Musings on MUTOs: A Pseudo-Essay

That is so interesting. I really wished that they delved into that more in the other films instead of letting it happen in a comic or forgetting about them in the films.

Also, ["Being the first truly original monsters in the franchise since Terror of Mechagodzilla’s Titanosaurus (monsters with some genetic connection to Godzilla, i.e. Biollante, SpaceGodzilla, Orga, and Megaguirus, do not count),..."] Shockirus from The Return of Godzilla (1984): Am I a joke to you?

Added a little annotation about Shockirus. Sorry 'bout that.

And thanks for the feedback! :)

Being the first truly original monsters in the franchise since Terror of Mechagodzilla’s Titanosaurus (monsters with some genetic connection to Godzilla, i.e. Biollante, SpaceGodzilla, Orga, and Megaguirus, do not count)

Original monsters, yes; however, regardless of any genetic connection or none to Godzilla, the MUTO’s aren’t as original as some of Toho’s creations - just monsters that happen to look similar to other Hollywood horror/giant multi-limbed creatures. Biollante is perhaps the most original Toho monster since Titanosaurus.

the MUTOs are the next generation of monsters, bred for an audience that wants to see more than the same old same old

The truth of the matter is that the MUTO’s are forgettable monsters. Outside of the Godzilla fandom, most of the general audience do not know the MUTO’s, or their connection to the Godzilla franchise.

The question in your second-to-last paragraph could be interpreted in different ways by different people with different answers. A short answer by me: if humanity could function without electricity for countless number of years, then humanity can continue doing so without it, albeit with some difficulty in the beginning but eventually humanity will learn to adapt.

If Godzilla is an allegory for nuclear power and the dangers it can unleash, then the MUTOs represent our fear of losing power and the chaos it could entail

MonsterVerse, to my knowledge, has not really given representation to the dangers of nuclear power. Seems to me it goes unacknowledged in Godzilla (2014) and takes a pro-stance in Godzilla: King of the Monsters, especially with the captions in the end credits. As for the MUTO’s, I think you may be overlooking into that issue. To my understanding, the MUTO’s purpose in the movie is they are parasitic beings who, if left unchecked, will disrupt natural balance. The MUTO’s EMP capabilities happens to serve as a plot point for the story. After that, it’s not much use.

I never would have thought of that! I really hope that's true, because that would just add another layer to that movie! Even if not... it's still a terrifying thought. Thanks for this incredible analysis of the Mutos!

@The Hooded Figure Maybe I am overthinking them a little...but does that necessarily mean I'm wrong?

And by Godzilla being an allegory for nuclear allegory, I was referring to the character as a whole, not just his MonsterVerse incarnation. I do plan on covering the MonsterVerse's stance on the nuclear issue in the future. I can already tell that you're going to tell me I'm wrong, though.

But whatever. It's all entertainment in the end. I think we can afford to have some measure of subjectivity on this.

@TheLazyFish Thanks! :)

That's nice.

I like the MUTOs, they remind me of Gigan crossed with a Xenomorph crossed with Clover

Dang. This was impressive to read.

Maybe I am overthinking them a little...but does that necessarily mean I'm wrong?

Not wrong, but perhaps misinformed. Yes there would be disastrous effects, but just because a scenario where (hypothetically speaking) humanity experiences tremendous or total loss of electricity does not mean there are not other methods to sustain themselves in their panic. Humanity is after all an adaptable species. Hollywood, with their supervision over Godzilla, just don’t have the interest to delve into concern for issues or themes like Toho will.

I can already tell that you're going to tell me I'm wrong, though.

How could I say what you are wrong about when the material you have proposed to discuss has not been published on Scified to be read? But outside of MonsterVerse, yes Toho does make representation of the dangers of nuclear issues.

It's all entertainment in the end. I think we can afford to have some measure of subjectivity on this.

For Hollywood, it may be; however, under Toho’s supervision, they put forth efforts in teaching and reminding its audience the lessons and dangers of various issues such as but not limited to: capitalism, pollution, nationalism, and of course, radiation. Subjectivity matters, but not so much without knowing or having a clear understanding of what is being or will be discussed.

JurassicKaiju14

OH GOD NO!!!! Please don't make another topic about MV Godzilla being pro-nuclear! We already had a week long argument about it! XD jk lol. What are your thoughts on MV Godzilla being pro-nuclear? I personally feel that if you really think about it, it's neutral-nuclear, like Godzilla 2014. Also, I think that because of that end line about how Godzilla is only on our side for now, we're going to see him do something "evil" to balance out the good he has done in GVK or in some other future movie. Just to reiterate he's a neutral force. Would be a pretty good way of balancing the nuclear-stance of MV Godzilla,  in my opinion.

Not wrong, but perhaps misinformed.

"Misinform: give (someone) false or inaccurate information"

So basically the same thing.

Yes there would be disastrous effects, but just because a scenario where (hypothetically speaking) humanity experiences tremendous or total loss of electricity does not mean there are not other methods to sustain themselves in their panic. Humanity is after all an adaptable species.

True, but it should also be taken into account what could have happened if the MUTOs had bred unchecked. I will agree that Humanity wouldn't necessarily go extinct, but life would definitely not be easy for us anymore.

How could I say what you are wrong about when the material you have proposed to discuss has not been published on Scified to be read?

Maybe I am being premature here. Let me put it to you this way; there was a big debate recently over whether the MonsterVerse was outright pro-nuclear. My personal view was that it's more a matter of how it's used. I'll explain my reasoning in a later post.

Finally, I will not deny that Toho does flesh out their messages more than the Hollywood movies have (although even they falter from time-to-time). That doesn't stop me from enjoying the MonsterVerse movies though; I like both the Toho and the MonsterVerse films for the most part. I value intelligent discussions of problems, and the simple joys of watching giant monsters that I've grown to love and cherish slugging it out with all the modern VFX we can get. When I speak of subjectivity, I'm talking more about personal preferences for which movies we enjoy.

So basically the same thing.

Not exactly how I meant but I suppose I could have used a different word to clarify the intended message. You had the gist of it when you stated the MUTO’s could bring disaster upon humanity with their EMP capabilities; however, you failed to include how humanity did not need to solely rely on electricity to maintain their continuance since there are other means to sustain themselves. Thus, while your explanation of humanity initially not knowing what to do upon loss of electricity is correct, long term circumstances is not taken into account on how humanity will look to other utilizations for the future.

True, but it should also be taken into account what could have happened if the MUTOs had bred unchecked.

What could have happened? Not much really. The MUTO’s interest is only in radiation. Humanity’s nuclear arsenal, power plants, etc. is enough for any MUTO to sustain themselves. Humans are merely ants to MUTO’s and will not be bothered by them unless provoked. Maybe MUTO’s would be doing humanity the favor in ridding the world of any nuclear presence but the reality (in the movie) is that Godzilla defeated the MUTO’s and ensured continual balance for the world.

Let me put it to you this way; there was a big debate recently over whether the MonsterVerse was outright pro-nuclear. My personal view was that it's more a matter of how it's used. I'll explain my reasoning in a later post.

While nuclear power has made positive remarks by society in regards to emission material compared to non-renewable resources, the fact is that it is still dangerous. It’s original purpose alone was for harmful effect, an act that occurred twice to end the bloodiest and most destructive war in human history. United States and the Soviet Union engaged in a Cold War with other countries and people suffering because of their struggle for dominance and power, something which Godzilla (1984) gives reflection on. Events like Chernobyl, Fukushima Daiichi, and Three Mile Island prove nuclear power’s original purpose.

I’ll provide a similar-in-concept scenario. Take, for example, the Sun. It certainly is beautiful and beneficial. It provides Earth with what it needs. However, what some people tend to forget is that the Sun can be harmful as well. Earth’s atmosphere shields every living thing from the Sun’s rays. Without Earth’s atmosphere, all life will die. Even though the Sun is beneficial for Earth, it’s still dangerous.

“Every rose has its thorns”, as the saying goes; although, nuclear energy/power is no rose.

"While nuclear power has made positive remarks by society in regards to emission material compared to non-renewable resources, the fact is that it is still dangerous."

Oh I agree completely, make no mistake about that. In fact, that assessment is actually strikingly similar to the vibe that I got out of the film's portrayal of the Titans.

But that's a conversation for another day. In the meantime, I'd like to take the time to thank you for, in spite of our disagreements, keeping things respectful and courteous. And I'd like to apologize if I might have come across as overly confrontational.

The Hooded Figure

Wait aren't all lifeforms adaptable, I just hate when people are like Humans are an adaptable species because we like to sniff our farts because Humans are special because have a soul harharharharhar. I absolutely hate human self-centerness, there are plenty of other lifeforms that are more adaptable then a human like extremephiles.

Wait aren't all lifeforms adaptable

Yes, I was making aware that humanity will not stop and drop over a loss of something when humanity’s prehistoric and recorded past went without electricity for countless years but would only face initial difficulty in adapting to an environment no longer dominated by such.

As for the rest of your comment, however: your words, not mine.

Humans aren't actually adaptable, we merely force the environment to suit us rather than we adapt to the environment. Because if humans were adaptable you would see multiple species of humans rather than just one.

Humans aren't actually adaptable, we merely force the environment to suit us rather than we adapt to the environment. Because if humans were adaptable you would see multiple species of humans rather than just one.

That makes no sense, so I’ll just say this: there’s a reason countless species have gone extinct. They couldn’t adapt to the changes occurring in their environment(s) at an appropriate scale. Species that adapted to the changes occurring in their environment(s) did so because they recognized the potential effects/outcome that could occur. I’d argue that modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens, if you want to be technical) are the most adaptable species. It’s through our methods that we managed to achieve our current status - however beneficial or consequential it may have been to other species (extinct or living). Evolutional or not, survival without adaptation guarantees extinction; survival with adaptation ensures continuance.

@The Hooded Figure

"I’d argue that modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens, if you want to be technical) are the most adaptable species. It’s through our methods that we managed to achieve our current status - however beneficial or consequential it may have been to other species (extinct or living)."

Agreed.

Anyway, the purpose of this piece was really just me sharing some thoughts that have been running through my mind as of late. This is all purely from my perspective and thought process. I'm not necessarily saying all this is there, I'm just bringing up parallels that I drew myself.

And of course the MUTOs aren't the best kaiju in the franchise. They satisfied my tastes well enough back in 2014, but given half the chance, I could probably come up with a better antagonist. The whole thing about them being "bred for a modern audience" was really meant as a general statement regarding their design. Their aesthetics are a product of the times. That was what I was trying to say.

Anyway, the purpose of this piece was really just me sharing some thoughts that have been running through my mind as of late. This is all purely from my perspective and thought process. I'm not necessarily saying all this is there, I'm just bringing up parallels that I drew myself.

And of course the MUTOs aren't the best kaiju in the franchise. They satisfied my tastes well enough back in 2014, but given half the chance, I could probably come up with a better antagonist. The whole thing about them being "bred for a modern audience" was really meant as a general statement regarding their design. Their aesthetics are a product of the times. That was what I was trying to say.

I understand what you mean. Although there were some things I disagreed with, I liked the thought you put into it.

Well as long as we can disagree in a respectful, understanding manner, then I'm happy.

Humans the most adaptable species is a laugh, Homo sapiens sapiens have only been around for 200,000 years pretty young compared to most species. Those other animals that went extinct were gradual most through competition, evolution into new species, or like you said unable to adapt to an ever changing environment.

Homo sapiens sapiens barely survived the ice age and we are a young species and not all that great, we have poor genetic diversity and should there be a major change to the environment humans will become extinct. Humans require a lot of food for their large brains, so in case a supervolcano or a meteror would strike.

Bye bye farms and without Farms, human population drops significantly. You can make the argument of in-door farms with nuclear powered plants keeping them up and running but humans would flock to these locations but the population would be bottlenecked then the slow killer happens; fewer and fewer children are born ever year in western countries who have access to these things and third world countries would severely be effect to no point of survival. Are you arguing that humans will be able to adapte and under go photosynthesis? Or evolve the ability to need less food under a short period of time?

The remaining human populations would be center in developed world countries while the rest of humanity dies off from starvation. Now can these remaining humans survive? Maybe, if they can hold on to their last remaining vestiges of technology they may slowly evolve to need less food but at the same time humans would slowly loose their sapience if we sacrifice energy for our brains and we slowly become just like any other animal.

If their technology doesn't hold out and the last nuclear power plants shut down to last spent fuel rod, the remaining humans would be doomed to starve to death.

Conclusion and TLDR: Humans demands more from the environment then most animals, sure alot of megafauna would die off along side us but as previous mass extinctions show us it is the smaller generalists that are the survivors, not big specialists and humans are specialists.

PS Roaches, Rodents, and Insects are better survivors than Humans

Humans the most adaptable species is a laugh

Care to provide examples of proven species (extinct or living) that has achieved or will achieve the current status humanity (Homo sapiens sapiens) resides at?

Homo sapiens sapiens barely survived the ice age and we are a young species and not all that great, we have poor genetic diversity and should there be a major change to the environment humans will become extinct

One, if humans (at a primitive state) could, as you say “barely survived” the Ice Age, think of present-day humans now (and for the foreseeable future) with the capabilities to prepare early on for global disaster scenarios knowing full well the potential effects that can be brought forth. Two, you continue to miss the point of the explanation I provided to you in my previous reply, and limiting your focus from an evolutional standpoint.

Are you arguing that humans will be able to adapte and under go photosynthesis? Or evolve the ability to need less food under a short period of time?

Never claimed to, but I will state humanity’s ability to recognize and understand change clearly (subtle or obvious, significant or insignificant), and to take immediate action when necessary serves to remind that when humanity’s survival is at risk, humanity will ensure their continuance by any means necessary.

as previous mass extinctions show us it is the smaller generalists that are the survivors, not big specialists and humans are specialists

Refer to the second, third, and last sentences of my previous reply to you. Additionally, mass extinctions only speeds up the process of extinction for species. Species that don’t go extinct continue living for a reason because early on, they maintain adaptation whereas species that don’t suffer for it through gradual decline until major events end them entirely.

PS Roaches, Rodents, and Insects are better survivors than Humans

I wonder why they haven’t banded together and figured out how to learn from and overthrow the human overlords who seem to have surpassed them in adaptability, status, and common sense. But I applaud them for their perseverance.

Ummm yeah no, evolution is a tree not a ladder Marvel-tard.

Evolution doesn't have a goal is a series of random mutations that are sorted out by natural selection and speciation, without our large brains the human is a weak and defenseless animal. Humans are an oddity not an end goal, there is no end goal to evolution except extinction. Eventually humans will become extinct, especially with humanities growing reliance of technology.

Microbal life is far more adaptable than a human, can a human grow stronger after being torn apart? No they become a cripple. If you cut a microbes in half they repair themselves into more microbes. you poison a human most of the time a human will die from poison, sure sometimes a human will build up an immunity but that is not passed to the next generation. Microbes on the other hand pass their poison immunities to the next generation.

Can a human adapt to boiling water or acid? No, but microbes can!

You are under the false sense that all life is suppose to evolve into humans, which is absolutely dumb. All life adapts to their own evolutionary paths depending on their environments and sometimes overlaps or even repeats to achieve similar but NOT the same morphs.

Humans are also not that special, humans are essentially primates that have a society similar to ants and bees without becoming eusocial. 

In my extinction scenario how are humans going to survive with our current technology? Half of Humanity starves to death due to a eruption super volcano or a meteror strike? With most vaccines and antibotics becoming less and less effective each year it makes you think that maybe we won't be able to fight off these super bugs anymore. Combine that with the cataclysm and the logistics of the cataclysm.... I will make a post about this 

@Xenotarsis Ummm yeah no, evolution is a tree not a ladder Marvel-tard.

Whoa whoa whoa whoa, let's back up and take a deep breath here. This is a thread for civil discussion and conversation amongst fans, not for mudslinging and name calling and bashing them because we may disagree on certain things, or something petty like if they like the MCU. And do you even know if he does? I think not.

I mean, seriously, things have been going real well here, even if there are disagreements. Don't spoil it all by sinking to the level of an internet troll. Be better than that.

I do believe this is one of the reasons he called scified a horror show...

Well, what can you do?

@Gmkgoji Who said that? Xeno or Hooded?

What? Oh, someone on Toho kingdom.

The concept of evolution was created by people who questioned the purpose of their existence yet created their own answers to satisfy their need for closure: evolution establishing humanity (and any other lifeforms) with their uniqueness in the physical reality. Because evolution is a human-created concept that was designed to cater to people’s existential crisis syndrome, it allowed for natural thought (away from what religious history entailed) to occur such as creating and detailing an evolutionary history (that they never witnessed, mind you) of gradual change than to believe creationist material made by religious people.

Perhaps lifeforms can endure some things humans cannot, perhaps humans can endure some things other lifeforms cannot; however, according to humanity’s viewpoint regarding evolution, yes, lifeforms may evolve in their own unique way but the reality is that all non-human lifeforms will maintain their current status: adapting only when necessary to ensure continuance rather than adapting for self-promotion because they lack the self-awareness as explained in the next sentence. Humanity (Homo sapiens sapiens) has the self-awareness to recognize that adaptation can be independent from evolutionary change since humanity has or will have the capabilities to voluntarily change themselves instead of being forced to do so.

If humanity was not that special, and are “essentially primates that have a society similar to ants and bees without becoming eusocial”, then humanity would not have made a big deal regarding questioning the purpose of their existence as religion or evolution made it out to be: the former establishing humanity their sacredness, the latter establishing humanity their uniqueness. Humanity would not be at its current state with that mindset; for example, you or I would not be discussing with each other if it was not that special or important. Other lifeforms accept reality as it is without ever questioning or wondering the purpose to their existence; for them, it’s all about survival. They can accept the reality they live in; humanity, unfortunately, has a difficult time doing so because our level of self-awareness conflicts with acceptance.

I read your extinction topic: could humanity survive the next cataclysm? It’s not impossible, just extremely difficult. But you continue to miss the point I wanted to help you understand. I won’t delve further into it, and I won’t repeat myself; however, what I will say is that people are entitled to their own opinions. Why? Because humanity has the ability to recognize their uniqueness and take advantage of it.

Sorry JurassicKaiju14 I got a little carried away, the reason why I said Marvel-tard is due to Marvel incorrectly thinking humans are the pinnacle of evolution which they are not.

The only thing humans have unique is their arrogance to think their unique. I am a firm believer that sapience is not solely unique to humans, several non-human animals shows levels of sapience which means millions of years later will either become rivals to human kind or if my extinction scenario comes true be our replacement.

Even if you could rewind time back to the dawn of Pliocene then play it forward, humans may or may not evolve a second time.