just, "WW2 was sad". The same de-huminzation we see in the final scenes, is exactly what was going on with WW2 imperial Japan in China and other parts of the globe. A lot of modern Japanese media I see currently, has a lot of questionable morals. As a result it was very refreshing to have watched this.

Another severe problem is the editing and pacing. This movie is just all over the damn. editing in particular is awful and the jump cuts are innumerable. Which leads me to the length of the movie. Normally a long movie over two hours would suit the serious tone and narrative driven story that we get, but it does not in this case, mainly due to the editing. Scenes shift very rapidly and you are given a lot of exposition in a short period of time. If you did not like how Shin Godzilla handled exposition via dialogue, you are not going to like this movie very much. It would probably do better if it either cut the running time by a bit or extended some of the scenes. Most of the time a scene does not stay in one place very long before shifting to somewhere totally different. The scene jumping can literally be comical and nonsensical due to its brevity at times.

Not to mention some of the government agents we get who are one dimensional cutout villains that you can easily predict what they are going to do. Okamoto and some of the other agents frequently get into lengthy, rapid shot arguments with each other and they get old very fast which left me bored throughout a good portion of the film combined with its long runtime. You are also bombarded with subplots like with "The Humanoids" that don't even further the plot until they get offed. Thanks to the rapid scene jumping we get visits to other countries like the US and France alongside more stale acting via laughing or staring by citizens getting asked about aliens and it comes across as just plain awkward. Was there supposed to be a message in this? People being rude to outsiders perhaps? That is definitely the theme of the movie so that would not surprise me in the slightest. The ending is especially all over the place because we get rapid fire action (in more ways than one) all over the world.

That'll be with you on personal preference, but I agree the film can have some awkward back and forths between locations.

I think a big issue with the film is that while there is a certainly an overarching plot with the blue-blood, you can clearly see how this was adapted from a novel. The chapters jump around, and it's easy to picture something as "this is the chapter where the reporter goes to NYC". It also explains a lot of the awkward cutting between scenes. I think considering how much ground the film covers it could be worse. Same goes for the Inhumanoids. I like the Inhumanoids as they add to the mystique and work well as a red-herring.

Oki and Saeko feel like robots they are so devoid of personality.

I slightly agree about Saeko, but I think with Oki it adds to the character. His routine getting his haircut is pretty symbolic, and it's a way of placating his possible guilt, and conformity. This isn't just a "he's an evil agent thing" but a thing common in Japan with getting ritualistic haircuts as well. The other military man, who winds up getting blue blood, works as a foil to him.

Would I recommend this movie? Well that depends. Do you not like sci-fi movies that are more grounded and realistic? Do stale and obvious references to Hitler peppered throughout the movie bother you? If you answer no to these give it a watch at least you might like it, otherwise you will probably be bored. This definitely isn't for the average modern moviegoer either that's for sure. So if you can only watch movies that are loaded with green screen special effects sequences this is not for you either. There is definitely an audience for this, albeit a niche audience, which is fine as some of the most overlooked movies have that trait. The best advice I could give is ask yourself what you think of Close Encounters of the Third Kind. If you liked that movie, you probably would like this. I would that is what this movie feels most like just with a darker and more political theme pervasive throughout.

[/quote]
I think Close Encounters of the Third Kind is the more "for general audiences" type movie, but yeah I can see a comparison made with "soft-scifi". I still don't get your hang up with being so upset that hitler was brought up.

But overall you seemed to have enjoyed it, or at least have given it a chance, which makes me happy! I suggest trying to seek out some of the other non-godzilla sf and horror films!

[Omegazilla]

This is just you putting your own weird spin on things, no one is butthurt and actually I'm glad you watched the movie. [

Way to be passive aggressive.

Pretty much agreed on everything said here.

Good we have some common ground. The movie was definitely stronger in some areas than it was others. While I didn't find it to necessarily be above average in most fields, it definitely had enough strengths to be enjoyable for a decent duration of the film. The best way I could describe this movie to someone considering watching it is to think of Close Encounters of the Third Kind, but make the tone much darker and insert very obvious socio-political themes.

Sorry, but the italicized is purely you inserting your own ideas/beliefs into the movie. It's transplanting your own ideas into a left vs. right wing debate, when there isn't one. Genocide and dehumanization can happen irregardless of political ideology, and I still find it strange that you're viewing this solely as a "leftist" movie, just because I said the film was still relevant and watchable because of how current trends in both China and America continue to this day. You can debate with whether a films relevancy equates to it's quality, and that's fine.

Two can play that game!

I imagine that similar things are espoused by cruel skreeonked up racist dictators and leaders of genocides. Unfortunately relating it to todays events, it's not unlike the current treatment of dissidents in China, or undocumented people in the United States by Donald Trump, which unfortunately makes this an evergreen movie

Sure sounds like you were injecting you own bias too there, especially on the underlined part. Comparing detained invaders to what victims suffered to in the movie is plain ignorant and actually insulting to those whom have been grievously mistreated by actual dictators. Yeah dictators come across the whole spectrum, yet this movie singled out just one of them and narrowed the field of focus to that specific dictator. So there is clearly an ideological bias. It's the director's movie he can do whatever he wants, but that is something I would considering worthy of mention. Anyway I could go on here but this isn't a political thread and I am sure the mods would close the thread if it became one and I certainly don't want that to happen as I do believe this movie could click with a certain niche audience that some members here definitely fit the bill for. So if you wanna discuss this aspect a bit more send me a PM.

I would agree, with you there, but I think the reason why it didn't bother me so much is that it's one of the rare insights that we have to such a dark topic from a Japanese perspective. Obviously this is a big budget film with globe-trotting and foreign actors, but it's still a Japanese-centric movie. It's not the United States kidnapping Japanese locals and performing experiments on them, it's Japanese nationals discriminating and incriminating Japanese nationals. It's one of the few big budget Japanese movies that addresses the build up towards facism in WW2, from a Japanese perspective, rather than just, "WW2 was sad". The same de-huminzation we see in the final scenes, is exactly what was going on with WW2 imperial Japan in China and other parts of the globe. A lot of modern Japanese media I see currently, has a lot of questionable morals. As a result it was very refreshing to have watched this.

I see where you are coming from on this one but the movie definitely made it clear this wasn't a Japanese only conspiracy, especially at the end. They were the main focus sure, but when combined with the Hitler references, it definitely suggests foreign involvement considering Hitler was not Japanese. That' again is why the Hitler references did turn me off to this movie somewhat. The movie could have mentioned Tojo directly or Unit 731 as often as Hitler, but did not and chose Hitler instead.It greatly narrows down the breadth of the conversation and forces you to think from that angle because there is less room for speculation. That is also why I said it sounds like the director was virtue signalling as I got a feeling of righteous indignation and claiming of moral high ground. Since Hitler was invoked now we've crossed the line of fiction with clever and subtle messages into overly obvious juxtapositions about reality that feel more like I am being pretentiously preached to than being entertained.

{quote]That'll be with you on personal preference, but I agree the film can have some awkward back and forths between locations.

I think a big issue with the film is that while there is a certainly an overarching plot with the blue-blood, you can clearly see how this was adapted from a novel. The chapters jump around, and it's easy to picture something as "this is the chapter where the reporter goes to NYC". It also explains a lot of the awkward cutting between scenes. I think considering how much ground the film covers it could be worse. Same goes for the Inhumanoids. I like the Inhumanoids as they add to the mystique and work well as a red-herring.[/quote]
Yes some might not be bothered by the constant shifting, but I found the Inhumanoids to be distracting until the end of their appearance in the movie. This movie probably would work better as a television series than a standalone film because that would fix a lot of the pacing issues. The editing on the other hand is inexcusable and could be a big hurdle for some viewers. I literally chuckled during one of the abrupt scene transitions because it was so unexpected and abrupt that it felt like comedic timing. If I showed somebody that didn't see this movie some of the edits in the movie they'd probably thought I edited it myself to truncate it or that I was making a "comedic edit."

I slightly agree about Saeko, but I think with Oki it adds to the character. His routine getting his haircut is pretty symbolic, and it's a way of placating his possible guilt, and conformity. This isn't just a "he's an evil agent thing" but a thing common in Japan with getting ritualistic haircuts as well. The other military man, who winds up getting blue blood, works as a foil to him.

That's an interesting take so I see where you are coming from. I on the other hand don't like when subpar acting is justified by the character being "traumatized." I see that as a reason on why Hayden Christiansen wasn't a bad Anakin a lot for example. Don't mistake me though, the acting was very solid and I would say the strongest point in the film after it's atmosphere. Some of the characters were also done better than others, so my critique of them doesn't apply to all the characters, just some of them.

I think Close Encounters of the Third Kind is the more "for general audiences" type movie, but yeah I can see a comparison made with "soft-scifi". I still don't get your hang up with being so upset that hitler was brought up.

But overall you seemed to have enjoyed it, or at least have given it a chance, which makes me happy! I suggest trying to seek out some of the other non-godzilla sf and horror films!

Again I am mostly in agreement here. Close Encounters is more accessible to your general movie goer because it is nowhere near as dark as Blue Christmas. General audiences also can't handle unhappy endings so this film's ending would certainly crush them. I really am not a big fan of soft sci-fi that tries to be grounded and realistic anyways. Close Encounters bored me to tears. The crazier the better. Probably why I am on a site dedicated to a company most famous for Godzilla.

As for my dislike of Hitler references I have explained that in depth but to put it tersely, it is just overused and distracting from the film's narrative. Whenever someone wants to make a connection to a dictator or even if they just don't like them they invoke Hitler. He's become a cliche when there are so many other just as vile (possibly more-so if that's possible)dictators to choose from , some of which have vastly higher body counts than him. That's not me trying to turn this into a grisly game of "hey which guy killed the most people?" but it doesn't make sense to me. He's hated so exclusively to the point he feels like an anti-celebrity. It's like if people would only bring up Ted Bundy if serial killers are discussed. If you still don't understand my explanation I don't think you ever will.

Overall I would indeed say I enjoyed the movie but I would say it was average and not a masterpiece or anything because it was sloppy in some areas. I would just be selective about who I recommend it too because this most definitely is not for everyone. I am all for checking out additional non-kaiju sci fi films as well. Unfortunately it seems many of them are hard to find.

[MaxRebo320]

I'm glad you sat down and watched the movie and enjoyed elements of it. I certainly can understand a lot of the criticisms you cite - its extremely unorthodox in its structure (And Nakadai being sidelined after a while is kind of a shame), and like I said previously, there are a lot of little elements that I'm not even sure I quite understand. But that's what rewatches are for. The romance between Oki and Saeko is certainly an awkward one, but I feel that's the point - both are individuals that have never been in serious relationships or are still recovering from broken hearts.

As for the political aspect of the film...again, I can understand finding aliens/mutated humans as an allegory for oppressed peoples uninspired/disingenuous. And yeah, the stuff with Hitler/the Holocaust is hardly subtle. And if you think the comparison is overused, so be it...but what the hell are you trying to get at? That the movie is biased/"virtue signaling" in stating rounding people up and putting them in concentrated camps is an inherently bad thing? Judging by your "detained invaders" statement, it sure looks like it...

Hell, shocked you're not giving us a "Hitler was a radical socialist who would have supported medicare for All, the Green New Deal and would have liked The Last Jedi" routine...

[Omegazilla]

I'm glad you sat down and watched the movie and enjoyed elements of it. I certainly can understand a lot of the criticisms you cite - its extremely unorthodox in its structure (And Nakadai being sidelined after a while is kind of a shame), and like I said previously, there are a lot of little elements that I'm not even sure I quite understand. But that's what rewatches are for. The romance between Oki and Saeko is certainly an awkward one, but I feel that's the point - both are individuals that have never been in serious relationships or are still recovering from broken hearts.

We agree on this. The good news is that I know someone in my country who has immigrated from Japan and I am pretty sure he has not seen this movie. I'll most likely rewatch this movie down the road, preferably with him there as well. The problem with watching foreign movies sometimes is that you might miss cultural differences which can affect the enjoyment to an extent. I think the mixed reaction to Shin Godzilla in the US as opposed to Japan is proof of this. I am curious as to why the director chose the concept he did. Human blood is already blue when not exposed to oxygen. I wonder if he did that on purpose of it was just a coincidence.

As for the political aspect of the film...again, I can understand finding aliens/mutated humans as an allegory for oppressed peoples uninspired/disingenuous.

I agree with this sentiment but there have been cases where that style/theme has been used to greater effect. I like to think District 9 in that regard. I find District 9 to be overrated, but nonetheless pretty good particularly in this department. It handled the theme with more subtlety and grace.
{quote]And if you think the comparison is overused, so be it...but what the hell are you trying to get at? That the movie is biased/"virtue signaling" in stating rounding people up and putting them in concentrated camps is an inherently bad thing? Judging by your "detained invaders" statement, it sure looks like it...[/quote]
You completely missed my point. I was saying the fact that we have obvious references to Hitler (exclusively mind you) came across as preachy and thus virtue signalling. If someone from let's say North Korea made a sci movie but directly mentions the Kim Jong dynasty to connect to his plot I would find that just as annoying, although at least Kim Jong isn't as mentioned anywhere near as Hitler despite being just as vile. If you are trying to imply that I support rounding people up and putting them in concentration camps that I am disgusted and appalled as such passive aggression. Like I just mentioned one of my friends is an immigrant directly from Japan, but he is a law abiding citizen so that does not bother me. You may want to read this, particularly definition two:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invade
I really don't see the connection people detaining people violating your laws and just locking them up and torturing/experimenting on them just because your government says so to be comparable. I feel I must tread carefully here though because this sounds like it could go off topic really fast. If you want to discuss this aspect in more detail you are welcome to PM me.

Hell, shocked you're not giving us a "Hitler was a radical socialist who would have supported medicare for All, the Green New Deal and would have liked The Last Jedi" routine...

Well I guess there's an argument to be made for that, but that really isn't entirely my position nor is it really relevant. You just assumed how I would think based on preconceived notions given to you. You basically admitted to assuming that because I take a stance on one argument I must take a certain rigid stance on another argument. Not everybody is that black and white. So of us have a mix of views from across the spectrum.

Oh I noticed I forgot to give an overall "grade" for the movie if you will. Being as I said it was mostly average, but certainly passable I would give it a 7/10 or so or a "C." It was very ambitious but fell short in some areas. Like I said earlier, it probably would have done better in a television series format. That would give the story the time it needs to space everything out and just plain take it's time setting everything up. That said the movie excels enough at it's strengths to carry you through the end even if some parts are recycled, boring, or even awkward at times. Just don't show it to kids or the audiences I mentioned previously. It is definitely better than most other "realistic" sci-fi I've watched. Like Close Encounters or those obnoxiously cliches "found footage" films. I'm not saying the movie is a Close Encounters ripoff, I'm just saying the influence certainly felt present. The movie was certainly different enough to feel original and didn't borrow too heavily from other ideas. Not counting Adolf Hitler of course. I am eager to see what my Japanese friend thinks of it. I've watched Japanese films with him before to give some more context, Gojira included.

[LSD Jellyfish]

I was listening to George Harrison's Crackerbox Palace, and suddenly the titular Blue Christmas song popped into my head.


Cracker Box Palace came out in 1976.
Blue Christmas came out in 1978.

To be clear, I am not accusing plagiarism, or anything remotely close to it, but I am wondering if I am not crazy for thinking the songs are alike, and if Cracker Box palace might have been used as a template to make Blue Christmas. Since the Inhumanoids are based on the Beatles the line of inspiration is pretty clear. Let me know what you think.

For comparison:


Perhaps someone musically talented (Terasawa?) can tell me if there's any actual similarities or if to a laymen's ear I'm just being projective.

[MaxRebo320]

Interesting...I never noticed the similarities, but they are present. If indeed copied intentionally or through cryptomnesia, I suppose it is mildly ironic given the whole My Sweet Lord/He's So Fine debacle, which Harrison wrote a song about. And said song, "This Song" appears on the very same album as "Crackerbox Palace", Thirty Three & 1/3. Funny little world, ain't it?


It should be noted there was a single version of "Blue Christmas" by Char sung in Japanese with a more rocking feel. It's my preferred version when I just want to listen to the song on its own.

[G-Matt]

It should be noted there was a single version of "Blue Christmas" by Char sung in Japanese with a more rocking feel. It's my preferred version when I just want to listen to the song on its own.

I also prefer the Japanese version.