The result is a movie that is arguably not as “good” from a substantive perspective, but is a lot more fun.Ĭertainly, a criticism that will (perhaps unfairly) be levied at Shin Ultraman is a lack of dramatic cohesion, as the antagonist shifts multiple times over the course of the movie, as though it’s several episodes of a TV series put together. However, the newer film lacks the profound sense of political commentary and haunting artistic nuance, because, frankly, the original Ultraman TV series wasn’t the traumatic dirge that the original 1954 Godzilla is. Don’t get me wrong there’s a definite overlap between Shin Godzilla and Shin Ultraman, and not just in the literal crossover in the Godzilla Battle Line mobile game: the film starts with a Shin Godzilla sight gag, there’s some recycled military footage, and one actor even seeming to reprise a role. This has led to a misunderstanding amongst the Godzilla fandom, who interpreted “Shin” to mean “horrific and creepy”, because the original 1954 Godzilla, a dour allegory for nuclear destruction, was horrific and creepy, but 1966’s Ultraman is a hopeful space-age fantasy. All of that is part of the lens, but ultimately, what the brand seems to be about is revisiting classic franchises, rebooting them effectively from the ground up, and distilling what worked about their original incarnations with an infusion of modern realism.
There are surface-level aspects, such as Hideaki Anno’s dense, jargon-filled dialogue, rapid editing and Akio Jissoji-inspired unconventional camera angles, pop cultural Easter eggs for otaku in the audience, and a soundtrack comprised of vintage film scores and banging new pieces from Shiro Sagisu.
As such, it’s neat to look at how it codifies just what the “shin” prefix represents. Shin Ultraman is, after the Rebuild of Evangelion and Shin Godzilla, the third entry in the Shin Japan Heroes franchise, but it’s also significant in that it’s the first made consciously with the “Shin” brand at the forefront.
0 kommentar(er)
