Talk:Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

message: .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)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: How can he claim this? The villains in the film were Westerners, and there was the scene where the Godzillasaurus was eating American soldiers! How can the director say it wasn't meant to be anti-American? Scorpionman 17:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Anti-American?? 

message: :Image:GXKG Poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:GXKG Poster.jpg

message: The trivia posted by IMDB and falsely credited to them is in fact taken almost verbatim from The Official Godzilla Compendium, written by J.D. Lees and Marc Cerasini, published by Random House in 1998.  It's on the bottom half of page 82.
Hypershell (talk) 21:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  IMDB needs to learn to give credit. 

message: first off, just because the villains are westerners doesn't mean that the film is anti-american. And guess what? American troops and japanese troops really DID fight in the pacific, so thats just a reflection of history. One must understand that in every country and culture soldiers are honored for their sacrifices, even if the cause wasn't just. Also, the reason they didn't depict the japanese troops fighting chinese troops should be obvious, China is right next door, and hasn't yet forgotten the destruction of WWII, they would have been a whole lot angrier than we ever would be.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.49.223.168 (talk) 22:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why it isn't anti-american 

message: At 9:51 in the film, a map is shown with the island spelled as Ragos, but the handful of English-language websites I've come across, as well as this article, spells it as Lagos. (I will grant that, at least to my ear, the dubbed dialog sounds like Lagos). Is this somehow the standardized English spelling? If it's going to be spelled Lagos, the article should probably note that the island in the film is fictional and not to be confused with the real Lagos Island in Nigeria. BW95 (talk) 07:08, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lagos vs. Ragos Island