Ready Player One Kaiju Spoilers

What about King Kong? Doesn't he count as a Kaiju?

^Well.... yes and a huge reason for no. King Kong's history predates the word Kaiju. He is a giant movie monster, but really anything related to Japanese giant monsters are Kaiju. Starting with obviously Godzilla being the first kaiju. Kong is a Kaiju in the Godzilla and Toho Universe. But King Kong isn't universally known or classified as "Kaiju".

Kong is this interesting monster nomad that crosses over into other monster universes and can fit into whatever you need him to be. Whether he's just a giant monster, kaiju, or MUTO, he is first and foremost, just a giant monster, respectively. He's part of all these classifications but the world will first recognize him as a giant monster first and kaiju last.

^To  further prove my point, wouldn't the Iron Giant technically be a Kaiju? No one thinks of that one.

 Can't wait for Mechagodzilla to join DCEU.

@riggzamortis86, that makes a lot of sense.

riggzamortis86 pretty much nailed it. The word "kaiju" is thrown around far too loosely. People are calling Rampage a kaiju film and it's not. Just because the word translates to "monster" doesn't qualify it for everything. There's a difference between kaiju the translation/transliteration and kaiju the Japanese word.

It's sort of a form of cultural appropriation. When the word kaiju is used in an English speaking context it stands for Japanese monsters only. So when I use the words "giant monsters" I'm referring to the original Kong or the Rhedosaurus from The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms. When I mention "kaiju" or "daikaiju" those monsters are not included in the conversation. I'm talking about Godzilla, Rodan, Mothra, etc.

Otherwise there's no point in English speaking fans to use the word kaiju. It loses all context if we just lump every giant monster in with the same word.

I kinda saw what makes a kaiju a kaiju similar to what makes an anime an anime.

Everybody's got a different definition; some more conservative (i.e., "it has to be from Japan to be considered anime!") and others more inclusive (i.e., "it uses an anime-ish art style and is heavily structured like a Japanese series, so I consider it an anime")

For me, what I define as kaiju goes by whether or not they fit 2 out of 3 qualifications:

1. The giant monster is from Japan (Golden Snitch rule; if it's big and from Japan, Kaiju.)
2. The monster has a personality and does not just roar and stomp on things.

3. The design is unique enough to separate it from the ol' "just a big ____" label.

In this way, I consider Kong 2017, Clover, and the Pacific Rim monsters kaiju (seeing how they fit #2 and #3), but at the same time, I don't consider 1933 or 2005 Kong a kaiju (because they only fit #2), nor do I consider Rhedosaurus a kaiju (because it only fits #3; and barely so at that. Kinda looks like a giant Tuatara to be honest).

That's just my way of looking at it, anyways. I'm sure other people got their own ways too.

100+ feet tall monsters/creatures is enough for me to refer it as a Kaiju. Anything below that is just a giant monster for me.

^But that's not accurate at all. If the monster is 100+ feet and from America, how is it a kaiju?

The only reason the monsters are called kaiju in the Pacific Rim franchise is because it was an agreed upon name for giant monster within the context of that fictional universe--And del Toro wanted them to serve as an homage to actual kaiju inspired from Godzilla, Ultraman, etc.

Otherwise it makes no sense to use a Japanese term for an American-based creature. It's like calling America chocolate chip cookies biscuits just because that's what Great Britain calls them.

^

Fair enough I guess. How about I just label a monster from Japan as a "Kaiju" and label a monster from America as a "Giant Monster", seems fair to me.

That's... exactly what I said above.

@The Bootleg Rebellious

Yeah, but then what makes Hokmuto and Femuto? Surely they're not just giant monsters, right? Their unique design, the way they interact with humans and each other, the way they think; not akin to just another big beastie.

  ^ I'm just going to consider them both, both because they are made in America and appeared in a Godzilla movie. So I'm considering them as both. Seems fair to me. Unless you could change my mind.

NateZilla10000,
I don't think they're designs are unique at all. I think the MUTO are just following a similar arachni-tile design Hollywood has been obsessing over for years--As such they're easily giant monsters.

Ehhhh, but at the same time the MUTOs clearly have a separate biology from those creatures. Granted the Starship Trooper bugs served as a part of their inspiration, but just because they have multiple legs like the others doesn't make them generic.

Not to mention Hokmuto and Femuto have clear personalities in the movie too; you can see each of them thinking and showing emotion despite their lack of facial features. Passion, Curiosity, Rage (of course), Anguish, etc. You don't get that out of the majority of the others listed.

What is exactly wrong with Monster/Kaiju having multiple legs aside from being "Overdone"? There is nothing wrong with Monster/Kaiju having multiple legs as long they aren't oversized already existing insects/arachnids.

"What is exactly wrong with Monster/Kaiju having multiple legs aside from being "Overdone"?"

Overdone = uninspired, boring. You answered your own question.

Regardless of whether or not the MUTO show personality, they're still not kaiju and clearly highly influenced by the Hollywood cogs of creature design.

But again, even if the multiple legs thing is a common trait in Hollywood, how does that make the overall design uninspired? That's 1 aspect about their design: multiple legs.

And what about all the things they did differently with them? Never before did we have a kaiju that looked like a stealth bomber, made those absolutely weird noises, had sexual dimorphism, used echolocation, had bio-luminescent lights to correlate with their echolocation, or utilized EMPs for both attacking as well as for communication with one another.

There's plenty of other character traits other than their limb count that make the MUTOs unique in design. Not to mention, yes, their personality is important. Kaiju always show their own character; they're not just big beasties that stomp on things and roar.

Still better than oversized insects/arachnids.

Kaiju always show their own character; they're not just big beasties that stomp on things and roar.

And they're Japanese.

The other physical traits are easily overlooked, nothing exactly high creative output. When you step back and take the basic design and silhouette into account it's not a massive leap from Hollywoods favorite creature tropes.

Other American monsters have personalities as well. That doesn't make them kaiju either.