Godzilla vs. Kong Discussion Thread - FULL SPOILERS AHEAD

[Showzilla]

In all honesty

I think the big skull belongs to s serpentine creature like manda

Big fangs? Check
Long spine? Check
Tons of ribs? Check
Absence of limbs? I don't remember any limbs but I could be wrong

[Gawdziller1954]

In all honesty

I think the big skull belongs to s serpentine creature like manda

Big fangs? Check
Long spine? Check
Tons of ribs? Check
Absence of limbs? I don't remember any limbs but I could be wrong

DA WURLD SERPENT!!11!

Added in 11 minutes 26 seconds:

MES back to debating semantics and science, eh?

In all seriousness, it’s probably not a Goji skeleton. Way too big, unless Titanus Gojira can grow to that size...

Who says Godzilla can't grow to that size? Godzilla had an unexplained growth spurt of 11 meters between 2014 and 2019.

That's 36 feet. He got little over 10% larger. From 2019 to 2024, he didn't grow at all. For consistency, members of his species should be relatively proportionate to him.

And why do you want this to be a member of Godzilla's species so badly, anyway? It's a forgettable skull, overshadowed by the spectacle of Kong and his axe.

Godzilla has far more facial soft tissue than any real-life reptile now or extinct, as evidenced by the fact he can grin like a slasher movie villain. No reptile can do this but he can-because he was inspired by bears and other large mammals. We must keep in mind that Godzilla is not necessarily a "true" reptile despite looking like one.

Godzilla naturally has what looks like a smile on his face, like many reptiles and birds. They played with the movement of his jaw, brows, eyes, and nostrils to create a more exaggerated look. It's not really a true smile like a human. This look is seen in Godzilla 2014, too.

His facial rigidity is sacrificed to make him expressive and "relatable." He was a bit more stoic in 2014 (which I honestly preferred). Most fictional reptilian monsters and dragons are way more expressive than real reptiles, in part because apparently people think it's cooler when other creatures exhibit human characteristics and emotions. We do this with everything for whatever reason, even with apes. We must keep in mind that while Godzilla isn't real, he's based upon some real reptiles and birds. His skull should at least reflect that a bit. But who cares, Ghidorah was more expressive than Godzilla, and yet has tyrannosaur skulls.

You also can't say that definitively about extinct reptiles. Just saying.

The nares are also the same shape-one can look at them and clearly see they are at least very similar.

They're not. The Hollow Earth skull's nares look like a dog's. It's pretty different in shape (narrower at the top, wider towards the bottom), while 5146_ADAM has two distinct nares that are pretty much the inverse shape (wide at the top, narrow at the bottom). And neither match with Godzilla, with his boxy, blunt snout.

You really could've just used any other bear-dog, too-amphicyon is the outstanding member when it comes to jaw muscle. Magericyon is a far better choice.

There's literally no reason for this. You know exactly what I'm talking about. I just said it looked more like a caniform (canid, ursid, or in-between), not like Godzilla, and provided three examples. I also said "without the defined sagittal crest."

Dagon's skeletal diagram does have canines. The 7th visible tooth in the upper jaw corresponds to a canine.

Does Godzilla have molars or canines? Does 5146_ADAM/Dagon have the massive canines of the Hollow Earth skull? Does the Hollow Earth skull match perfectly with either one? No? Then it doesn't work.

You can continue saying what Godzilla "Should" have as part of his skeletal. I'm going to continue relying on an actual part of the canon showing a Godzilla skeletal until they release something that contradicts it.

Godzilla's mere design contradicts the whole thing. Seriously. There's no point to this if you just recognize that the novelization and the movie don't match 1 to 1.

And I'll keep asserting that his skull should be far closer of a match, rather than looking like some kind of dog. It's a shame when fans can design better skulls for an official design than professionals in the industry can. Just saying, this model from Egalvez Projects is so much better, even with some anatomical oversights.

Godzilla's design is based off of reptiles and mammals such as bears, with eagle in the face. He literally smiles (as in, grins with his mouth) when he clips Kong with his A-breath. I'm not talking about a crocodile smile (which he barely has anyway).

No, I really don't-even without the saggital crest Amphicyon bears little resemblance to the skull, and I so I pointed it out. Not my problem.

>TFW tooth size apparently does not grow when animals get bigger or individual variation does not exist
Also, the skull need not be a 1:1 match with Dagon's to be a Godzilla. Ex: MOR-008 and MOR-555.

Doesn't matter. It's a canon depiction of Godzilla's skeleton and the skull resembles the skull of the chamber dweller. I haven't even read the novelization. I saw the film on April 2 and thought the skeleton was a Godzilla skeleton when I saw it in theaters. It isn't a matter of I "want" it to be a Godzilla skeleton, it is more of a matter that it probably IS a Godzilla skeleton given it resembles Dagon's. Until they present a new Godzilla skeleton or someone gives word on what the skeleton is exactly other than a Godzilla I will maintain, supported by the evidence thus far, that it is a Godzilla. It doesn't matter if the fan-designed skull is better (which it almost certainly is)-it is not canon.

This is the film that literally stole art from Deviantart for its opening credits and has concept art where Ghidorah's skull is literally AMNH-5027's but with horns strapped onto it. That does not change the fact that Dagon's skeletal is the canon Godzilla skeleton, like it or not.

[Showzilla]

In all honesty

I think the big skull belongs to s serpentine creature like manda

Big fangs? Check
Long spine? Check
Tons of ribs? Check
Absence of limbs? I don't remember any limbs but I could be wrong

DA WURLD SERPENT!!11!

Added in 11 minutes 26 seconds:

Who says Godzilla can't grow to that size? Godzilla had an unexplained growth spurt of 11 meters between 2014 and 2019.

That's 36 feet. He got little over 10% larger. From 2019 to 2024, he didn't grow at all. For consistency, members of his species should be relatively proportionate to him.

And why do you want this to be a member of Godzilla's species so badly, anyway? It's a forgettable skull, overshadowed by the spectacle of Kong and his axe.

Godzilla has far more facial soft tissue than any real-life reptile now or extinct, as evidenced by the fact he can grin like a slasher movie villain. No reptile can do this but he can-because he was inspired by bears and other large mammals. We must keep in mind that Godzilla is not necessarily a "true" reptile despite looking like one.

Godzilla naturally has what looks like a smile on his face, like many reptiles and birds. They played with the movement of his jaw, brows, eyes, and nostrils to create a more exaggerated look. It's not really a true smile like a human. This look is seen in Godzilla 2014, too.

His facial rigidity is sacrificed to make him expressive and "relatable." He was a bit more stoic in 2014 (which I honestly preferred). Most fictional reptilian monsters and dragons are way more expressive than real reptiles, in part because apparently people think it's cooler when other creatures exhibit human characteristics and emotions. We do this with everything for whatever reason, even with apes. We must keep in mind that while Godzilla isn't real, he's based upon some real reptiles and birds. His skull should at least reflect that a bit. But who cares, Ghidorah was more expressive than Godzilla, and yet has tyrannosaur skulls.

You also can't say that definitively about extinct reptiles. Just saying.

The nares are also the same shape-one can look at them and clearly see they are at least very similar.

They're not. The Hollow Earth skull's nares look like a dog's. It's pretty different in shape (narrower at the top, wider towards the bottom), while 5146_ADAM has two distinct nares that are pretty much the inverse shape (wide at the top, narrow at the bottom). And neither match with Godzilla, with his boxy, blunt snout.

You really could've just used any other bear-dog, too-amphicyon is the outstanding member when it comes to jaw muscle. Magericyon is a far better choice.

There's literally no reason for this. You know exactly what I'm talking about. I just said it looked more like a caniform (canid, ursid, or in-between), not like Godzilla, and provided three examples. I also said "without the defined sagittal crest."

Dagon's skeletal diagram does have canines. The 7th visible tooth in the upper jaw corresponds to a canine.

Does Godzilla have molars or canines? Does 5146_ADAM/Dagon have the massive canines of the Hollow Earth skull? Does the Hollow Earth skull match perfectly with either one? No? Then it doesn't work.

You can continue saying what Godzilla "Should" have as part of his skeletal. I'm going to continue relying on an actual part of the canon showing a Godzilla skeletal until they release something that contradicts it.

Godzilla's mere design contradicts the whole thing. Seriously. There's no point to this if you just recognize that the novelization and the movie don't match 1 to 1.

And I'll keep asserting that his skull should be far closer of a match, rather than looking like some kind of dog. It's a shame when fans can design better skulls for an official design than professionals in the industry can. Just saying, this model from Egalvez Projects is so much better, even with some anatomical oversights.

Godzilla's design is based off of reptiles and mammals such as bears, with eagle in the face. He literally smiles (as in, grins with his mouth) when he clips Kong with his A-breath. I'm not talking about a crocodile smile (which he barely has anyway).

No, I really don't-even without the saggital crest Amphicyon bears little resemblance to the skull, and I so I pointed it out. Not my problem.

>TFW tooth size apparently does not grow when animals get bigger or individual variation does not exist
Also, the skull need not be a 1:1 match with Dagon's to be a Godzilla. Ex: MOR-008 and MOR-555.

Doesn't matter. It's a canon depiction of Godzilla's skeleton and the skull resembles the skull of the chamber dweller. I haven't even read the novelization. I saw the film on April 2 and thought the skeleton was a Godzilla skeleton when I saw it in theaters. It isn't a matter of I "want" it to be a Godzilla skeleton, it is more of a matter that it probably IS a Godzilla skeleton given it resembles Dagon's. Until they present a new Godzilla skeleton or someone gives word on what the skeleton is exactly other than a Godzilla I will maintain, supported by the evidence thus far, that it is a Godzilla. It doesn't matter if the fan-designed skull is better (which it almost certainly is)-it is not canon.

This is the film that literally stole art from Deviantart for its opening credits and has concept art where Ghidorah's skull is literally AMNH-5027's but with horns strapped onto it. That does not change the fact that Dagon's skeletal is the canon Godzilla skeleton, like it or not.

That's nice and all.....but dagon has never been portrayed with fangs

Also...What's the world serpent? I thought it was a manda about out like anguirass got a shout out in the last movie

[Gawdziller1954]

In all honesty

I think the big skull belongs to s serpentine creature like manda

Big fangs? Check
Long spine? Check
Tons of ribs? Check
Absence of limbs? I don't remember any limbs but I could be wrong

DA WURLD SERPENT!!11!

Added in 11 minutes 26 seconds:

That's 36 feet. He got little over 10% larger. From 2019 to 2024, he didn't grow at all. For consistency, members of his species should be relatively proportionate to him.

And why do you want this to be a member of Godzilla's species so badly, anyway? It's a forgettable skull, overshadowed by the spectacle of Kong and his axe.

Godzilla naturally has what looks like a smile on his face, like many reptiles and birds. They played with the movement of his jaw, brows, eyes, and nostrils to create a more exaggerated look. It's not really a true smile like a human. This look is seen in Godzilla 2014, too.

His facial rigidity is sacrificed to make him expressive and "relatable." He was a bit more stoic in 2014 (which I honestly preferred). Most fictional reptilian monsters and dragons are way more expressive than real reptiles, in part because apparently people think it's cooler when other creatures exhibit human characteristics and emotions. We do this with everything for whatever reason, even with apes. We must keep in mind that while Godzilla isn't real, he's based upon some real reptiles and birds. His skull should at least reflect that a bit. But who cares, Ghidorah was more expressive than Godzilla, and yet has tyrannosaur skulls.

You also can't say that definitively about extinct reptiles. Just saying.

They're not. The Hollow Earth skull's nares look like a dog's. It's pretty different in shape (narrower at the top, wider towards the bottom), while 5146_ADAM has two distinct nares that are pretty much the inverse shape (wide at the top, narrow at the bottom). And neither match with Godzilla, with his boxy, blunt snout.

There's literally no reason for this. You know exactly what I'm talking about. I just said it looked more like a caniform (canid, ursid, or in-between), not like Godzilla, and provided three examples. I also said "without the defined sagittal crest."

Does Godzilla have molars or canines? Does 5146_ADAM/Dagon have the massive canines of the Hollow Earth skull? Does the Hollow Earth skull match perfectly with either one? No? Then it doesn't work.

Godzilla's mere design contradicts the whole thing. Seriously. There's no point to this if you just recognize that the novelization and the movie don't match 1 to 1.

And I'll keep asserting that his skull should be far closer of a match, rather than looking like some kind of dog. It's a shame when fans can design better skulls for an official design than professionals in the industry can. Just saying, this model from Egalvez Projects is so much better, even with some anatomical oversights.

Godzilla's design is based off of reptiles and mammals such as bears, with eagle in the face. He literally smiles (as in, grins with his mouth) when he clips Kong with his A-breath. I'm not talking about a crocodile smile (which he barely has anyway).

No, I really don't-even without the saggital crest Amphicyon bears little resemblance to the skull, and I so I pointed it out. Not my problem.

>TFW tooth size apparently does not grow when animals get bigger or individual variation does not exist
Also, the skull need not be a 1:1 match with Dagon's to be a Godzilla. Ex: MOR-008 and MOR-555.

Doesn't matter. It's a canon depiction of Godzilla's skeleton and the skull resembles the skull of the chamber dweller. I haven't even read the novelization. I saw the film on April 2 and thought the skeleton was a Godzilla skeleton when I saw it in theaters. It isn't a matter of I "want" it to be a Godzilla skeleton, it is more of a matter that it probably IS a Godzilla skeleton given it resembles Dagon's. Until they present a new Godzilla skeleton or someone gives word on what the skeleton is exactly other than a Godzilla I will maintain, supported by the evidence thus far, that it is a Godzilla. It doesn't matter if the fan-designed skull is better (which it almost certainly is)-it is not canon.

This is the film that literally stole art from Deviantart for its opening credits and has concept art where Ghidorah's skull is literally AMNH-5027's but with horns strapped onto it. That does not change the fact that Dagon's skeletal is the canon Godzilla skeleton, like it or not.

That's nice and all.....but dagon has never been portrayed with fangs

Also...What's the world serpent? I thought it was a manda about out like anguirass got a shout out in the last movie

Dagon's skull has canines, literally pointed this out to you in a previous post. The "fangs" in the chamber dweller skull are canines, albeit larger ones (then again, the chamber dweller's skeleton is larger too).

The "World Serpent" was a final enemy from a BS GVK leak that lived at the center of the world.

[MegaEvilSaurus666]

That skull implies Godzilla's eye muscles are bones though. The smaller skull is more accurate. People forget skeletons don't like the people. So why would Goji's skeleton look like him?

It's meant to be an example of how much better a fan made design can be, even if inaccurate. The jugal bones correspond for the most part. The nares correspond decently. The silhouette matches. The teeth match rather well. The jaw works. The only extremely major anatomical oversight are the eye ridges.

Godzilla's skeleton would look like him. You should be able to look at his skull and tell right away what it is. There should be no debate. I think everyone is overselling how soft tissue affects the look of a creature, and it's based upon mammalian standards. Godzilla isn't a platypus, hippopotamus, elephant, or whale. He's not a dog, cat, or human. Birds and reptiles should be the basis for figuring out something like that.

Godzilla's design is based off of reptiles and mammals such as bears, with eagle in the face. He literally smiles (as in, grins with his mouth) when he clips Kong with his A-breath. I'm not talking about a crocodile smile (which he barely has anyway).

Okay, so you're just plain wrong right now. It's a feature of his face.

No, I really don't-even without the saggital crest Amphicyon bears little resemblance to the skull, and I so I pointed it out. Not my problem.

Look at the fangs, nares, and zygomatic bone and say that again. Go on, try it. Now stop being disingenuous.

>TFW tooth size apparently does not grow when animals get bigger or individual variation does not exist

Individuals in a species, or even within a genus, have common features, and dentition does not vary so incredibly between adult individuals of any size. Small, young male crocodiles don't look like an entirely different genus next to massive males; older males are just more robust. They don't suddenly gain tusks as they get bigger, for example. This is a really silly hill to die on. I really don't know why you're arguing this.

Also, the skull need not be a 1:1 match with Dagon's to be a Godzilla. Ex: MOR-008 and MOR-555.

MOR-008 and MOR-555 both look like adult Tyrannosaurus rex skulls. Neither looks like Tarbosaurus bataar. Individuals look different, and fossil distortion plays a role in the variance between them. There's no question that they're the same species, however; same kinds of teeth, same fenestrae, and very similar silhouettes. That's honestly a poor example right there, and you decided to fault me for amphicyon (even despite my dog and bear comparison). It's not like one tyrannosaurus has fangs, and the other has molars.

[Showzilla]

DA WURLD SERPENT!!11!

Added in 11 minutes 26 seconds:


Godzilla's design is based off of reptiles and mammals such as bears, with eagle in the face. He literally smiles (as in, grins with his mouth) when he clips Kong with his A-breath. I'm not talking about a crocodile smile (which he barely has anyway).

No, I really don't-even without the saggital crest Amphicyon bears little resemblance to the skull, and I so I pointed it out. Not my problem.

>TFW tooth size apparently does not grow when animals get bigger or individual variation does not exist
Also, the skull need not be a 1:1 match with Dagon's to be a Godzilla. Ex: MOR-008 and MOR-555.

Doesn't matter. It's a canon depiction of Godzilla's skeleton and the skull resembles the skull of the chamber dweller. I haven't even read the novelization. I saw the film on April 2 and thought the skeleton was a Godzilla skeleton when I saw it in theaters. It isn't a matter of I "want" it to be a Godzilla skeleton, it is more of a matter that it probably IS a Godzilla skeleton given it resembles Dagon's. Until they present a new Godzilla skeleton or someone gives word on what the skeleton is exactly other than a Godzilla I will maintain, supported by the evidence thus far, that it is a Godzilla. It doesn't matter if the fan-designed skull is better (which it almost certainly is)-it is not canon.

This is the film that literally stole art from Deviantart for its opening credits and has concept art where Ghidorah's skull is literally AMNH-5027's but with horns strapped onto it. That does not change the fact that Dagon's skeletal is the canon Godzilla skeleton, like it or not.

That's nice and all.....but dagon has never been portrayed with fangs

Also...What's the world serpent? I thought it was a manda about out like anguirass got a shout out in the last movie

Dagon's skull has canines, literally pointed this out to you in a previous post. The "fangs" in the chamber dweller skull are canines, albeit larger ones (then again, the chamber dweller's skeleton is larger too).

The "World Serpent" was a final enemy from a BS GVK leak that lived at the center of the world.

I have NEVER seen a picture of dagon with enlarged canines

we see his body in after shock and we've seen diagrams of his skull with no enlarged canines

[Gawdziller1954]

That's nice and all.....but dagon has never been portrayed with fangs

Also...What's the world serpent? I thought it was a manda about out like anguirass got a shout out in the last movie

Dagon's skull has canines, literally pointed this out to you in a previous post. The "fangs" in the chamber dweller skull are canines, albeit larger ones (then again, the chamber dweller's skeleton is larger too).

The "World Serpent" was a final enemy from a BS GVK leak that lived at the center of the world.

I have NEVER seen a picture of dagon with enlarged canines

we see his body in after shock and we've seen diagrams of his skull with no enlarged canines

The 7th tooth in the upper jaw is enlarged and corresponds to a canine

Added in 19 minutes 31 seconds:

That skull implies Godzilla's eye muscles are bones though. The smaller skull is more accurate. People forget skeletons don't like the people. So why would Goji's skeleton look like him?

It's meant to be an example of how much better a fan made design can be, even if inaccurate. The jugal bones correspond for the most part. The nares correspond decently. The silhouette matches. The teeth match rather well. The jaw works. The only extremely major anatomical oversight are the eye ridges.

Godzilla's skeleton would look like him. You should be able to look at his skull and tell right away what it is. There should be no debate. I think everyone is overselling how soft tissue affects the look of a creature, and it's based upon mammalian standards. Godzilla isn't a platypus, hippopotamus, elephant, or whale. He's not a dog, cat, or human. Birds and reptiles should be the basis for figuring out something like that.

Godzilla's design is based off of reptiles and mammals such as bears, with eagle in the face. He literally smiles (as in, grins with his mouth) when he clips Kong with his A-breath. I'm not talking about a crocodile smile (which he barely has anyway).

Okay, so you're just plain wrong right now. It's a feature of his face.

No, I really don't-even without the saggital crest Amphicyon bears little resemblance to the skull, and I so I pointed it out. Not my problem.

Look at the fangs, nares, and zygomatic bone and say that again. Go on, try it. Now stop being disingenuous.

>TFW tooth size apparently does not grow when animals get bigger or individual variation does not exist

Individuals in a species, or even within a genus, have common features, and dentition does not vary so incredibly between adult individuals of any size. Small, young male crocodiles don't look like an entirely different genus next to massive males; older males are just more robust. They don't suddenly gain tusks as they get bigger, for example. This is a really silly hill to die on. I really don't know why you're arguing this.

Also, the skull need not be a 1:1 match with Dagon's to be a Godzilla. Ex: MOR-008 and MOR-555.

MOR-008 and MOR-555 both look like adult Tyrannosaurus rex skulls. Neither looks like Tarbosaurus bataar. Individuals look different, and fossil distortion plays a role in the variance between them. There's no question that they're the same species, however; same kinds of teeth, same fenestrae, and very similar silhouettes. That's honestly a poor example right there, and you decided to fault me for amphicyon (even despite my dog and bear comparison). It's not like one tyrannosaurus has fangs, and the other has molars.

https://tenor.com/view/godzilla-vs-kong ... f-21004487
"part of his facial features" yeah sure buddy

no reptile or bird has facial musculature capable of that sort of expression, not even reptiles with muscular faces and jaws (tegu and kin).

Given that bears were a major part in the design of Godzilla (a fictional creature who is reptilian) mammals should be used in extrapolating what he would look like.

I did try it. You're wrong. Sorry. Stop being disingenuous.

megatooth shark tooth morphology changes as they get older (as does the tooth morphology of some dinosaurs such as Limusaurus or Tyrannosaurus, if you're not in the Bakker-Larson camp). The cave-dweller's skull simply has longer canines-that is the only difference relating to that particular tooth in the jaw. I'm arguing this because it's correct lmao. Arguing it's NOT a godzilla is a really silly hill to die on, and yet here you are. I'm not the one arguing the canon depiction of Godzilla's skeleton is wrong and non-cannon.

MOR-008 and MOR-555 are reconstructed WITHOUT distortion-even attempts to iron out MOR-008 result in the really weird upturned face-and even then you simply cannot get a very similar skull shape out of them. Tarbosaurus/Tyrannosaurus Bataar has a very similar skull to "Tristan/Otto" and MOR-555, though. Had it been discovered in Canada it would be considered a species of Tyrannosaurus if not an oddly proportioned T.rex. I do fault you for using Amphicyon because it's a bad comparison. Given the similarities between dagon and the cave skeleton the comparison still stands.

[Showzilla]

Bruh

Images of Dagon and other specimens of Gojiras

There

Are

No

Fangs

[Jermobooka]

Are you bastards still arguing about a skeleton that appeared for, like, two seconds

[Lesko]

I had high hopes for this entry but I disliked it overall. I'm not too big on KotM either but it had some good ideas set up and this entry did not pay them off whatsoever. Where were the other titans? The hinted Mothra egg? These didn't need to be a big part of the story or anything but they could have at the very least shown them a little bit. The fights themselves were pretty dull except for the HK fight. The warbats and hellhawks don't get much screen time at all and the so called ocean battle was hardly a battle and mostly Godzilla just goofing off. I am also disappointed that Godzilla really only has a presence in the beginning and end. It just felt like a Kong film most of the time which in of itself isn't bad but I was expecting roughly equal for each monster. While I am on Godzilla, that is the biggest problem I have with the film. How Godzilla behaved differently just so Kong didn't immediately get decimated by him. What was that scene of Godzilla laughing about? Don't get me wrong, I liked it but it felt really out of place from the rest of the trilogy. Since when does this Godzilla enjoy damaging other monsters? Plus the whole Mechagodzilla was just very ridiculous. The match was so one-sided just as a cheap way to make Kong seem relevant after getting his ass whipped by Godzilla for his fans. Godzilla didn't even get a single good hit in which is very hard to believe. Plus Mechagodzilla came from that goofy Ghidorah's head. So why was Mechagodzilla also out of character with how savage and competent he was in the fight? Finally, can we stop with the cliche team up endings and actually have one of the characters destroy the other? I actually was surprised how bad Kong did get beat up though which in of itself was enjoyable. With the cliche ending I actually was a bit surprised they went as far as they did with the beating. It was savage and enjoyable. The devastating tail whip followed by the four legged mauling was pretty awesome but of course very short lived just like the brief skullcrawler cameo. Oh and don't even get me started on the characters...

So the only major positive I can think of is Kong himself. Kong is portrayed very well and has a good design. This movie certainly did him justice although I can't say the same for Godzilla. The whole sign language ordeal was cool and gave us a way to show Kong's intelligence without it seeming force or cheap. Kong also has a very primal sounding angry roar which is pretty nice. Further movies can easily be done with Kong like this. Hollow Earth was also pretty awesome visually and conceptually. I guess this was kind of outside of the scope of the movie but I would have liked to see more about this war between Kong and Godzilla's species. Just one of many things that should have been talked about more here but just wasn't. Like Serizawa. Was Serizawa even supposed to be related to the Serizawa from KotM? You really would never know there was a connection without the same name. Overall this movie just feels very incomplete from all of the stuff in past films that got ignored and even story elements introduced in this movie that were glossed over. Best way I could describe it is that GvK is GvK's worst enemy. It expects a lot of suppositions from the viewer while not fleshing out the interesting and enjoyable stuff that it actually had going for it. Very unfortunate.

[StreamOfKaijuness]

I have finally seen Godzilla vs. Kong. I watched it three times in a span of 24 hours before it left HBO Max. It’s a blast!

What makes the 1962 King Kong vs. Godzilla work so well is that it offers a full-fledged Kong movie and a full-fledged Godzilla movie all in one package on top of the titular matchup. It hits a lot of the classic Kong tropes (Kong living on a remote island, coexisting with the native people, getting into fights with the island’s other creatures, being chained and taken from his home for commercial exploitation only to run wild and carry a woman atop a landmark building) and it also delivers on the standard Godzilla elements (Godzilla laying waste to the defense forces, wreaking havoc on the Japanese countryside, sending crowds fleeing in terror, surviving elaborate military operations). Their stories occur independently at first, then they intersect naturally midway through the film before diverging again. It emphasizes how Kong and Godzilla are each practically too big to be contained within a crossover story, as humanity goes to preposterous lengths to bring them back together for the final showdown.

Godzilla vs. Kong mostly does a good job of delivering on both fronts on top of the crossover. It’s essentially a Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla story happening concurrently with a Kong: Journey to the Center of the Earth story, with Apex Cybernetics setting both plots in motion, and with Godzilla going out of his way to attack Kong at two different points in the film.

The movie sprints efficiently from one scene to the next without getting sidetracked and it dwells on the monster battles more than anything else. It’s kind of hard to believe that Legendary needed to assemble a writers room and ultimately credit Godzilla vs. Kong’s story to three different writers and its screenplay to two other writers when the finished product is such a simple and straightforward monster mash. It definitely feels like it was whittled down to the bone in post-production with a lot of character scenes getting axed. Lance Reddick is in the film even less than Hedorah in Final Wars. Ziyi Zhang and Jessica Henwick are nowhere to be found. Shun Oguri’s character is indeed named Ren Serizawa but any intent to connect his character to Ken Watanabe’s Dr. Serizawa is absent from the finished film. Still, all of that judicious editing made for a very lean movie, with the end credits rolling at 1 hour and 45 minutes and with no post-credit scene. I think it’s hard to argue that any take on Godzilla vs. Kong needs to be longer than that, although I’d be very interested in checking out an extended cut.

It’s great to see Mechagodzilla restored to its ‘70s roots as a destructive villain that Godzilla can’t handle alone. Having Ren Serizawa mentally control MG harkens back to Katsura Mafune, the incorporation of Ghidorah’s severed head evokes the reverse-engineering of Mecha King Ghidorah, and the way the dead Ghidorah takes control of MG and runs berserk is very much like Kiryu. Really the only essential trait this Mechagodzilla lacks is the ability to turn into a city. Between Ren Serizawa plugging himself in to control MG, the fleeting references to Nathan Lind’s dead brother and the nighttime battle between Kong and Godzilla in Hong Kong, this movie is more than a bit derivative of Pacific Rim. More than anything else, though, the biggest influence continues to be the ‘90s Gamera trilogy, just like with Legendary’s previous Godzilla flicks.

As a sequel to Kong: Skull Island, this movie is a lot of fun but it’s a notable step down in quality. One of the many things I appreciate about K:SI is how it broke away from tradition by depicting the island’s native people as neither savage nor disposable. The Iwi people didn’t offer any women to Kong for ritual sacrifice and they weren’t in the movie just to be slaughtered, unlike the natives who kidnapped Ann Darrow in the 1933 King Kong and were unceremoniously wiped from the face of the Earth at the end of The Son of Kong. After K:SI’s fresh take on Skull Island and the Iwi people, it’s disappointing to see Godzilla vs. Kong revert to a variation of what The Son of Kong did 88 years ago, with the island still intact but rendered uninhabitable by an endless storm and all of the Iwi people besides Jia said to have been wiped out before the events of this film. Apparently an entire nation of people could survive the dangers of Skull Island for untold millennia but they couldn’t survive after their usefulness to the next film’s plot had run out.

As a follow-up to Godzilla: King of the Monsters, Godzilla vs. Kong is a significant improvement. As a threequel to Godzilla, it takes the trilogy to a new level of over-the-top ridiculousness, thoroughly burning any bridges to realism that G:KotM had spared, and I think that is glorious. The fact that we now have a trilogy of Hollywood-produced Godzilla movies is a miracle and I’m glad that they covered as much ground as they could in three flicks, from Godzilla causing a tsunami just by walking ashore to Godzilla and Kong grabbing Mechagodzilla by the arms and slamming it through a skyscraper.

Pacific Rim > Shin Godzilla > Colossal > Kong: Skull Island > Godzilla vs. Kong > Godzilla > Rampage > Jurassic World > Godzilla: King of the Monsters > Power Rangers > The Meg > Pacific Rim: Uprising > Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom

[obZen]

lul it’s not a Godzilla skeleton

[Gawdziller1954]

Bruh

Images of Dagon and other specimens of Gojiras

There

Are

No

Fangs

7th tooth in upper jaw is a canine

Added in 22 seconds:

Are you bastards still arguing about a skeleton that appeared for, like, two seconds

Yes

[MegaEvilSaurus666]

"part of his facial features" yeah sure buddy

no reptile or bird has facial musculature capable of that sort of expression, not even reptiles with muscular faces and jaws (tegu and kin).

Frankly, I'm getting tired of going back and forth with you here. You really want to be right so bad that you're ignoring something so obvious. I've put plenty of time into studying this design, as well as many other monsters. The "smile" is naturally part of the model. Was it exaggerated by the way they made Godzilla's face move and shake? Yes, I already said that. But it's always been there.

I did try it. You're wrong. Sorry. Stop being disingenuous.

Well, I'm sure others will be the judges of that. And that doesn't work here. You can't just copy someone's rebuttal. You seem to be acting as if you don't get the point just for the sake of arguing.

megatooth shark tooth morphology changes as they get older (as does the tooth morphology of some dinosaurs such as Limusaurus or Tyrannosaurus, if you're not in the Bakker-Larson camp). The cave-dweller's skull simply has longer canines-that is the only difference relating to that particular tooth in the jaw. I'm arguing this because it's correct lmao. Arguing it's NOT a godzilla is a really silly hill to die on, and yet here you are. I'm not the one arguing the canon depiction of Godzilla's skeleton is wrong and non-cannon.

Why are you doing this? It doesn't work the way you want it to. Tyrannosaurus doesn't undergo major changes in its dentition from a younger adult to an older adult. It simply doesn't happen. In juveniles yes, but in mature adults? Limusaurus loses its teeth from a juvenile to an adult. That's not the same as an adult's teeth just magically changing size, shape, and function as it becomes elderly. You're just not correct here. Seriously. It's not even the only difference. 5146_ADAM has molars for fuck's sake. Molars.

And the illustration of 5146_ADAM is neither a match with the Hollow Earth skull, nor is it a match with Dagon (despite being the same individual) or Godzilla. And I'm not just talking about the skull, but the whole skeleton. That's visually evident, and I've pointed it out ad nauseum. You keep going on about it as if they're the same. They aren't. Stop, man. I don't care if it's canon (despite how much the movies and comics retcon each other back to back). It's dumb.

Tarbosaurus/Tyrannosaurus Bataar has a very similar skull to "Tristan/Otto" and MOR-555, though.

No, it doesn't. Tarbosaurus has a skull that is more slender/narrow, so much that the binocular vision is lower than that of Tyrannosaurus, and that follows the with the whole body being more gracile, put shortly. Want a better example? Neither look like Gorgosaurus. There are enough differences there. That's not even what we're here for, though. The point is that individuals in a species look more like each other than anything else. Godzilla, 5146_ADAM, and the Hollow Earth skull don't resemble each other. They just don't. We're flooding the thread with a discussion that doesn't remotely matter.

I do fault you for using Amphicyon because it's a bad comparison.

That's because you're being picky and not getting the point of the comparison. I said "even amphicyon" to further exemplify my point, because despite the differences, it looks way more like one of them than it does to Godzilla. It's not about looking absolutely exactly like a particular wolf, bear, or related caniform. It's that by comparison, it looks closer to even the weakest example. I figured you'd get the point, but you just don't.


Finally, why are we even debating this? The novelization and the movie aren't the same anyway. I said that from the very start. The movie makes no grand note of its existence. It's there for a few seconds, and that's it. In the novelization, it's described differently. A "still largely articulated" skeleton, instead of broken, scattered remains with missing parts. Kong pulls the "scepter" from the "reptilian neck." Not the skull, the neck.

[miguelnuva]

lul it’s not a Godzilla skeleton

Expect it might be.

[Gawdziller1954]

"part of his facial features" yeah sure buddy

no reptile or bird has facial musculature capable of that sort of expression, not even reptiles with muscular faces and jaws (tegu and kin).

Frankly, I'm getting tired of going back and forth with you here. You really want to be right so bad that you're ignoring something so obvious. I've put plenty of time into studying this design, as well as many other monsters. The "smile" is naturally part of the model. Was it exaggerated by the way they made Godzilla's face move and shake? Yes, I already said that. But it's always been there.

I did try it. You're wrong. Sorry. Stop being disingenuous.

Well, I'm sure others will be the judges of that. And that doesn't work here. You can't just copy someone's rebuttal. You seem to be acting as if you don't get the point just for the sake of arguing.

megatooth shark tooth morphology changes as they get older (as does the tooth morphology of some dinosaurs such as Limusaurus or Tyrannosaurus, if you're not in the Bakker-Larson camp). The cave-dweller's skull simply has longer canines-that is the only difference relating to that particular tooth in the jaw. I'm arguing this because it's correct lmao. Arguing it's NOT a godzilla is a really silly hill to die on, and yet here you are. I'm not the one arguing the canon depiction of Godzilla's skeleton is wrong and non-cannon.

Why are you doing this? It doesn't work the way you want it to. Tyrannosaurus doesn't undergo major changes in its dentition from a younger adult to an older adult. It simply doesn't happen. In juveniles yes, but in mature adults? Limusaurus loses its teeth from a juvenile to an adult. That's not the same as an adult's teeth just magically changing size, shape, and function as it becomes elderly. You're just not correct here. Seriously. It's not even the only difference. 5146_ADAM has molars for skreeonk's sake. Molars.

And the illustration of 5146_ADAM is neither a match with the Hollow Earth skull, nor is it a match with Dagon (despite being the same individual) or Godzilla. That's visually evident, and I've pointed it out ad nauseum. You keep going on about it as if they're the same. They aren't. Stop, man.

Tarbosaurus/Tyrannosaurus Bataar has a very similar skull to "Tristan/Otto" and MOR-555, though.

No, it doesn't. Tarbosaurus has a skull that is more slender/narrow, so much that the binocular vision is lower than that of Tyrannosaurus, and that follows the with the whole body being more gracile, put shortly. Want a better example? Neither look like Gorgosaurus. There are enough differences there. That's not even what we're here for, though. The point is that individuals in a species look more like each other than anything else. Godzilla, 5146_ADAM, and the Hollow Earth skull don't resemble each other. They just don't. We're flooding the thread with a discussion that doesn't remotely matter.

I do fault you for using Amphicyon because it's a bad comparison.

That's because you're being picky and not getting the point of the comparison. I said "even amphicyon" to further exemplify my point, because despite the differences, it looks way more like one of them than it does to Godzilla. It's not about looking absolutely exactly like a particular wolf, bear, or related caniform. It's that by comparison, it looks closer to even the weakest example. I figured you'd get the point, but you just don't.


Finally, why are we even debating this? The novelization and the movie aren't the same anyway. I said that from the very start. The movie makes no grand note of its existence. It's there for a few seconds, and that's it. In the novelization, it's described differently. A "still largely articulated" skeleton, instead of broken, scattered remains with missing parts. Kong pulls the "scepter" from the "reptilian neck." Not the skull, the neck.

Not my problem.

I'm not talking about the jawline. He literally smiled in the film using his soft tissue. Thank you for conceding that. I never denied he had a crocodile like "smile" but he literally pulls back his "lips" and squints up his eyes and smiles. Ignore the GIF I posted all you want, no amount of saying "i've studied the design so i'm right" will make your statement correct.

You have pointed it out ad nauseam but that does not change the fact that that is the canon skeleton. Stop trying to dispute it because it's not getting you anywhere.

Tarbosaurus does have a similar skull to the two T.rex specimens I pointed out.

I am correct here lmao. Not my problem you refuse to listen to facts. If Godzilla and Dagon and the chamber skeleton are all Godzillas the Chamber skeleton is much larger-its teeth would be proportionately larger too.

Gorgosaurus is only distantly related and unlike the chamber skeleton and dagon does not share enough similarities for it to be confused with the big tyrannosaurine tyrannosaurs. The skeletons do resemble eachother. They just do. You're flooding the thread with nonsense at this point.

It really doesn't. It resembles the canon Godzilla skeleton more than it does any of the examples you brought up, in particular amphicyon-which is why it was a bad choice. You hardly posted a rebuttal. It isn't my fault the canon Godzilla skeleton does not look like Godzilla but does look like the chamber skeleton.

[Showzilla]

The presence of canines does not mean that they randomly warp their skulls and have a different tooth become a fang

[obZen]

lul it’s not a Godzilla skeleton

Expect it might be.

Nah, I don’t think so. Something as significant, noteworthy as that would require at the very least a random sensitive shot; a moment of acknowledgment (as in, oh shit, yes the glowing-blue magic axe Kong is dislodging is from out the cranium/neck of a Godzilla), if not a line of acknowledgment —because of it’s implications. We didn’t get either.

If that were a Godzilla I would frankly find that scene to be disrespectful l’mao

I’m confident it’s not a Godzilla.

Added in 25 minutes 29 seconds:
On a related note: there’s a neat fan-made piece circulating, showing a bunch of Kong’s in what looks to be the ‘throne room’ from GvK — and it’s a bloody affair that depicts several Kong’s injured/incapacitated and a bloodied Gorosaurus is in the middle of said throne room.

It’s titled, ”Hollow Earth: The Last Stand Of Gorosaurus”. It’s basically a cheap crop/paste but it’s a cool concept.

[MegaEvilSaurus666]

Not my problem.

I'm not talking about the jawline. He literally smiled in the film using his soft tissue. Thank you for conceding that. I never denied he had a crocodile like "smile" but he literally pulls back his "lips" and squints up his eyes and smiles. Ignore the GIF I posted all you want, no amount of saying "i've studied the design so i'm right" will make your statement correct.

It is your problem; you started this debate in the first place by replying directly to me. I just quoted the novelization and gave my opinion. You do not concede even one point, despite the fact that you aren't correct. Your arguments have holes. They don't hold up to scrutiny. You become more arrogant as you go along. That's exactly why it's tiresome.

For the highlighted, are you sure?

"part of his facial features" yeah sure buddy

Godzilla's design is based off of reptiles and mammals such as bears, with eagle in the face. He literally smiles (as in, grins with his mouth) when he clips Kong with his A-breath. I'm not talking about a crocodile smile (which he barely has anyway).

The corners of his mouth are likely soft tissue; pure muscle. The ridges below his eyes are meant to be his jugal bones, hence my comparison to the anatomy of iguanas (his inner mouth is even based upon iguana anatomy) most of what's below those ridges is soft tissue, until you reach the lower jaw. Those corners of his mouth have always moved and jiggled in every movie, and even in tests from 2013. This isn't news to me. They exaggerated the movement to somewhat resemble a smile (it looks goofy). Neither interpretation of it is wrong; it got past Toho's rules. I simply don't see it as a true, anthropomorphic smile considering the shape for a smile is already there, permanently fixed on his face like a dolphin. His eyes and nostrils do more of the emoting. Agree to disagree.

You have pointed it out ad nauseam but that does not change the fact that that is the canon skeleton. Stop trying to dispute it because it's not getting you anywhere.

And it's not getting you anywhere to keep asserting that the skulls are the same. They're not. The dentition is wack. The structure is wack. The similarities you see are not the whole picture, because the differences are glaring enough. The canon is wack. I don't care about what you're saying, because Godzilla doesn't have molars, and his skull wouldn't resemble a dog's, simply by looking at him. 5146_ADAM doesn't have well defined canine teeth, and neither does Godzilla. None of what I just said is debatable for very obvious reasons. Simply disagree if you'd like, and that'll be the end of this.

I am correct here lmao. Not my problem you refuse to listen to facts. If Godzilla and Dagon and the chamber skeleton are all Godzillas the Chamber skeleton is much larger-its teeth would be proportionately larger too.

You seem to be referring to this: https://gwtoday.gwu.edu/newly-discovere ... eth-adults
Which doesn't match with what we're talking about. You also seem to be referencing the fact that juvenile Tyrannosaurus rex individuals have thinner, smaller teeth that become much larger and thicker as adults. Godzilla isn't an adolescent as far we know (watch that get retconned). He's an adult. So was Dagon. Like a crocodile, Godzilla still grows as an adult. (Although crocodiles don't get tremendously bigger as they age as growth slows down over time, and most of the crucial growth is done when young.)

No reptile grows teeth of a different size, function, and shape from adulthood/maturity to elder years. Giant, older crocodiles like Cassius don't look entirely different from younger, smaller, adult crocodiles. They're merely more robust, with thicker skulls. They don't just grow proportionately larger teeth because they're older and bigger. Growing larger doesn't mean that one's teeth become gargantuan fangs. That doesn't work that way. Teeth grow proportionately larger from juveniles to adults, but not from adults (let's say around 16 years old) to older adults (60 to 100 years old). Proportions for teeth stay pretty much the same at that point, regardless of size increases, with variability between species. Elders stop replacing teeth so quickly, and have fewer.

Unless I'm assuming wrong about what you're referring to and you know of discoveries I'm unaware of, you just don't have this one. And as a whole, you've provided little very explanation to your claims.

Gorgosaurus is only distantly related and unlike the chamber skeleton and dagon does not share enough similarities for it to be confused with the big tyrannosaurine tyrannosaurs. The skeletons do resemble eachother. They just do. You're flooding the thread with nonsense at this point.

You're just not paying attention. There are more morphological differences between 5146_ADAM, the Hollow Earth skull, and Godzilla than the differences between Tyrannosaurus and Tarbosaurus, or even Gorgosaurus. The Tarbosaurus comparison was to highlight that even among closer related species, things don't look the same. With individual variation, there is still a load of commonality, even down to the most minute details. Individual variation doesn't result in adults appearing to be of an entirely different genus, subfamily, or family altogether, and having wildly different dentition that imply an entirely different lifestyle and niche. That's my point. You kept going on about how their differences could be explained through variation between individuals of a species, and I'm telling you right now, the answer is a big bold No. Even Tyrannosaurus and Gorgosaurus have more in common than the 5146_ADAM drawing and the Hollow Earth skull. You really want to say otherwise, but it's unfortunately not true. You don't just find molars in one individual, and large fangs with no molars in another. That doesn't look all that related to me.

It really doesn't. It resembles the canon Godzilla skeleton more than it does any of the examples you brought up, in particular amphicyon-which is why it was a bad choice. You hardly posted a rebuttal. It isn't my fault the canon Godzilla skeleton does not look like Godzilla but does look like the chamber skeleton.

Alright, what part of "it looks way more like one of them than it does to Godzilla" don't you understand? You keep saying the Hollow Earth skull looks like 5146_ADAM (which it really doesn't), but neither of them look like Godzilla. I've been saying that the Hollow Earth skull looks more like a caniform skull than it looks like Godzilla himself. If you don't like that one example out of the three I provided, that's your problem.

"It's not about [the Hollow Earth skull] looking absolutely exactly like a particular wolf, bear, or related caniform. It's that by comparison [to Godzilla], it [the Hollow Earth skull] looks closer to even the weakest example [amphicyon]. I figured you'd get the point, but you just don't."

[miguelnuva]

I think we should all just drop the discussion between the skeletons looking different. Dagon is suppose to look like Godzilla because I doubt the film makers thought we'd pay that much attention to the skeleton.

HE guy maybe it was supposed to be a Godzilla the same way Ghidorah's skull looks different.

The movies are made mostly for the GA, my mother for example recognized Ghidorah's skull and the Dagon skull as Godzilla but she is also not look and comparing every difference the way we do.

Had the novel no mentioned it however I wouldn't have said the HE skull was a Godzilla but looking at it with the novel is is close enough it could pass as one but it could have been made better.