Godzilla Thread

[SpartanSquat]

I understand Godzilla is a fantasy, but the modern remake has got me thinking- would it be possible that a theropod could have evolved with a dragging tail and upright posture, much like the Godzillasaurus that Godzilla himself was a mutant of?


I guess what I find really weird about the new movie is that it features a monster that is based upon a concept that is so dated. It's set in the twentieth century and all, and we know tail dragging theropods (to our knowledge) did not exist, and yet no-one questions it. It just clashes with the realistic, gritty style of the film itself. It's like if Jurassic Park had been made with Ray Harryhausen models.

I have not seen the 2014 version yet, so maybe his backstory is different and maybe he isn't a mutated Godzillasaurus. I'm not bashing the Godzilla franchise btw, it's just something that interested me.

And yes, I do know I'm thinking way too deep into this...but that is my way

Well godzilla has had a couple origin stories, the mutated godzillasaurus being one from the hensai era but if the most recent movie is an unofficial follow-up to godzilla 1954 that the 1954 event happened and american tried to cover it up by blasting the Pacific ocean to hell, then the origin for this godzilla is a bit murky but the scientist in the 1954 film postulated godzilla was an amphibious precursor to the dinosaurs not a dinosaur himself he was not mutated by the h bomb just made aware of humans being a threat and godzilla has a heavy, muscular, very flexible tail used for swimming that tend to drag the ground when he is on land like crocodile tails, as for his upright posture it is based on outdated concepts of theropods but in its own way has become iconic, and since the 1954 godzilla wasn't truly a dinosaur or any type of animal that we have a fossil record of who is to say that the godzillas could not have evolved an upright posture.

Exactly! The new one used the 1954 theory. The new ones in the graphic novel said its a giant marine reptil that lived in Permian. I have a theroy that the new Godzilla specie is related with Placodus.

Looks like a mini version of Godzilla.

[brandem]

Hey here's a text zoo about godzilla physiology
http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2007/02/07/the-science-of-godzilla-1/

[Gwangi]

Same article also discusses what Godzilla "is".

Godzilla's phylogenetic affinities

Based on the conclusions of Japanese palaeontologist Dr Yamane, we 'know' that the original Godzilla from the 1954 movie was a dinosaur, and according to Carpenter (1998) it was clearly a theropod. Yes, this is Ken Carpenter, the palaeontologist best known for his work on armoured dinosaurs. By inferring certain morphological details, Carpenter concluded that Godzilla must have been an immense neoceratosaur related to ceratosaurids and abelisaurs. In part this idea comes from the shared derived character of bony scutes growing along the dorsal midline: present in both Godzilla and ceratosaurids, these aren't present in other theropods and were therefore interpreted as a synapomorphy. I don't need to tell you that Carpenter's article was written tongue-in-cheek.

[Yutyrannus]

Wow, you're thinking too much about this. Don't try to classify Godzilla, he's fictional and he's meant to be fictional. It's like trying to classify a manticore.

[tyrantqueen]

Wow, you're thinking too much about this. Don't try to classify Godzilla, he's fictional and he's meant to be fictional. It's like trying to classify a manticore.

What if people find it interesting? There is usually some logic behind fiction, even fantasy. All the best science fiction and fantasy designs are influenced by real animals and concepts. It's fun to think about. It's no different from people on DeviantART who have been inventing dragon species and evolutionary trees.

[Yutyrannus]

Yes, but Godzilla is pure fantasy, there is nothing similar to him and there never has been. Maybe he was influenced by real animals but only faintly, and he is not meant to be anything real.

[Gwangi]

Yes, but Godzilla is pure fantasy, there is nothing similar to him and there never has been. Maybe he was influenced by real animals but only faintly, and he is not meant to be anything real.

We're all aware of that but It's still fun to speculate and imagine. This is especially true given our mutual interests in biology, paleontology and natural history. None of us take it that seriously (I hope).
On a similar note we once tried to identify a Swedish fish candy using our identification key in a college ichthyology class. No, it wasn't part of the class.

[tyrantqueen]

Yes, but Godzilla is pure fantasy, there is nothing similar to him and there never has been. Maybe he was influenced by real animals but only faintly, and he is not meant to be anything real.

Actually the 2014 design was influenced by bears and crocodiles (according to the designer). He has gills like a fish, which is an adaptation for an aquatic lifestyle. He obviously has the body of a theropod dinosaur, and his plates are inspired by a Stegosaurus. Also, the original fifties Godzilla film was an allegory for the atomic bomb.

We're all aware of that but It's still fun to speculate and imagine. This is especially true given our mutual interests in biology, paleontology and natural history. None of us take it that seriously (I hope).
On a similar note we once tried to identify a Swedish fish candy using our identification key in a college ichthyology class. No, it wasn't part of the class.

Yep, I agree, it is fun.

[tyrantqueen]

Btw, I always thought those x-ray type pictures you can find in mangas were really cool



I also remember reading somewhere that the Godzillasaurus species had a second brain in its lower body, which seems to have been inspired from the (now discarded) theory that stegosaurus had a second brain.

[brandem]

classify a manticore.

Family: chimera
Genus: sphinx
Species: S. martyaxwar

[Yutyrannus]

Yes, but Godzilla is pure fantasy, there is nothing similar to him and there never has been. Maybe he was influenced by real animals but only faintly, and he is not meant to be anything real.

We're all aware of that but It's still fun to speculate and imagine. This is especially true given our mutual interests in biology, paleontology and natural history. None of us take it that seriously (I hope).
On a similar note we once tried to identify a Swedish fish candy using our identification key in a college ichthyology class. No, it wasn't part of the class.

All right then.

[Paleogene Pals]

All right, but how would Godzilla fit in with say a Gorgo? They obviously share a common ancestor somewhere.

[Simon]

My 17-year old son asked me to go with him to see Godzilla tonight.  IMAX 3D

Should be a fun time.  I feel like I know enough about the movie to (hopefully) avoid some disappointment from not seeing enough Godzilla ...

I'll report back tomorrow.  I remember seeing the original (1954) Godzilla on TV when I was a kid.  The next day everyone at school was talking about it.  Caused quite a sensation.  This was before 90% of you on this board were even born (Stoneage was, of course, being older than me) ....

[brandem]

Gorgo I feel would have to be a more basal member of the godzilla Clade, more prominent amphibious features such as exposed gills but not having developed the conductive plate that help channel their internal radioactivity stores into a concentrated beam.

Perhaps the most basal member of this group being rhedosaurus, a species transitioning to aquatic life but smaller and better suited to being on land for prolonged periods of time.

[Gwangi]

Are we going to have to start a serious scientific kaiju thread? 

[Paleogene Pals]

Yes you will 

OK, I buy Gorgo as a basal member and rhedosaurus as the most basal of the Godzilla Clade. Since characteristics of the Godzilla Clade apparently include exposed gills, amphibious nature, and the ability to terrorize at will, I would have to include the Creature from the Black Lagoon as the most highly derived member, having developed rudimentary intelligence. Although the Creature is not radioactive or has the ability to project radioactivity as far as I know, I believe this trait was lost along with the size reduction. Atomic breath is fatal to use under forty feet tall.

The Creature is likely a direct ancestor to the Loveland Toad, which has demonstrated tool usage.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

Did anyone not see this coming ?

http://www.scified.com/site/godzillamovies/godzilla-2014-sequel-is-already-in-development

[postsaurischian]

I have seen the IMAX 3D version yesterday.
Pretty bad movie, but the best Gozilla monster I've seen so far.
Since the movie is called 'Godzilla', I wish they would have given him more than just a minor part.
Ergo > About 20 minutes of the movie are great entertainment. Another Hollywood movie I will forget in about two days.

[Simon]

Just got back from the IMAX 3D.  A few thoughts (without giving away too much for those who haven't seen it;

1.  8 out of 10 is about appropriate for this movie;
2.  It is the best serious Godzilla movie since the original (1954).
3.  It is hands down the most lifelike Godzilla; and the best CGI effects as well - the scenes with G's fins racing through the water I find to be truly iconic;
4.  The film is not a "WWE match" like so many campy formula Godzilla movies of the past; Lest I be accused of misleading, let me clarify that unlike many G movies, this one is not a start-to-finish drag out knock down brawl.  And as often happens, in this movie, "Less becomes More" as a result; The action sequences are surprisingly BRUTAL and not at all cartoon-like. And the final 'coup-de-grace' scene is an absolute classic.
5.  This movie is a surprisingly good and fresh take on a "serious" sci fi story (as serious as it can be with skyscraper-sized monsters);
6.  Outside of the main character's parents early on, I thought the acting was pretty good for a kaiju flick;
7.  Both my son and I were hoping for a sequel, which, given the box office take and positive word of mouth buzz seems inevitable right now;
8.  My 17-year old non-sci-fi-junkie, non-Godzilla-freak, serious son really liked it;  I read that to mean that the movie has scored at least a Triple (if not a Homerun) with the age group that determines how successful a film it will be [apologies for the baseball analogy for our non-American friends];

Initially I was not interested in seeing it (after all, how can one make a serious Godzilla flick?), but after reading reviews I became intrigued;  the movie turned out to be much, much better than I expected it to be - part "Cloverfield" (ominous suspense), part "Battleship" (great CGI, fantastic action sequences), and VERY entertaining!

I give it 4 out of 5 THUMBS UP.

Go to the movie without reading too many spoilers and without expecting any old "formula" Godzilla flick and you will come away pleasantly surprised.

[tyrantqueen]

I'm going to see the movie today, and I'm taking my parents and sister with me. My parents are in their sixties and retired, but my mum seems to enjoy monster movies (she even liked the Emmerich Godzilla...) and my dad really liked Pacific Rim, so I'm thinking they'll probably enjoy it.

As for me, I don't expect too much from it, but I don't expect much from any movie nowadays, really.