What defines a Godzilla movie?

SHAZOTHEHEDGEHOG - A Godzilla film is defined by its singular, self-evident trait: the inclusion of Godzilla. The destruction, death and/or mayhem that ensues over the course of such a film is secondary to the apperance and role of Godzilla himself. Al in all, I am of a mind to state that a Godzilla film is defined primarily by the lead monster's (Godzilla's) spot in the film. :)

Thank you Something Real for that wondrous response! I can agree with your point through every detail!

SHAZOTHEHEDGEHOG - You are most welcome! I am pleased the response I gave is acceptible. As an aside, I am mortified by the fact that I did not spell "all" correctly in my reply! Ugh! I am such and oaf! Oh, well. :)

What makes a Godzilla movie?

Godzilla

destruction

people running and getting crushed by buildings

people talking about how to stop ethier godzilla or the other evil monster

have godzilla destroy more stuff and fight the millitary, fight a super X or mech, or another monster

have godzilla swim to the water, "die", or roar in victory then walk to the water

godzilla theme in the end credits 

BOOM

oh and have a badass opening of godzilla roaring when he busts out of the water as the opening titles show up

@Something Real, I didnt notice that 'all" was mispelled! XD

@HeiseiKing So basically the same structure as a Heisei Godzilla movie? Its ironic hense your name! XD. For my animation, Godzilla would have a silhouette rising out of rubble with the J. Robert Oppenheimer dialogue. When the dialogue would say "Vishnu takes on his multi-armed form, and says..." Godzilla would be seen from a side angle rising up from the rubble of Japan in silhouette form and the screen would cut to black. An iconic Godzilla roar would sound loudly and the dialogue will continue, fading into the title as the line finishes.

As i said above a badass opening titles, and yours is BADASS!!!

I think the only real criteria is Something Real's. Everything else is just an added variable.

Did we see people physically die on-screen in Godzilla vs. Mothra '92? How much destruction was there in Godzilla's Revenge? Did he fight a monster in Godzilla '54 or The Return of Godzilla?

It seems to me the traits many think define a Godzilla movie aren't the result of being a Godzilla movie, but rather how screenwriters believe specific films should be written. Deaths, destruction and battles depend on what kind of Godzilla movie your setting out to make. They're not necessarily a recipe that automatically make a Godzilla film.

My views are based off of Something Reals and G-Mans.

A Godzilla film is Godzilla, the bottom line, backdrop, everything its about Godzilla. But Godzilla, has to act a certain way and invoke a certain feeling with his presence, and a good amount of G films don't execute this well (GMK).

In the original 1954, Godzilla's presence was felt when he was not on screen. He was here not intentionally, but acting on instinct, which is something terrifying for us humans. Godzilla in the Heisei series destroyed the building for a mainly Malicious intent, and had no care whether we lived or died, he was fighting for himself and anyone who needed too go in the process would have.

In the Millenium, he had mixed feelings. In 2000 he had truly malicious intent, FOR THE FIRST HALF. And then he battled Orga, my feelings are as those for the Heisei for Millenium, he was fighting for himself. And this was further Proven when he proceed's to blow up the city.

In GMK, Godzilla tried so hard too be evil that he was not evil, he was cartoony. And in Tokyo SOS he was a pure evil, but once again his villanious presence wasn't felt because him being evil was too forced upon you.

And in Final wars he was portrayed as a Anti-Hero leaning towards being a hero, so he was a good Godzilla.

In Godzilla 2014, Godzilla had a uncontrollable feel, he felt like an animal but an animal who can not be stopped he truly felt like Godzilla, but only when he was on screen!! When Godzilla was off screen his presence was not felt, you just knew he existed and he was not shown enough for you too feel his power. But when he was on screen he felt like a Godzilla.

@Gman2887, Where my animation was going, I wanted a dark tone. That's why I wanted death, destruction and battles. When I first got into Godzilla, the movie I saw was Godzilla vs King Ghidorah. It had a very dark tone towards the end of the movie and that's what gave me chills. It's exactly what I'm aiming for. Thanks for your response, it made me think a lot about the films I've watched.

@GorillaGodzilla, Wow, that was awesomelay detailed! You just went and described most of the Godzilla personalities! I really didnt see how Godzilla 2000 was malicious to me until you made that description. I just though he didn't give a crap about people at all. Thanks for your response!

Yeah it pretty much just comes down to having Godzilla. Destroying buildings/protecting them, fighting other monsters/being alone, killing people/saving people, being good/bad every aspect of these has been done in movies that we all would call a Godzilla movie.

As long as it has Godzilla the film can go in whatever direction it wants with the character for the most part.

It really boils down to what kind of Godzilla film you're watching. Everything Durp004, something real, and Gman2887 pointed out is pretty much what makes a Godzilla a Godzilla film.

"I really didnt see how Godzilla 2000 was malicious to me until you made that description."

ShazoTheHedgehog,
To be fair, other than the 1954 film, I think GorillaGodzilla pretty much misses the mark on most of the films he was describing by a pretty large margin. I've always felt in cases like Godzilla 2000 and the Heisei series, he's simply territorial. Tokyo SOS wasn't truly evil, he was simply attacking because the bones of a relative had been disturbed, as emphasized by the Shobijin/Chujo about a thousand times in that film.

And he's normally off about the excellence in GMK which emphasized Godzilla as a symbolic amaglam for the historical dangers of generational gaps spiraling a culture into repeat mistakes. The idea was that he was their to forcibly remind Japan, thus the "force" was necessary.

But this gets into less about what makes a Godzilla movie and more about how Godzilla is used. He's been a nuclear analogy. Defender of humanity. Advocate for going green. A cold war pin-up. A posterboard for natural disasters. A social study for unchecked nationalism and capitalism. A confidence builder for children with imagination. A warning about generational mistakes and an example of world unity. He can stand in for practically anything as long as he looks, sounds, walks, fights and terrorizes (whether it be an enemy monster or humanity) like Godzilla.

I agree with everything stated above me

However, as long as it isn't some movie made by a different studio that uses basically a new creature that Toho takes the rights to and makes it a new kaiju, it's a Godzilla movie.

@GMAN2887 Its just.. Godzilla didn't reallly look like a "malicious being" in 2000 to me. I like to see other people view. Heisei Godzilla, in later movies, looked like a passionate creature who cared for others and didn't destroy intentionally. However in Godzilla vs King Ghidorah and Biollante, his demeanor was terrifying towards mankind. I enjoyed GMK, but Godzilla looked odd. His personality was destructive but his look was just disturbing. Thanks for the clarificaction.

Wow, these responses are getting really good! I enjoy reading them all!

The later Heisei Godzilla films certainly tried to portray Godzilla in a more sympathetic light, generally. This is likely due to story shifts in the later Heisei movies.

Godzilla in Godzilla 2000 was out to destroy human energy for some reason-- That act seemed like terrirotial aggression to me.

And if you found Godzilla's look disturbing in GMK, I would say the film's mission was accomplished.

But again all of this has more to do with how to use the character. Not what makes a Godzilla film.

Gman, i believed that Godzilla did indeed have Malicious intent in 2000. Tokyo SOS was him being back with a vengeance cause he was attacked, 2003 may have just been territorial. And you can't deny, in GMK they were trying too hard to make him seem like a Demon which was so strange after Godzilla never acting like that.

And Shazo no problem glad i helped.

    I have often found myself at odds with how to feel when viewing GMK. The concept of Godzilla being an otherworldly being that is, for all intents and purposes, a monstrous composite of restless souls and negative energy is, hmm, interesting.

    Personally, I have always enjoyed Godzilla as a cautionary tale against the use of atomic power - a mutant nightmare resultant of Mankind's abject disregard for nature. That is what Godzilla is to me; what he means to me. He is a symbol of unfettered progress that cares naught for the world within which it has arisen - a monolithic being of flesh and blood characterized by our most horrid qualities. To that end, Godzilla is much like the humans responsible for his birth; and, like nealry evey creation that has arisen from our haphazard manner of discovery, he is destined to destroy us. There is no reason good enough to explain this fatalistic dance. Just as when a star dies upon generating iron within its core, it simply is the way it must be.

GorillaGodzilla,

Godzilla in Gmk acted no different than Godzilla 54', 64', and 84' films. This whole demon thing isn't taking into aspect by anyone. Toho did something different with Gmk and it worked. It's the highest grossing Godzilla film of the whole millennium series. Just because Godzilla in Gmk has the undertaker like eyes doesn't make him a demon. They wanted to represent fear. That's what Godzilla was in 54', 64' 84' and even few others.