Toho Kingdom

His “official” name is “French Godzilla”.
That’s a new one.

I like him. While obviously not official by any means, I like the fanfic idea of Zilla's species being related to Godzilla's.

I watch it as a cool kaiju. By the way, call him GINO or Godzilla 1998 is wrong, because they are 2 different creatures, not the same.

If it weren't named after something it clearly isn't, I'd like it more. With the animated series that came after being more faithful to what Godzilla should be like, it's an okay kaiju thanks to the improvement it gave Zilla.

As its own monster with his own identity and traits, he's not THAT bad. He's a decent lower-mid tier kaiju. As a Godzilla incarnation though...... Might as well make bootprints on that dead horse.

Its that giant iguana that failed to kill Ferris Bueller...

And then it got its face kicked in & was buried in Sydney.

Yay?

Grievous wrote:Its that giant iguana that failed to kill Ferris Bueller...

And then it got its face kicked in Sydney...

Yay?

As a new member here, I should warn you that this attitude is not going to make you any friends. Roland Emmerich's Definitive Godzilla(tm) is quite beloved on these boards (almost as much as Shin Godzilla is universally hated.)

Zarm wrote:

Grievous wrote:Its that giant iguana that failed to kill Ferris Bueller...

And then it got its face kicked in Sydney...

Yay?

As a new member here, I should warn you that this attitude is not going to make you any friends. Roland Emmerich's Definitive Godzilla(tm) is quite beloved on these boards (almost as much as Shin Godzilla is universally hated.)

;)

Well...Thanks for the info Zarm...

BUT...

That isn't going to change my opinion on the creature
known as Zilla or stop me from voicing said opinion.

This is not simply the "hateful ramblings" of a "diehard
fanboy" I do not like Zilla. The design is boring, the film
he was introduced in is long, tedious & boring & I would
like to think that if I can accept that there are fans of
Zilla...then hopefully those fans can accept that I am not
a fan.

I'm not trying to start any trouble...I'm just being open &
honest with my opinions...while hopefully getting a chuckle
out of a few members.

Grievous wrote:

Zarm wrote:

Grievous wrote:Its that giant iguana that failed to kill Ferris Bueller...

And then it got its face kicked in Sydney...

Yay?

As a new member here, I should warn you that this attitude is not going to make you any friends. Roland Emmerich's Definitive Godzilla(tm) is quite beloved on these boards (almost as much as Shin Godzilla is universally hated.)

Well...Thanks for the info Zarm...

BUT...

That isn't going to change my opinion on the creature
known as Zilla or stop me from voicing said opinion.

This is not simply the "hateful ramblings" of a "diehard
fanboy" I do not like Zilla. The design is boring, the film
he was introduced in is long, tedious & boring & I would
like to think that if I can accept that there are fans of
Zilla...then hopefully those fans can accept that I am not
a fan.

I'm not trying to start any poop...I'm just being open &
honest with my opinions.

(In case the smiley was not clear, I was completely joking on both counts.)

Zarm wrote:(In case the smiley was not clear, I was completely joking on both counts.)

Oh...

Oh...I missed the joke.

Sorry...

I used to like Zilla '98 as a kid, now. It's mixed. I like Zilla as it's own monster. He's smart and fast and has a good design. As a giant monster movie, it's not bad.

As a Godzilla movie...not so much.

I've nearly forgotten about Zilla at this point, and I think it's best some parts of the fanbase stop obsessing over the '98 film (as in downright hating or loving it), and move on. It's been 20 years, and at the rate the franchise is going we're got 20 more years to let this franchise flourish.

Ever since GFW rehabilitated him and made him a separate kaiju, I am on board.

MechaGoji Bro7503 wrote:I've nearly forgotten about Zilla at this point, and I think it's best some parts of the fanbase stop obsessing over the '98 film (as in downright hating or loving it), and move on. It's been 20 years, and at the rate the franchise is going we're got 20 more years to let this franchise flourish.

Hear Hear!

KaijuCanuck wrote:Ever since GFW rehabilitated him and made him a separate kaiju, I am on board.

That's a funny word for "Smacked around like a little bitch"

American Godzilla wrote:Even though the monster in the 1998 film wasn't Godzilla

It was tho

To (hopefully) head off this semantic debate from starting again-

Godzilla, the legal, trademarked entity; yes.

Godzilla, he character from the other Godzilla movies that everyone identifies with that name... not necessarily. The threshold of what qualifies for being a new interpretation of the same character vs. a totally different character with the same name varies from individual to individual.

It's the same with any claim of 'this isn't [X Franchise]'- technically, for legal and product-owner purposes, it is. But its content actually meeting that criteria, to actually be that thing and not a knock-off or pretender that assumes the same name; that's for the individual fan to decide, and difficult to objectively quantify.

('This isn't canon,' on the other hand, is not a valid claim, as canon is an objective standard of what is considered official. The correct statement there would be more akin to 'this is not in continuity' or 'this can't exist in the same universe', which is a quantification of congruity- likewise, objective- rather than a statement on whether something is on an official list or not, which conflicts of continuity and logic don't actually affect. But that's a different discussion...)

Zarm wrote:To (hopefully) head off this semantic debate from starting again-

Godzilla, the legal, trademarked entity; yes.

Godzilla, he character from the other Godzilla movies that everyone identifies with that name... not necessarily. The threshold of what qualifies for being a new interpretation of the same character vs. a totally different character with the same name varies from individual to individual.

It's the same with any claim of 'this isn't [X Franchise]'- technically, for legal and product-owner purposes, it is. But its content actually meeting that criteria, to actually be that thing and not a knock-off or pretender that assumes the same name; that's for the individual fan to decide, and difficult to objectively quantify.

('This isn't canon,' on the other hand, is not a valid claim, as canon is an objective standard of what is considered official. The correct statement there would be more akin to 'this is not in continuity' or 'this can't exist in the same universe', which is a quantification of congruity- likewise, objective- rather than a statement on whether something is on an official list or not, which conflicts of continuity and logic don't actually affect. But that's a different discussion...)

Yeah...

What he said.

*Goes back to reading Power Girl comics*

Low point or not, still Godzilla. Denouncing it because we don't like it isn't really how it works.

Claiming it's not the Godzilla you know and love is cool. But it's still Godzilla. Just a really crappy one lol.

I think, for the most part, when people are saying that (and this really reminds me of the Ghidorah discussion a few weeks back), they're not denying that it's Godzilla, the trademark; just that that isn't Godzilla, the character. Or, as you put it, 'not the Godzilla we know and love'- just another guy coincidentally named Godzilla. I think that's what most people mean by 'not Godzilla.'

(Or, for that matter 'not Luke Skywalker,' 'not Superman,' 'not Batman,' etc.; someone whose character is so different from the character normally associated with that name that, for all intents and purposes, they are a completely different individual tat simply shares the name. Not that it isn't that character- clearly, it is intended to be; but that it misses the mark heavily enough to not be connected to the individual that was previously identified by that name, in their opinion.)

Zarm wrote:I think, for the most part, when people are saying that (and this really reminds me of the Ghidorah discussion a few weeks back), they're not denying that it's Godzilla, the trademark; just that that isn't Godzilla, the character. Or, as you put it, 'not the Godzilla we know and love'- just another guy coincidentally named Godzilla. I think that's what most people mean by 'not Godzilla.'

(Or, for that matter 'not Luke Skywalker,' 'not Superman,' 'not Batman,' etc.; someone whose character is so different from the character normally associated with that name that, for all intents and purposes, they are a completely different individual tat simply shares the name. Not that it isn't that character- clearly, it is intended to be; but that it misses the mark heavily enough to not be connected to the individual that was previously identified by that name, in their opinion.)

Yeah I know; that's why I threw that in there