Constant rebooting of Godzilla

[LegendZilla]

Hey there folks, LegendZilla here. Ever since 1999 with Godzilla 2000, virtually every Godzilla film has been a reboot with an entirely new continuity. People have argued that the benefit of such a practice is allowing every filmmaker to do their own unique spin on Godzilla and I understand that. However, does this practice have to be the only way for the rest of time? I am in the crowd that yearns for the day Toho makes up their minds to establish one sole continuity to settle on for an extended period of time.

Sure there’s the Monsterverse and Anime trilogy, but those weren’t actually done by Toho themselves. For almost a generation, they have developed an unhealthy obsession for constantly hitting the reboot button and I’m calling it for them to take a break. I simply wish to see in my lifetime, a singular timeline for Toho have be the setting for a line of Godzilla (and possibly other monster films) to take place in. If they could have it last as long as the Heisei series, or even the Showa series, I would be happy.

Anyone share my feelings? If so, posting what you have to say in this matter here would be greatly appreciated. I’m looking forward to see how this thread does.

[UltramanGoji]

The problem with a single continuity is that you have to force the creative staffs of entries in the series to be beholden to whatever has happened before. This severely limits creative potential at every angle from the designs of reoccurring monsters to story problems like tonal environments and character decisions. For example, if you establish a Showa-like continuity where pseudoscientific weaponry is the norm, it therefore severely affects the plans for a future director who wants a more grounded film. The idea of a grounded reality in this director’s film is now slightly less doable due to a previously established tone. It’s not impossible, but it’s definitely hindered.

I’m also not one of those people who has the “everything must be connected” gene. I don’t have it, I don’t get excited when things in these movies callback things from older movies. It’s not interesting to me, nor is it detrimental to my viewing experience. It’s why I’m not really opposed to the constant reboots because what matters to me is an interesting and unique vision to a film.

[LegendZilla]

The problem with a single continuity is that you have to force the creative staffs of entries in the series to be beholden to whatever has happened before. This severely limits creative potential at every angle from the designs of reoccurring monsters to story problems like tonal environments and character decisions. For example, if you establish a Showa-like continuity where pseudoscientific weaponry is the norm, it therefore severely affects the plans for a future director who wants a more grounded film. The idea of a grounded reality in this director’s film is now slightly less doable due to a previously established tone. It’s not impossible, but it’s definitely hindered.

I’m also not one of those people who has the “everything must be connected” gene. I don’t have it, I don’t get excited when things in these movies callback things from older movies. It’s not interesting to me, nor is it detrimental to my viewing experience. It’s why I’m not really opposed to the constant reboots because what matters to me is an interesting and unique vision to a film.

I see your concern for lack of diversity of creative visions, but I do have a solution for such a problem. In the beginning, The MCU was relatively grounded with Ironman 1 only to become more fantastical with the passage of time. Or do you think the idea of shared cinematic universes is detrimental for reasons you stated above and Marvel should’ve never done it?

In that case, why can’t the same route be taken for Godzilla? Such a practice would solve a ton of creative conflict between directors. That’s just my suggestion.

[UltramanGoji]

By that logic, should’ve the MCU never been a thing with its shared continuity spanning over 20 films? In the beginning, it was relatively grounded with Ironman 1 only to become more fantastical with the passage of time. Why can’t the same route be taken for Godzilla?

Such a practice would solve a ton of creative conflict between directors. That’s just my suggestion. Do you think I have a valid point?

Apples to...well, not even oranges, more like apricots at this point.

“Marvel” is not a franchise. It’s a company. “Iron Man” is a franchise, “Thor” is a franchise, so is “Guardians of the Galaxy”, “Ant-Man”...you get the picture. The difference with Marvel and the MCU is that their catalog of characters and brands is so vast that each can stand on its own without having to be touted under a singular banner. Ant-Man movies can be made without having a direct tie to Thor because the two have no influence on each other.

With Godzilla however, it’s making a universe out of a single franchise, which is just a normal series of films like we’ve gotten in the past. A King Ghidorah series won’t necessarily work without Godzilla around, which essentially nullifies the concept of a standalone franchise like what Marvel has. It’s not a “cinematic universe” if everything is a “Godzilla thing”, if that makes any sense. It’s just a “Godzilla series” at that point.

So a “Toho cinematic universe” then? Well no, that wouldn’t really work either. 90% of Toho’s previously established standalone monster movies have been rolled in under the “Godzilla” banner. Mothra and Rodan are no longer “Toho kaiju”, they’re now “Godzilla kaiju”. Neither really appear as much without the Big G’s branding somewhere around them.

This is also part of the reason why I believe the MonsterVerse utterly fails as a “cinematic universe” as well. There’s a complete lack of standalone franchises (including Kong; one movie does not a standalone franchise make) and 50% of it is Godzilla sequels with no indication of expanding it beyond Godzilla and Kong as the tent pole characters. What we have now is essentially a Godzilla franchise with a Kong-focused prequel film.

Anyway, the initial question was “should the Godzilla franchise be constantly rebooted” which I think we’ve sidetracked from a bit. My answer is no, I don’t really think it should be, and in all honesty (as I’ve already said in my last post) I don’t really care.

[LegendZilla]

^Nowadays, pretty much every Marvel character has been rolled under the “Avengers” banner. Also, if you consider Marvel an invalid argument for a shared universe, why not Star Wars then?

[GoWhaleTours]

I don’t consider them reboots. The term reboot is usually used for a franchise starting fresh to rejuvenate it or create a new continuity. The Millenium films, for the most part, were not that. They all came out very close to each other and were done by different people without the constraints of prior entries.

[LSD Jellyfish]

I don’t consider them reboots. The term reboot is usually used for a franchise starting fresh to rejuvenate it or create a new continuity. The Millenium films, for the most part, were not that. They all came out very close to each other and were done by different people without the constraints of prior entries.

On top of that, while my memory is hazy, I'm pretty sure the millennium series has also been confirmed to be an intentional choice. It's not like they said "GMK failed" let's make GxMG. It's also pretty clear as UltramanGoji said it's n unnecessary constraint. We wouldn't have gotten GxMG or GFW if they were forcibly attached to GMK.

The other thing is that with the exception of maybe G2000 most of the movies are made far enough in distance from one another in time. It's not like what has been a recent thing with continually starting new super hero films.

I think the issue is that this is once again a case of applying "Hollywood" and comic book terminology to Godzilla films.

[LegendZilla]

I don’t consider them reboots. The term reboot is usually used for a franchise starting fresh to rejuvenate it or create a new continuity. The Millenium films, for the most part, were not that. They all came out very close to each other and were done by different people without the constraints of prior entries.

New continuity created on the spot = reboot.

[GoWhaleTours]

I don’t consider them reboots. The term reboot is usually used for a franchise starting fresh to rejuvenate it or create a new continuity. The Millenium films, for the most part, were not that. They all came out very close to each other and were done by different people without the constraints of prior entries.

New continuity created on the spot = reboot.

Not really, no. The word reboot (in hollywood) gained popularity when franchises started new film series based on existing characters. A refresh, reboot. The 2000s Godzilla movies are not that. They were (mostly) individual stories meant to standalone, without the intention of creating a new longstanding Godzilla verse. Like the person above you said, you can’t apply terminology like that to such a complicated Japanese film series, because it doesn’t apply.

[Jetty_Jags]

If we are going to compare godzilla movies to comic book terminology, I feel like the millennium series is much closer in nature to DC's Elseworlds comics than a reboot. For those unaware the elseworld comics include stories like Gotham by Gaslight (Victorian Batman hunts down Jack the ripper), Superman Red Son (Kal El lands in the soviet union) etc., where there's more liberties taken with the characters than what they had in the past. And honestly, if the quality remains high, I kinda hope this is the approach Toho continues with so we can get more unique and diverse stories.

Added in 3 minutes 45 seconds:
Interestingly enough, though, the picture representing a reboot on the Wikipedia page is one of Godzilla Raids Again (a particularly odd choice I might add).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reboot_(fiction)

[Dynomy-DX]

I don’t mind some of the alternate takes, but I think it would be nice if we got some extra trilogies in the midst of it all. With some movies, there’s so intrigue for what could be done next. Some obviously more than others, but my point remains. A middle ground of sorts could be fun. Some trilogies thrown around if certain iterations are received well are welcome to me, as long as the creative freedom remains.

[eabaker]

In addition to the creative limitations potentially imposed by focus on ongoing continuity, there's also the risk of unfriendliness to new/casual audiences. Not every property is going to succeed in the mass-market arena the way that Star Wars and the MCU have - I imagine most people (by a wide margin) going to see a Godzilla movie want to see a Godzilla movie, not the latest chapter in the ongoing saga of Godzilla. To focus a bit on those two alternative examples, Star Wars and the MCU are both fundamentally character driven; the audience is compelled to come back and see what is going on in these people's lives, how the drama they experience transforms them over time. The core of the Godzilla franchise is, of course, Godzilla himself, but Godzilla is not compelling to audiences because of his emotions and psychology - Godzilla does not lend himself to soap opera.

That said, I can also understand getting tired of seeing the character re-introduced again and again, and I think the best approach most of the time is that of the Showa era, in which the pre-existence of the character could be taken for granted, but they were not beholden to specific, detailed continuity or [shudder] lore. You can see an evolution in the character and the world, but that evolution is really more reflective of the culture and the cinematic marketplace of the time than on the stories told in past movies.

[DirektorSplennic]

^ I agree with pretty much everything said here except the negativety towards lore. Some of the best parts of some properties, like Star Wars, is the extended lore you don't see in the movies. What's wrong with lore?

[tbeasley]

It's really nothing new as far as franchises are concerned, Batman, James Bond, Godzilla, etc. were all 'rebooted' before reboots were even a thing. There's also other long-running Japanese media to consider like Super Sentai, Ultraman and Kamen Rider where continuity has never been that stringent depending on the story and new series/movies are released just about annually with audiences/fans accustomed to it.

But as far as continuity is concerned myself I'd much rather see something like the self-contained Heisei Gamera (3 films) over the drawn-out Heisei Godzilla (7 films). Having a solid, consistent creative team goes a long way and can make the journey film to film very enriching and rewarding. It's a shame how, outside of the anime trilogy, we've yet to see that with Godzilla.

[eabaker]

^ I agree with pretty much everything said here except the negativety towards lore. Some of the best parts of some properties, like Star Wars, is the extended lore you don't see in the movies. What's wrong with lore?

Purely a matter of personal taste; I think too much focus on lore can distract from story, and for me a significant part of the fun of fantastic worlds is the opportunity to speculate about and imagine one's own version of the greater lore based on any story-relevant hints the works provide. Plus, it can just kind of muddle up what would otherwise be very graceful narratives.

Star Wars, for me, is definitely a case where filling in the backstory and lore mostly serves to dampen the magic and wonder.

[LegendZilla]

I am not saying they should never reboot ever again, all I'm asking for is just for once, a longstanding continuity that lasts a good while before they decide to make another new one.

[edgaguirus]

I can see your point there. Films that have more or less of a connection can be a good thing, as long as it makes good movies. The Showa films did this well.

Reboots and reimaginings can also be good for a character. What really matters is if the movie is good, entertaining, or both. Forcing writers to certain facts and past events can keep creativity from being expressed, so new story lines help to keep a character fresh. I don't read comics, but I do know that different story lines have created alternate universes, nightmare scenarios, and given new origins to some heroes. The same goes for Godzilla and his fellow kaiju. As long as it helps the characters and the franchise, open your imagination and give us something good.

[Dynomy-DX]

I am not saying they should never reboot ever again, all I'm asking for is just for once, a longstanding continuity that lasts a good while before they decide to make another new continuity.

This is kinda what I want too. Not to limit any creative visions, mind you. But something with a bit more continuity for the time being.

Once again, I’m not complaining if we still stick with a new iteration day after day. But I think there’s a good middle ground that can be struck.

[_JNavs_]

I think making a universe without the restrictions of the lore makes it seem half baked and lazy.

I also think making a consecutive universe as the central focus in Japan is restrictive, I think they can do respective solo films for each monster, have them all be their own thing, and then for Godzilla, have the one in that continuity. But don't be afraid to do anthology animated films with a lower budget.

[Breakdown]

^ I agree with pretty much everything said here except the negativety towards lore. Some of the best parts of some properties, like Star Wars, is the extended lore you don't see in the movies. What's wrong with lore?

Purely a matter of personal taste; I think too much focus on lore can distract from story, and for me a significant part of the fun of fantastic worlds is the opportunity to speculate about and imagine one's own version of the greater lore based on any story-relevant hints the works provide. Plus, it can just kind of muddle up what would otherwise be very graceful narratives.

Star Wars, for me, is definitely a case where filling in the backstory and lore mostly serves to dampen the magic and wonder.

I understand that why you might think that too much lore removes the mystery and speculation. Hell several of my favorite franchises went way too far in explaining literally everything to the point where the mystery was removed. Prime example being the origins of The Flood from Halo being explored in the Forerunner novels. The lore was really underwhelming and it removed the sense of terror and mystery surrounding The Flood. Some things are better left unexplained.

Conversely, adding lore can really help flesh out certain aspects of a franchise. Using Halo as an example again, you can find a wealth of information about the technology of the series from the operating mechanism of the Assault Rifle to the materiel composition of the MJOLNIR power armor. I personally like to know how things work, when they were developed, what they're made out of, etc. I'd love some lore about the development of Masers or the Super-X like what kind of power source they have, who conceptualized them, developmental history, deployment history, etc. I'm a sucker for that kind of deep lore.