Page 3 of 4

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:00 am
by Mini-Godzilla
MechaGoji Bro7503 wrote:^Mini-Godzilla, the Godzillasaurus/Heisei Godzilla is completely different from G54, in which the Futurians dont mess with for some reason.


According to Godzilla '84, it's the same monster. He's "immortal," as Hayashida puts it. GvKG assumes the same thing (which is why the characters directly mention 1954 as the year of irradiation), and GvBio establishes that Godzilla's cells can regenerate. GvDes confuses the point a bit, but every film in continuity up to that point asserts that there's only one Godzilla.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2017 11:58 am
by MechaGoji Bro7503
Mini-Godzilla wrote:
MechaGoji Bro7503 wrote:^Mini-Godzilla, the Godzillasaurus/Heisei Godzilla is completely different from G54, in which the Futurians dont mess with for some reason.


According to Godzilla '84, it's the same monster. He's "immortal," as Hayashida puts it. GvKG assumes the same thing (which is why the characters directly mention 1954 as the year of irradiation), and GvBio establishes that Godzilla's cells can regenerate. GvDes confuses the point a bit, but every film in continuity up to that point asserts that there's only one Godzilla.

Huh, I thought only the '85 version states him as immortal.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 10:10 pm
by godzilla1541

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:47 am
by szmigiel
That is the same theory that is posted here, it has the same flaws, brings in retcons from movies made years later to make it's point. It also fails to explain why the future seems to be changed when Emi is looking at the fallen King Ghidorah.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:32 pm
by BARAGONBREH
So, sorry if someone's already asked this (as I'm sure they have) but reading all these responses would be like reading a novel.

So, can anyone tell me, if the Godzilla in Heisei isn't the same as the mutated Godzillasaurus the Japanese met during WW2, then why did Godzilla and Shindo have their little intimate moment? Or does this prove definitively that Godzilla was not in fact empathizing whatsoever with Shindo and Shindo was just a moron for thinking this giant beast gave a skreeonk about him?

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:52 pm
by Fropston
BARAGONBREH wrote:So, sorry if someone's already asked this (as I'm sure they have) but reading all these responses would be like reading a novel.

So, can anyone tell me, if the Godzilla in Heisei isn't the same as the mutated Godzillasaurus the Japanese met during WW2, then why did Godzilla and Shindo have their little intimate moment? Or does this prove definitively that Godzilla was not in fact empathizing whatsoever with Shindo and Shindo was just a moron for thinking this giant beast gave a skreeonk about him?

From what I can tell, the timeline did not change whatsoever, as the same submarine still created the Heisei Godzilla. The Futurians were just extraordinarily incompetent, but at least they managed to create King Ghidorah. So it is the same Godzillasaurus.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2017 3:36 am
by Zarm
Fropston wrote:
BARAGONBREH wrote:So, sorry if someone's already asked this (as I'm sure they have) but reading all these responses would be like reading a novel.

So, can anyone tell me, if the Godzilla in Heisei isn't the same as the mutated Godzillasaurus the Japanese met during WW2, then why did Godzilla and Shindo have their little intimate moment? Or does this prove definitively that Godzilla was not in fact empathizing whatsoever with Shindo and Shindo was just a moron for thinking this giant beast gave a skreeonk about him?

From what I can tell, the timeline did not change whatsoever, as the same submarine still created the Heisei Godzilla. The Futurians were just extraordinarily incompetent, but at least they managed to create King Ghidorah. So it is the same Godzillasaurus.


The Godzillasaurus is still the Heisei Godzilla, he's just not the 1954 Godzilla like Futurians thought.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 6:28 am
by Zarm
To begin with, I completely get this theory, as laid out in the OP: that the Futurians got it wrong, this was a predestion/stable time loop scenario in which Heisei Godzilla was always formed this way, and they just didn’t realize there were two Godzillas. And I think it is the best way to rationalize the plot if you’re looking to understand it in traditional time travel terms.

But

Rewatching this last night, I don’t think that’s accurate. I would posit that the intent of the film is to posit a world where time travel changes occur at the moment time travel does, bringing a new world into being from that point forward- and as such, not actually altering the past, only altering the present moment into a world as it would have been from an altered past. Which, as time travel logic goes, makes far less sense- but also matches the narrative far better.


Consider the following:
-The Futurians’ computer calculated the theory from the book at a 98% probability of being accurate; this computer is later shown to be reliable.

-At the exact moment of the time travel (in 1991), Godzilla vanishes and King Ghidorah appears. I know the current theory just indicates they have trouble tracking him… but Godzilla disappearing and KG appearing at that exact moment? That seems a little less easy to spin as a simple tracking error.

-The characters (including time-travel-knowledgeable Futurians) seem content that they have erased Godzilla from history even though everyone still remembers him and knows who he is, indicating that alteration of the past is supposed to work that way, if successful.

-Godzilla is now in the spot that they sent him to in the past, and appears to get there instantly from the place that he was, where he disappeared from at the moment of time travel. It would have to be an enormous coincidence for Godzilla, who had been motionless for two years, to suddenly start moving so rapidly he that ongoing tracking suddenly lost him (he didn’t seem like he had that kinda speed in him, from the ANEB), to head exactly for the spot he’d been born 50 years earlier, just as King Ghidorah, who’d been around (hiding?) for 50 years, suddenly got picked up, and all precisely at the moment that time travel occurred.

-When noting Godzilla’s size, the characters note that he was created with modern nuclear powers ‘this time’, as well as absorbing radiation from the sub. As opposed to Godzilla simply having been the same from Biollante and getting cured/enlarged by the sub. The characters are aware that the sub would have an effect- but then, Godzilla gets nuclear power in Return of Godzilla and doesn’t grow merely from that. The movie seems very intent on positioning this as due to the different nature of his origin. The Futurians also refer to it as his ‘second birth.’ Yes, these characters could be operating on an outmoded understanding based on a wrong theory (according to the accepted time travel model from this film)… but the idea that he now originated from the sub accident in the Berring Sea as opposed to the Bikini Atoll blast seems to be very much what the film is suggesting.

-Last but not least, I floated the idea that there are three 23rd century futures- the Futurians’, with a superpowered Japan that was untroubled by Godzilla, a second , where Japan had been destroyed by Godzilla, and the third and final, which would be super-advanced from the reverse-engineering of future-tech left behind in the 90s at the end of the movie. This time around, I realized that dialogue confirms this; in the sub scenes, the future fellow refers to Japan as a ‘needy country’ that had been destroyed by Godzilla and nuclear waste- indicating that the timeline had indeed changed from the Futurians’ origin based on the actions in the film.


All of this taken together suggests to me that- while the logic of it may not fit a typical understanding of time travel- this film is indeed positing that Godzilla’s past had been altered by the events in this film, successfully; that, based on the nature of their odd time travel model, RoG and vs. Biollante still happened… but that at the moment the time travel craft departed and returned to 1991, Godzilla did indeed vanish- replaced by this new version of Godzilla with an alternate past whose visit to Japan here was, for him, his first.

History changed- but only from this moment in 1991-onward, with every preceding moment untouched (however nonsensical that is when you think about it), but the kaiju themselves altering states instantly to the nature they would have been from the revised history (KG coming into existence on Lagos, ANEB-infected Godzilla from Bikini Atoll ceasing to exist, sub-mutated Godzilla popping into existence in the Berring Sea; both at, essentially, their first moment of existence, with no prior history).*

It’s the only thing that matches all the dialogue and concepts in the film- which the prevailing time travel theory, while more logical in its temporal mechanics, simply doesn’t. As fans, we’ve concocted another model that gives the writers far more credit than they deserve; but I’d suggest neither the idea that this was a stable time loop, nor a situation in which RoG and Biollante were erased from history; but a weird, third option in which the past still happened for everyone except Godzilla, who now has a different history.


*This confusing model- with past changes resulting in an instantaneous change to the present to the new status quo, despite not undoing anything prior to that moment- does also seem to be what’s used in Rebirth of Mothra III, meaning that at least there is a consistent, nonsensical cosmological model for time travel in this era?

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:27 am
by eabaker
You are absolutely correct, Zarm. The "time loop" interpretation defies both the internal logic of the movie (which you nicely lay out here) and the apparent thematic intent (that Godzilla himself, being a reflection of and punishment for human hubris, is a historical inevitability which cannot be prevented - a point which only matters if others things can be altered/prevented).

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 9:39 am
by Zarm
Incidentally, in the West, Frequency is the only film I can think of that uses (roughly) this kind of time travel model... which is definitely more about narrative and emotion than trying to reason out 'how it might actually work'. (Which, arguably, most sci-fi time travel is about; story needs over science- this model just has less artifice to disguise that fact than others!) ;)

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:02 am
by LegendZilla
I'm surprised more of you people aren't up in arms over continuity issues like this that riddled the Showa films, just as much if not more so than this film and by an extant the Heisei series as a whole.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:05 am
by Zarm
I don't think this is a continuity complaint; just an attempt to analyze/make sense of what we saw presented onscreen.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:15 am
by eabaker
Zarm wrote:I don't think this is a continuity complaint; just an attempt to analyze/make sense of what we saw presented onscreen.


Yeah. In fact, one of my major problems with the "stable time loop" argument at a basic theoretical level is that it relies on evidence from subsequent movies, which means emphasizing ongoing continuity over the logic of the movie itself.

Also, the Showa series never really presented itself as being continuity-driven, while the Heisei series continually embraced continuity as a key component.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:19 pm
by MechaGoji Bro7503
LegendZilla wrote:I'm surprised more of you people aren't up in arms over continuity issues like this that riddled the Showa films, just as much if not more so than this film and by an extant the Heisei series as a whole.

Well what continuity issues did the Showa series have? I don't think they really had any since everything's pretty lenient, and like eabaker said the Showa Godzilla series wasn't worried about continuity. I'll add on that I think it not being continuity-driven doesn't mean anything contradicts each other.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:27 pm
by LegendZilla
MechaGoji Bro7503 wrote:
LegendZilla wrote:I'm surprised more of you people aren't up in arms over continuity issues like this that riddled the Showa films, just as much if not more so than this film and by an extant the Heisei series as a whole.

Well what continuity issues did the Showa series have? I don't think they really had any since everything's pretty lenient, and like eabaker said the Showa Godzilla series wasn't worried about continuity. I'll add on that I think it not being continuity-driven doesn't mean anything contradicts each other.


I can a few :

1. Minya seemingly not aging between 1967 and 1999.
2. The Myriad of kaiju who were clearly killed in their debut films, only to somehow magically come back to life in Destroy all Monsters.
3. Never canonically clarifying the connection between Monster Island and Monsterland.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:31 pm
by Maritonic
Continuity wasn't really a thing for the Showa Series. It was for the Heisei Series.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:36 pm
by Zarm
LegendZilla wrote:1. Minya seemingly not aging between 1967 and 1999.
2. The Myriad of kaiju who were clearly killed in their debut films, only to somehow magically come back to life in Destroy all Monsters.
3. Never canonically clarifying the connection between Monster Island and Monsterland.


I don't know that Minya's aging rate is really a continuity error, unless it's compared to some known rate for the species that is not being adhered to. Likewise, Monster Island and Monsterland aren't clarified... but I don't know of any particular claim that is violated by having either one or two islands that house monsters with 'monster' in the name.

And yes, it is absolutely true that a bunch of monsters show up again in DAM after having died, which strictly speaking is poor continuity... but keep in mind this is the 9th entry in the Godzilla series, a series in which the title monster was killed in the first movie and a second, identical monster showed up without explanation in the second. :) So I'd call it more an accepted premise of the series than a continuity breach in anything but the strictest terms- and certainly something where proof-of-concept has been offered about multiple survivors from a single species.



Either way, though- like I said, I don't think this thread is meant to be a criticism of the Heisei era (unfairly scrutinizing it, unlike Showa), or even a criticism of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah- just an analysis of the plot of the film, its mechanics, a now-popular theory, and, as of today, a refutation and counter-theory. :) None of which is done to denigrate the film or era... just to explore the workings of the film in detail as nerds like myself often do with the things they love. :)

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:41 pm
by eabaker
That counter-theory, by the way, was exactly the conclusion reached in the pages of G-Fan back in the mid-90s. I actually assumed that was the default interpretation until the Aiken article started getting pushed online.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:48 pm
by LegendZilla
Zarm wrote:
LegendZilla wrote:1. Minya seemingly not aging between 1967 and 1999.
2. The Myriad of kaiju who were clearly killed in their debut films, only to somehow magically come back to life in Destroy all Monsters.
3. Never canonically clarifying the connection between Monster Island and Monsterland.


I don't know that Minya's aging rate is really a continuity error, unless it's compared to some known rate for the species that is not being adhered to. Likewise, Monster Island and Monsterland aren't clarified... but I don't know of any particular claim that is violated by having either one or two islands that house monsters with 'monster' in the name.

And yes, it is absolutely true that a bunch of monsters show up again in DAM after having died, which strictly speaking is poor continuity... but keep in mind this is the 9th entry in the Godzilla series, a series in which the title monster was killed in the first movie and a second, identical monster showed up without explanation in the second. :) So I'd call it more an accepted premise of the series than a continuity breach in anything but the strictest terms- and certainly something where proof-of-concept has been offered about multiple survivors from a single species.

Either way, though- like I said, I don't think this thread is meant to be a criticism of the Heisei era (unfairly scrutinizing it, unlike Showa), or even a criticism of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah- just an analysis of the plot of the film, its mechanics, a now-popular theory, and, as of today, a refutation and counter-theory. :) None of which is done to denigrate the film or era... just to explore the workings of the film in detail as nerds like myself often do with the things they love. :)


Nothing wrong will calling out on double standards.

Re: The time-travel of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

Posted: Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:51 pm
by eabaker
LegendZilla wrote:Nothing wrong will calling out on double standards.


It's not a double standard, though. In both cases, the standard is, "Judge the movies on how well they accomplish their goals."