Talk:Godzillasaurus

Untitled
Erm...this seems pretty poorly written...

Ok, I don't mean to sound rude, but I think this article needs to be either re-written, or merged with the main article on the monster Godzilla. I see a lot of grammatical errors and the poor use of exclamation points shows that it's in serious need of a re-write. Also, it seems to be lacking in information.206.176.97.195 16:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)anonymous.

-

.Read this;

GODZILLA VS KING GHIDORAH and the HEISEI TIMELINE Author: Keith Aiken, SciFi Japan http://www.scifijapan.com/

Kazuki Omori is a very sloppy writer, but GODZILLA VS KING GHIDORAH does fit within the Heisei timeline without ruining or contradicting the other films. Just saying the movie is not part of continuity or that it erases the events in GODZILLA 1985 and BIOLLANTE may be easy, but it's not accurate according to Toho. Since they make and own these movies it's their call. With a little effort, seeing how the pieces fit together is not too hard.

There are a few things the viewer needs to keep in mind regarding the Heisei films: 1. Toho says the timeline included G54 and G85-to DESTOROYAH. That's it, no adding or cutting of movies. 2. A good explanation should not contradict anything shown in any of those movies. 3. The viewer should add as little guesswork to the story as possible. Any explanation that requires a lot of fan-created events never shown onscreen is junk IMO.

Combining sloppy writing and time travel is just asking for problems, but if you follow the 3 'rules' above the Heisei Godzilla timeline goes like this:

GODZILLA VS KING GHIDORAH picks up with Godzilla still weakened by the ANB virus from GODZILLA VS BIOLLANTE. During the military conference early in GODZILLA VS KING GHIDORAH Miki states that Godzilla is so weak he hasn't moved from his resting place in the Sea of Japan in nearly 3 years.

The Futurians appear in 1992. They have a book written by reporter Kenichiro Terasawa that theorizes that Godzilla was created from a dinosaur that was discovered on Lagos Island during WWII. The Futurians say that their own analysis shows a 90% chance the Terasawa is right. Two things contradict that; Yamane's theory behind G54 in the original GODZILLA (which was conceived by Godzilla’s creators Ishiro Honda and Tomoyuki Tanaka with writer Takeo Murata), and the events in DESTOROYAH (also written by Omori, the writer/director of GODZILLA VS KING GHIDORAH) that prove the 54 and 84-95 Godzillas are two different beasts. If the Lagos dinosaur was G54, then preventing its transformation into Godzilla would have zero effect on G84. The Futurians’ plan is flawed from the start.

The Futurians say that Godzilla will soon revive and attack nuclear power plants, causing fallout that will make Japan uninhabitable for centuries. Emi later tells Terasawa that this is a lie; in her time Godzilla had never recovered from the ANB. For all intents and purposes he was beaten. The Futurians real plan was to take over Japan before it could become the most powerful nation on earth.

The group travels back in time to 1944. Miki senses that the dinosaur is Godzilla, but she has never met the 1954 Godzilla. Of course she recognizes it as the Godzilla she encountered in GODZILLA VS BIOLLANTE.

The wounded dinosaur is teleported to the Bering Sea in 1944. It is NOT transported thru time as many people incorrectly assume.

The group returns to 1992 to find things are exactly the same as when they left, and everyone still remembers Godzilla (you think that would be a tip off). Futurian leader Wilson receives a report from the Japanese Self Defense Force that Godzilla is no longer in the Sea of Japan (you think he'd bother to check for himself, but he doesn't). This is easily explained; Godzilla simply moved. In Omori's GODZILLA VS BIOLLANTE the JSDF cannot track Godzilla when he is moving underwater. This was shown at the mid-point of that film; watch the scene where they expected Godzilla to attack Tokyo and were caught completely off-guard when he surfaced near Osaka instead.

The Futurians betray everyone, and Shindo's nuclear sub heads to the Bering to attempt to recreate Godzilla from the dinosaur.

Miki senses Godzilla (not the dinosaur) moving slowly in the Bering Sea, which further proves Godzilla was not removed from history. This surprises Terasawa, so he does some research and finds a newspaper report on a nuclear submarine that sank in the Bering Sea in the 1970s. This nuclear accident is what mutated the dinosaur into the 84 Godzilla; by moving the dinosaur the Futurians didn't “uncreate” G54, they aided the creation of G84. This is confirmed when Shindo's sub doesn't find the dinosaur, but an ANB-weakened Godzilla instead. Godzilla absorbs the sub's nuclear energy, which burns off the ANB infection and increases Godzilla's size to 100 meters.

Everything else is in the film pretty clear, I think.

The Heisei Series timeline goes like this: 1944: Dinosaur moved to Bering Sea. March 1954: Bikini H Bomb test. 1954: The H Bomb tests mutate an amphibious creature into the first Godzilla (50 meters tall), and destroy its undersea environment. This leads to the events shown in the original GODZILLA; when the first Godzilla attacks Japan and is killed by the Oxygen Destroyer. Late 1970s: Nuclear sub accident in Bering Sea creates 2nd Godzilla (80 meters tall) from dinosaur (proof: newspaper headline in GODZILLA VS KING GHIDORAH) 1984: Events in GODZILLA 1985. 2nd Godzilla attacks Japan and is dumped into volcano at Mt Mihara. 1990: Events in GODZILLA VS BIOLLANTE. Godzilla is infected by ANB. 1992: Events in GODZILLA VS KING GHIDORAH. 1993-1994: GODZILLA AND MOTHRA, GODZILLA VS MECHAGODZILLA II 1995: GODZILLA VS SPACE GODZILLA refers to events in BIOLLANTE, proving that film is still part of the timeline. 1996: GODZILLA VS DESTOROYAH refers to events in the original GODZILLA, and states clearly that the original and Hesiei Godzillas are not the same monster.

This by no means a perfect explanation, but it answers most of the questions and should clear up some of the confusion. User:Dark-Hyena 02:40, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Parts of this article are full of crap.
Godzila vs Mechagodzilla 2 states that Rodan was the Brood Parasite meaning it laid it's eggs in the nests of other Dinosaurs. Pay Attention! Angry Sun 17:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

It does not say anything about Rodan being the parasite. All it says is THE EGG. Seeing as it was the Godzilla egg they took, it is clear which one they were talking about.

Although the scientists (perky Ryoko Sano and movie veteran Yuksuke Kawazu among them) believe it to be Rodan's, the egg turns out to be a parasite, and soon enough Baby (Hurricane Ryu), a man-sized Godzillasaurus, hatches. http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=14292

Here's a subbed screencap http://img340.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pdvd002rq5.png

Here is the whole scene. Nowhere is Rodan or Radon mentioned in the parasite lecture. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sylBLl7dspI

I know forums arent a source, but I asked the question and everyone (all hardcore Godzilla fans) confirm that Baby G was the parasite. You're the only one who thinks otherwise. One poster points out how the nest containing the Rodan and Goji egg were on top of a high mountain, with the skeletal remains of an adult pteranodon next to them. This is all the confirmation necessary. http://www.kaijuphile.com/forums/showthread.php?p=252822#post252822

87.102.23.51 12:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay let's see...

ON the list of who is a source....

List

Toho

Not a Source: N00by Fanboys Opinions on a Kaiju Fan board.

You lose. Angry Sun 20:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

No actually. On my side, I have;


 * A subbed screencap which does not mention Rodan. http://img340.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pdvd002rq5.png


 * The scene itself which does not mention Rodan being the parasite. Heck, he isnt mentioned at all. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sylBLl7dspI


 * The fact that an adult, unmutated Pteranodon skeleton was shown at the nest site.

All you've done on the other hand is pout and whine like a child, and shown no proof for your claims at all. The forum was not meant to be a source, but as a confirmation that strangely enough, you're the only G-fan in the whole world who holds this totally unfounded delusion. HOWEVER, if you show me some facts, I'll possibly reconsider.87.102.18.77 20:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I meant, I saw them when they first began. I have the film too. Neither English or Japanese versions mention Rodan. The words "Rodan" and "Pteranodon" (same as English) cannot be heard in the Japanese audio version of the "Parasite" lecture. I've presented proof (screencap, and video clip in original language no less), and found third party confirmations that I am right. I've followed Wikis guidelines on how to solve arguments. What have you presented? Whatever version you have, which you're so certain will show that thousands of Godzilla fans are wrong, and that Rodan was a parasite, it most certainly isnt the English version I have, or the original Japanese version (which is the most valid)87.102.18.77 21:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Mine came from SCI_FI. Angry Sun 21:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, only one English dub was made, and that did not mention Rodan. Heck, even the Japanese version doesn't.

Again, I present the proof...


 * A subbed screencap which does not mention Rodan. http://img340.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pdvd002rq5.png


 * The scene itself which does not mention Rodan being the parasite. Heck, he isnt mentioned at all. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sylBLl7dspI

And the third person confirmation, which is allowed in wiki's guidelines to confirm the validity of an argument. http://www.kaijuphile.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15597

I could sign up on the TohoKingdom forum or the Godzilla vs Mechagodzilla II forum on IMDB and get the same answers. You are the only one G-fan out of THOUSANDS who believes what you do, and there is no proof. Heck, we have all the confirmation we need on the Japanese audio version, the most official version there is, period.87.102.18.77 10:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay let's see...Who laid the egg....Oh that's right. IT WAS RODAN! A BIRD! WHO LAYS EGGS! Godzilla was a MALE. HE CAN'T LAY EGGS! Only Zilla(G.I.N.O) could asexually reproduce. But Godzilla? No. He can't do that. Thus, It was Rodan. Angry Sun 20:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

You're not making any sense at all. Since when in the film did Rodan lay any eggs? And Rodan is not a bird, he's a pterosaur, a reptile. So what if Godzilla is a male? You yourself stated (on the Godzilla Jr. article) that the idea of him being an ADOPTIVE father was crap, so by YOUR OWN logic, it would mean that Godzilla at one point had a mate who laid the egg. I'm sorry, but your arguments are based on nothing but your own original interpretations, which totally contradict both English and Japanese language versions of the film. Why are you taking this so personally? So what if you misinterpreted the dialogue of the film? It's not something to be ashamed of or worked up about.87.102.18.77 13:29, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh gee let's see here No Rodan didn't lay the egg.

Another Rodan did. Geezuse some common sense. Why do you think the Prof was holding a BIRD when he was talking about the Brood Parasite. Angry Sun 15:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Theories, theories, theories. Thats all you've come up with. No proof, no third party opinions. And Rodan is not a bird, he's a reptile. Plus, there was no other Rodan, just a dead pteranodon, which reminds me, why was the nest on the peak of a mountain, and why was the dead mother pteranodon still there when it was supposedly meant to fly off before the parents of whatever animal it was parasitising would return? You keep drilling into people that only OFFICIAL sources are valid. Well, virtually everything you've stated is original (and therefore unofficial) research which contradicts the English and (most importantly of all) the Japanese versions of the film. Aside from lack of any evidence on your part, you've also failed to present any third party opinions.

If you're so confident that Toho puts you in the right, then by all means, find an official source which proves me and every single G-fan aside from you in the wrong. Your word alone is not good enough. PROOF and THIRD PARTY OPINIONS.87.102.18.77 16:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Third Party Opinions don't get you anything. That's because are just OPINIONS. They are no source. That's just how they feel on it. And I can watch that movie again if I have to to show to you I'm right. Angry Sun 19:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, wikipedia allows the use of third party opinions as long as they're backed by evidence, which I've given. I don't need you to watch the movie again. I've already provided a video clip of that scene IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, as well as a subbed screencap of the English. Whatever movie you've seen, is either a poor, alternate dub (which most certainly does not rank above the original Japanese version) or more likely, you've grossly misinterpreted what has been said. Again, I say you've presented no evidence and no third party opinions. All your argument amounts to is your own word, which is just not enough. And even if the film you're watching is an alternate dub, it can't outrank the original version anyway.83.100.132.71 20:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Reverting the article to your version was dishonest, as it implies that my version is unfounded and has no evidence, when in fact the opposite is true. Using the argument that birds were used as an example is pointless, seeing as; A. Rodan is never mentioned. B. Both Rodan and Godzillasaurus's are reptiles. C. Reptiles lay eggs. D. The nest was obviously a Pteranodon nest, considering is was on a mountain peak and there was the corpse of the mother present. E. Seeing as the G-egg is of a central role in the plot, if they were talking of the Rodan egg, they would have said so. F. Kazuma (the pterosaur expert) would have logically been the one to point out if the parasite was the pterosaur. 87.102.18.180 16:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sick of freaking arguing about this. I know what I heard and I know it to be true. We just won't put it in the article. Angry Sun 17:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I know what I heard and I know it to be true.

Suit yourself. You're the only G-fan in the world who thinks so anyway.87.102.75.202 22:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

No I'm not. I have a cousin. Angry Sun 22:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Baby isn't herbivorious! Those idiots just couldn't figure out what in the hell he has sharp teeth for! WHO WROTE THAT!? THIS IS PURE, PISSFUL OUTRAGE!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Godzilla's Heir (talk • contribs) 23:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Protected
I've temporarily protected this page due to an ongoing edit war. Please use this time to discuss the dispute here, on the talk page, and try to reach consensus about how to proceed rather than edit-warring. MastCell Talk 23:25, 22 June 2007 (UTC)