Help Build a Godzilla FAQ.

Another huge misconception i hear when talking to my friend at the grocery store is

Hey isnt Godzilla 2014 the sequel to Godzilla 98?

**Thinks** (Atleast my Girlfriend understand Godzilla...)

Cause legitimetly everyone else i know doesnt udnerstand it......Kids these days....

**Thinks** (Atleast my Girlfriend understand's Godzilla...)

Cause legitimetly everyone else i know doesnt udnerstand it......Kids these days....

CeeBoogie,
Thanks. I created it for an article: http://www.scified.com/site/we-all-wear-suits---japanese-sci-fi--fantasy/godzilla-14-as-a-stealth-showa-film

I liked how much it came out that I decided to make it an avatar for a little bit. I'm actually doing other half-and-half Godzilla faces for other designs. Been thinking about taking requests on that, but that's another topic for another time.

Been making a list of your guys' suggestions.

Just a thought GMAN, could do a half/half of G54 and G84 since they're so similar

GMAN2887 - How very interesting! Hmm, one of the most glaring questions I've seen asked at least 10 times is "Do the older Godzilla films use animatronics?". Many people, from what I've been able to deduce, are under the impression that the monsters brought to life in the older films were mostly robotics and puppet wizardry rather than the Tokusatsu art form known as Suitmation. This, in my opinion, deserves some clarification. :)

Sparkzilla- 2014 and 75 match the best.

You can mix and match any though. That's part of the fun.

Ok, i know there is documentary after documentary about godzilla's healing ability.

So the question i would often ask is, has godzilla had healing powers since 1954?

Think about it like this, how do we not know tomoyuki tanaka wasn't lying about it during the early years.

I seriously want a debate about this, the begginers book called "The offical godzilla compendium" States that godzilla has had this power since 1954, however books by steve ryfle, august ragone, and david kalat all say different.

So how about we look into this for a change?

I'd take Ryfle, Ragone and Kalat's words over Lees any day.

^That's your opinion, but in all honesty how do you not know that they weren't making stuff up?

Your general audience is going to ask, why couldn't godzilla be killed by tanks, missles, laser beams, etc? If they watch biollante or even 2000 with the description of godzilla's cells in both films, they will instantly think oh ok, so he has healing abilitys.

I didn't upset you did i gman?

The fact that Ryfle, Ragone, Kalat (not to mention Englund, Aiken and Godziszewski) have a history of working with (and being on better terms with) Toho gives them the benefit of the doubt over Lees. Not to mention they cite their sources which the Compendium does not.

I think general audiences simply accept that Godzilla is very durable and can't be harmed by conventional weaponry. I never heard such a complaint from audiences for the new film.

And while more general audience members might watch Godzilla vs. Biollante and Godzilla 2000 and get the impression that Godzilla has always had a healing factor, that leads itself to more issues: General audiences also don't know how the franchise is split up, nor do they know the creators and the intent behind these movies. In short I don't think a misunderstanding of the series should be considered to explain a healing factor in the early films. Otherwise we're going to have to allow these same exact misunderstandings slide for people who think the films feature weak acting due to the dub, or that the special effects aren't done with a purpose...etc...

I really don't know what to say. :/

Guess i will just stick with artwork.

The Godzilla series has never been one that has stuck to continuity or logic for that matter. They seemed to re-invent things as they went along, as long as it suited the story, even within the same era/series.

A couple of cases in point:

At what point did Godzilla “feed” on radiation? I don’t recall any reference to that in the Showa films that I’m familiar with. Bear in mind, I’m foggy on pretty much everything in the 70s, so I don’t remember if they make references there. Gman? Early on it’s never inferred that he eats it or is attracted to it. The first reference for me that immediately comes to mind is the Return of Godzilla/Godzilla 1985 and that was obviously the start of the Heisei series. In fact in Gojira, it’s inferred a couple of times that he is in fact predatory.

Electricity. In Gojira, he cuts through the electrical blockade like it’s not even there, and doesn’t bat an eye, yet electricity is used as a weapon in KK vs G, M vs G, and several other movies.

It was established early on that he was fairly impervious to conventional weapons, but not until the Heisei series (again, if memory serves), that he had special regenerative/healing properties.

Then of course, there’s the ears and four toes versus no ears and three toes, after the first two movies, which was probably just a design decision.

Here’s something curious. Ever notice, no one (in the movies) ever really mentions/discusses Godzilla’s breath weapon? It’s just sort of accepted. “Oh look, he breathes radioactive fire!” I would think that would be a huge topic of discussion in a “real world” situation, don’t you think? It was funny in G2014 when Godzilla uses it the first time when one soldier says “Holys@#$! Did you see that?”

^All good points and sort of what I've been preaching. Indeed the nuclear radiation feeding didn't come into play until the Heisei series. And his weaknesses tend to depend on what the script calls for. (On the other hand it was a different Godzilla for the rest of the Showa era so it could be argued he simply had different weaknesses.)

In the Showa series in particular Godzilla films were a little closer the Millennium era in regards to continuity. Other than a select few they seemed to be stand alone advenures not particularly concerned with what came before. Which I liked-- It made it a lot like the James Bond series.

Yeah, it feels like G'54 through Monster Zero follow a somewhat straight line, and then after that they kinda went somewhat loose. 

Sort of. I know a lot of fans look at Godzilla's return in King Kong vs. Godzilla as a reference to the ice he was buried in at the climax of Godzilla Raids Again, but the truth is those were two different locations. I think so much time had passed since Godzilla Raids Again and King Kong vs. Godzilla was such a different movie that they simply thought sleeping in an iceberg made for a cool (HA!) reveal.

True, but it could possibly have detached and drifted (albeit a long distance). I have never read anything that disputed it didn't pick up from the prev movie and just looked at it as a natural progression form GRA. If you know that for a fact then kudos to you! Chronologically it certainly could have taken place after M vs G, Ghidorah, Monster Zero or even in fact Sea Monster. Or it could just be a standalone film. Obviously people in it know who Godzilla is and there was some precedence for him, as the American chopper pilot says his name when he's emerging from the ice.

^Indeed. All good points and I'm not necessarily going to label these points as incorrect. It's simply that there's so many loose ends with the continuity that it's lead to fans believing and speculating multiple things. Which is fine. I don't think there is a definite answer about how Godzilla got in the iceberg or how everyone knows him. Personally, like Godzilla 2000, I think audiences simply know who Godzilla is and that's that. They just get on with the story.