Rodan

Rodan (1956)
Toho Studios
Director: Honda Ishirō, Tsuburaya Eiji (special effects)


This is a milestone: Toho's first daikaiju movie in glorious colour! It’s not the first to be filmed in the “Tohoscope” widescreen format – that’ll be The Three Treasures (1959) or, if that’s not monstery enough for you, Mothra (1961).

Let’s get the mundane stuff out of the way first. Nice to see Hirata Akihiko, who played the doomed Dr Serizawa in Godzilla (1954), playing another scientist as Dr Kashiwagi. This time, he isn’t wearing an eyepatch. The youthful hero Shigeru is played by Sahara Kenji, another one to watch out for.

The second half of the film, featuring the kaiju who’s actually named in the title, is fine, but I prefer the first half. The first scene of a Meganulon attack is extremely effective. The creatures remain unseen, we just hear their bleeps/chitters and see members of the search party pulled under the water in the flooded mine. Their noises owe something, I think, to the giant ants in Them! (1954), although the Meganulon costumes worn by stunt actors look a lot better than the puppet ants in the American movie. The sudden appearance of one at Kiyo's house, even though it immediately shows us the full costume, is no less effective thanks to its shock value. The mountainside confrontation that follows is also well staged.

This film feels like two ideas welded together: the creeping horror at the Mt Aso mine and the slambang military campaign against the two Rodans. The first gives way abruptly to the second and is soon forgotten, barring Shigeru's discovery of the Rodan egg hatching among the Meganulons, which we see in a luridly coloured flashback. Yet it doesn't seem there's enough meat in the Rodan story, so it has to be padded out with lengthy scenes of explosions. The JSDF bombardment of the Rodans' nesting site at Mt Aso goes on for what feels like forever, including the same shot of a missile being launched over and over again. Then there's another abrupt shift at the end into pathos as everyone stands around silently mourning the deaths of the Rodans, which appear to dive resignedly into the lava after their nest is destroyed. This is quite a disjointed movie.

The style overall is somewhat in line with America’s creature features. The monsters are explicitly prehistoric animals (or at least, based on them), members of a species and not named individuals. In later daikaiju eiga, Rodan will be the proper name of an entity who appears in crossovers with Godzilla. Those lone monsters are more prone to being reinterpreted as something supernatural, perhaps kami or embodiments of some incomprehensible force. Here, the Rodans are just big pest animals, and the military succeed in corralling them and blowing them up. Perhaps Rodan owes more to Them! than might first appear.

There's some talk among fans that Rodan's impact on Tokyo is meant to call to mind the aerial assaults and fire-bombing of the Second World War. (At one point, Dr Kashiwagi also suggests the Rodans and Meganulons might have been revived by nuclear testing, but that comes out of nowhere and really feels like the writers just threw it in to cover all the bases. As noted in the plot summary, the Japanese name of the creature, Radon, derives from the word “pteranodon” and has nothing to do with the radioactive element.) In the context of the film, it's only one brief scene and, as far as the effects of Rodan's sonic boom flying and wing flapping are concerned, it looks more like a hurricane or a tsunami. Between this, the opening conversation about climate change, the flooding and earthquakes at the mine and the JSDF's bombardment of Mt Aso causing a small volcanic eruption, it looks like this film might be more about natural disasters and the dangers of life as a miner than about warfare or nuclear tests.

Godzilla Raids Again

Godzilla Raids Again (1955)
Toho Studios
Directors: Oda Motoyoshi, Tsuburaya Eiji (special effects)

Not also discussed: Gigantis, the Fire Monster (1959). Again, we’ll come back to that another time.


So if Godzilla (1954) is the nightmare replay of the Second World War in Japan, this is the wish fulfilment version – the armed forces ride back in, turn things around and immobilise their foe. I think it’s the only time a movie has ever ended with the Japan Self-Defence Forces successfully defeating Godzilla. And this does look a little bit like a showcase for the new air force, the JASDF, which had been formed in July 1954 and kitted out with shiny jet planes licensed from North American Aviation by Mitsubishi. The ending is poignant rather than triumphalist due to the death of Kobayashi (to say nothing of several unnamed JASDF pilots), but then again the “avenge a fallen comrade” storyline is a popular jingoistic ploy in war movies, and this isn’t far removed from that genre. I wonder how contemporary audiences, Japanese or American, felt about seeing a squadron of Japanese pilots “finishing the job” for their comrades who’d crashed in action.

Overall, this film has more of a personal touch than its predecessor. We get more detail of the characters' lives. We spend time with Tsukioka, his buddy Kobayashi and his girlfriend Hidemi the radio operator. We see them relaxing at a nightclub in Osaka, drinking sake with the boss in Hokkaido, hanging around in the office. I assume the detail of former wartime pilots taking on civilian jobs like tuna spotting is true to life, and the mid-film reveal of their connection to their friends in active service in the JSDF doesn’t feel like it comes out of left field. All of this gives the human drama a pleasing sense of authenticity.

The addition of a second monster keeps things fresh, even if poor old Anguirus only makes it halfway through the movie. Already the filmmakers are setting the template of Godzilla vs Something that will come to define the franchise. The special effects are again pretty good – the composite shots of the spotter pilots witnessing the first monster tussle on Iwato Island, shot from the ground up for extra impact, are outstanding. But Tsuburaya doesn’t yet seem to have settled on the trick of overcranking the camera to add weight to the monster shots, so they don’t look ponderous enough for their size.

Now’s a good time to start playing Spot the Actor. With so many of these movies being made by Toho, and with Toho employing actors on the same sort of “repertory theatre” system that used to be common in Hollywood, kaiju fans can expect to see some faces crop up in film after film. (A familiar game to fans of 1970s Doctor Who, in which every castle, secret military installation and alien embassy seems to be guarded by diminutive stuntman Stuart Fell and there’s roughly a 20% chance that one of the villains will be played by Michael Wisher or Frederick Jaeger.) Shimura Takashi returns here as Dr Yamane, but that’s a straightforward reprise from the previous film – we’ll see a lot more of him in other roles. This film marks the blog's first encounter with Koizumi Hiroshi, playing the hero role of Tsukioka, and he’ll pop up again in a variety of sympathetic roles in subsequent films. And the fighter pilot Tajima is played by Tsuchiya Yoshio, later to star in a handful of movies about mutated super-criminals as well as several other kaiju movies.

Although the conversation about US re-edits that differ significantly from their source films is one for another day, I should just quickly note the four-year delay in getting Godzilla Raids Again into American cinemas, and under a disorientingly different name. Toho had sold the US rights to Godzilla to Jewell Enterprises, who had quickly turned around Godzilla, King of the Monsters! (1956) for distribution by Trans World Releasing Corp and Embassy Pictures. For whatever reason, they offered Godzilla Raids Again to another film company, American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres (AB-PT), who ran into financial difficulties before their version of the movie could be produced. Producer Paul Schreibman bought the rights a little later, and naturally decided against putting out something that was obviously a sequel to an Embassy Pictures movie, so all references to Godzilla were removed and the daikaiju’s name was changed to Gigantis. Schreibman then sold the film on to Warner Brothers for distribution. It was this set of circumstances, and not any anxiety over the militaristic aspects of the movie, that caused the delay and the change of studio.

Godzilla

Godzilla (1954)
Toho Studios
Directors: Honda Ishirō, Tsuburaya Eiji (special effects)

Also discussed: The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (1953). Or, to give it its full title from the cinematic trailer: The Beast, the Beast, the Beast, the Beast from 20,000 Fathoms!

Not also discussed: Godzilla, King of the Monsters! (1956). Bear with me, we’ll come back to that another time. This post will refer to a specific additional source, however: Jeffrey Angles' 2023 translation, with afterword, of Kayama Shigeru's 1955 novelisations of his scripts for the first two Godzilla movies.


Picture it: Sicily, 1922.

I'm sorry, I was briefly possessed by the spirit of Estelle Getty there. Let's try that again.

Picture it: Tokyo, 1954. Two years since the post-war American occupation of Japan ended, except for Iwo Jima and Okinawa which the United States would hold onto for another decade and a half, plus all the US troops still stationed in Japan. The Japanese public's relationship with all things American was... complicated. On the one hand, resentment over the occupation and the terms under which it officially ended continued to boil over into large public protests. On the other, the imposition of a new political constitution and the inevitable influence of all those American troops wandering around had liberalised Japanese society a bit, at least compared to what had gone before. I think it's fair to say some Japanese were happy to see the back of the military regime that had dragged their nation through World War Two, notwithstanding the circumstances.

On the third hand, Japanese interest in American culture wasn't a new thing. It might be possible to chart an increase in American influence in Japanese cinema and, through that, Japanese fashions and lifestyles post-1945, although that's outside the scope of this blog. But one thing I can confidently state is that King Kong (1933) had made a huge impact on Japanese cinema audiences and filmmakers - local imitations such as Japanese King Kong (1933) and King Kong Appears in Edo (1938) had quickly followed, and the RKO original had enjoyed a re-release in Japan in 1953. So that's one of three important factors in the development of Godzilla, Toho's surprise hit of 1954.

The second is that Toho Studios producer Tanaka Tomoyuki had just had a film fall through and needed a quick replacement. He’d been expecting to work on a historical drama shot overseas and co-produced with an Indonesian company, but they’d backed out under public pressure because of ill feeling over Japan’s wartime actions in the area. He’d had a wasted journey to Jakarta to try to change the Indonesian producers’ minds. On the flight back, he thought of capitalising on the popularity of Kong and came up with a proposal that also took in some of the flavour of another hit monster movie, The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (1953). The Beast hadn’t been released in Japan, but some details of the movie and its success in America were known through the film trade press. Tanaka’s outline revolved around a similar core concept: a reptilian behemoth brought out of hiding by nuclear tests, attacking ships and wading ashore to cause havoc on land.

The third important factor is The Bomb. America had taken control of the Marshall Islands, formerly occupied by Imperial Japan, during the course of the Second World War. They were formally put in charge in July 1947, as administrator of the United Nations' Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, but a full year earlier they’d already tested nuclear weapons on Bikini Atoll. These were plutonium fission implosion devices of a type similar to the one dropped on Nagasaki in August 1945. In March 1954, the US Army went back to Bikini Atoll to test a new variety of two-stage, fusion-fission thermonuclear weapon that employed a combination of heavy hydrogen isotopes and uranium. The test exceeded expectations: the Castle Bravo explosion was measured at 15 megatons, two and a half times the expected yield, lighting up the sky 250 miles away and contaminating more than 7,000 square miles of the surrounding area. A Japanese fishing boat called Daigo Fukuryū Maru (“Lucky Dragon Number Five” – the “Maru” suffix just indicates that it’s a ship’s name) was fishing for tuna 40 miles outside the anticipated danger zone, but was one of several fishing vessels to be showered with radioactive fallout. By the time the boat returned to port two weeks later, the crew were showing severe signs of radiation sickness; one crewman died later that year.

The incident caused an international scandal and was the subject of Shindō Kaneto's biopic film Daigo Fukuryū Maru (1959). By the time that came out, the administrator of the United Nations' Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands had carried out two further series of nuclear tests at Bikini Atoll, in 1956 and 1958. But let’s turn our attention back to 1954.

Tanaka, formulating the idea for a movie with some superficial similarities to the atomic-era cautionary tale The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms, commissioned a script treatment from Kayama Shigeru, one of Japan's most popular science fiction authors. Kayama wove this topical bit of news about nuclear testing into his script. Directors Honda (overall/live action) and Tsuburaya (special effects) were brought on board. Honda had strong pacifist leanings and turned the script into something more about and against the war and its aftermath. Tsuburaya was a firm Kong fan and was keen to make a stop-motion monster movie, but that would have been impossible in the time available to him, so Godzilla was instead realised through a combination of miniature models, puppetry and stunt actor Nakajima Haruo wearing a monster costume. Thus a legend was born.

There’s not much I can add to what’s already been said about Godzilla. Its roots in the topical plight of the crew of the Daigo Fukuryū Maru are plainly shown in the opening scenes of ships blasted with light and the surviving fisherman in hospital raving about what he’s seen. Contemporary critics found this tasteless – one of the crewmen of the Daigo Fukuryū Maru had died between the film’s production and its release, and there was a more general concern about playing on the public anxieties over nuclear testing. Nonetheless, the film was a success. Naturally there was a reflex sequel, which we’ll look at next week.

As far as commenting on nuclear testing is concerned, both Godzilla and The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms go there but I think the way Godzilla does it is fundamentally more honest. In The Beast, we see an American team carrying out the test that awakens the titular threat, but it’s being conducted safely away in an uninhabited part of the Arctic circle, and it’s easy for the characters to feel remorse for their part in the nuclear arms race when the monster they’ve unleashed devastates their own homeland. Godzilla comes right out and says: the American tests are happening on our doorstep, and they have a human cost that the Americans won’t feel. (What it doesn’t add is any mention of the Marshall Islanders themselves, whose story is a harrowing one.)

Judging by the example of Dr Serizawa’s sacrifice, the makers of Godzilla also had something pretty pointed to say about how they thought the fathers of the atomic bomb ought to feel.

What I don’t recall seeing anyone else mention before is the very specific imagery of the Oxygen Destroyer as a fantasy super-version of the hydrogen bomb. Like the bomb, it has a spherical chamber inside a larger casing (transparent in this case, so we can see the sphere inside it), but instead of imploding on a payload of fissile material when it’s detonated, the two halves of the Oxygen Destroyer’s inner sphere pop apart. And instead of triggering that implosion with a fusion reaction of isotopic hydrogen, it targets oxygen – the other atomic component of water – and tears it apart. It’s actually a kind of Opposites Day H-Bomb. I find this striking.

The imagery of Godzilla’s assault on Tokyo has some further resonance with Japan’s experience of being firebombed during the Second World War, and the film doesn’t stint on the trauma in showing the survivors cowering during the attack and huddled in makeshift hospitals afterwards. With the exception of Godzilla Minus One (2023), I can’t think of another Godzilla movie that’s presented scenes quite this grim.

King Kong

King Kong (1933)
RKO Radio Pictures
Directors: Merian C Cooper and Ernest B Schoedsack (effects by Willis H O’Brien)

Also discussed: Son of Kong (1933), Mighty Joe Young (1949).


The word “classic” is a loaded one, isn’t it? In the mouths of most cinephiles and film pundits, it means something a cut above, something iconic, something imbued with a gloss of quality that has stood the test of time. King Kong is certainly that. (Don’t worry, this isn’t going to be a revisionist take-down of a beloved film.)

In another sense, and I’m thinking particularly of the field of literature, it can mean a text that everyone is supposed to have read, or feels they ought to have read, but that many haven’t. Something that’s gained a kind of authority through seniority, but that younger generations don’t have a natural connection to. I think that can be true of film, and it might be true of the 1933 Kong. Other Kongs are available, and anyway Kong has long since escaped the bounds of his own film and become part of the cultural furniture. So a recap of the plot of this extremely well-known film might not go amiss.

King Kong has its roots in the wildlife travelogues and ethnographic features made by its directors and others like them for the wide-eyed entertainment of American audiences after the First World War. It’s just... bigger, and more obviously fictional. Cooper and Schoedsack had at least been overseas and brought back genuine footage for their earlier features, notwithstanding they framed it with actors and scripted narratives. Others, like the makers of the infamous Ingagi (1930), were less scrupulous, producing schlocky, racist “documentaries” that suggested bestial relations between blacked-up women and men in gorilla suits filmed on an American studio backlot. There’s undeniably an echo of that in Kong’s pursuit of Ann, although here it’s played as a larger-than-life doomed romance, which I think does much to soften it.

The visible unreality of the special effects also helps to reinforce the fantasy nature of the film, but let’s just take a moment to appreciate those effects. (And maybe at some point I’ll take a moment to share my thoughts on just what “realism” in fictional media is worth anyway.) Willis O’Brien’s stop-motion Kong is great, a monster both destructive and sympathetic. His expressiveness makes the melodrama work. And the compositing of the effects is tremendous – the scene of Kong rolling sailors off a log to their doom (or, in the cut scene, into a pit full of lethal giant bugs) is sensational. It’d be contrary of me to suggest that 90-year-old special effects haven’t been bettered since, but at least they stand up well enough.

According to an interview cited on Wikipedia, Cooper rejected any suggestion that King Kong might be taken as some sort of racial commentary in the manner of the exploitation flicks. His intention, in juxtaposing Kong with the audience’s familiar world of skyscrapers and biplanes, was apparently to tell a tale of “the primitive doomed by modern civilization”. While this choice of phrasing isn’t great, the idea of King Kong as a lament for nature overtaken by human industry appeals to me, and would chime nicely with quite a few other giant monster movies.

Besides, the film doesn’t portray America in 1933 as unconditionally better than Kong’s world. Again, bear in mind that this was economically a miserable time for the industrialised world, so the audience wouldn’t necessarily consider New York the more desirable of the film’s two destinations. The juxtaposition of New York and Kong’s island invites comparison (something the 2005 Peter Jackson remake takes a lot further).

And while Carl Denham – who looks suspiciously like a self-insert by Merian Cooper, who co-drafted the story – might have been intended to be a lovable rogue, he’s not the hero. (That would be either Ann Darrow or First Mate and love interest Jack Driscoll, if we insist on a human hero, but it’s actually more likely to be the tragic figure of Kong himself). When told that the planes got Kong in the end, Denham ripostes that “it was Beauty killed the Beast”, implying that Kong’s love for Ann was his fatal flaw and turning the whole thing into an inevitable fairytale tragedy. This neatly sidesteps the fact that, in reality, it was Denham killed the Beast. Kong’s death, the untold loss of life and damage to property in New York and the enormous counselling bills Ann is going to rack up would never have happened if Carl Bloody Denham hadn’t hunted and captured Kong and displaced him for the sake of other people’s entertainment to begin with. We should have been tipped off to Denham by the obvious parallel with the island chief, who also wanted to buy Ann’s participation as a sacrificial damsel in a staged performance. (Which makes the recipient of the performance, Kong, a monstrous mirror for Denham’s audience... and us?)

I think it’d be a step too far to suggest that the character of Denham was meant to be a comment on the trouble thoughtless entrepreneurs can cause. Even now, the jury’s out on what the root cause of the Great Depression was – I don’t suppose people at the time were blaming freelance film directors for it. Still though, I wonder if contemporary audiences felt a frisson at the spectacle of this amoral man exploiting Kong and Ann in pursuit of a fast buck, then turning his back on the fallout.

Back to those planes. In just about all the American monster movies that followed this, particularly in the 50s wave of creature features, the American armed forces are the heroes and the whole purpose of the exercise is boosting them in the public eye. The monster is there to provide something large and dangerous for the military to shoot at for an hour and a half, and its death is meant to reassure the American public that guns, tanks and planes will keep them safe. That’s not the case here. Kong, too, is shot down by Army biplanes, but it's presented as a tragedy rather than a military triumph. It's a compounding of Denham's error, injury on top of insult.

Kong himself, for all that he bridged the gap between the stop-motion dinosaurs that preceded him (including many created by Willis O’Brien) and the stranger creatures that came after, doesn’t fit the same pattern as The Deadly Mantis or The Giant Claw (both 1957). He isn't an aggressive invading force, he's just a gigantic ape who wants to go about his business without being kidnapped, shipped across the ocean and exploited. (He is, ironically, the “little guy”.) He has more in common with the antagonists of Universal Pictures' monster movies: he has his own unique personality, including a proper name, which is more than the Mantis or the Claw can boast. Those other creatures rarely feel like characters at all, but Kong is a headline act on a par with Dracula or Frankenstein’s Creature, and he doesn't just dominate the title but the whole film. And yet, unlike Universal’s monsters, Kong doesn’t have his roots in Gothic literature or folklore – he’s part of the natural world, albeit oversized, which puts him back in line with the dinosaurs and the giant bugs. He’s a hard one to place.

Because King Kong was a huge success, there was of course a reflex sequel. It’s hard to believe Son of Kong (1933) came out in the same year as the parent movie, given how painstakingly slow stop-motion animation is, but they made it happen. A few of the actors reprise their roles: Robert Armstrong as Denham, the ship’s captain and cook, a couple of the islanders. Son of Kong presents a warmer, softer story than King Kong, and this time Denham actually is the hero, trying to redeem his earlier behaviour and becoming the romantic male lead.

Son of Kong is less fondly remembered than King Kong.

Some little while later, RKO brought out Mighty Joe Young (1949), a fantasy caper about a gorilla of roughly the same size and temperament as Little Kong who is brought to America (from a settled home in Tanganyika, this time) to perform in a Hollywood nightclub, goes on a rampage when some drunken customers upset him but ends up heroically helping to clear a burning building. Yet again Robert Armstrong features as the entrepreneur responsible for putting the ape on the stage and again Cooper and Schoedsack direct. The film’s notable for featuring the first professional stop-motion effects of Ray Harryhausen, working under the supervision of his hero Willis O’Brien and somehow delivering an even more expressive ape. In Germany, it’s known by the title Panik um King Kong, just in case the reprise wasn’t obvious enough.

Kong himself has appeared in a couple of remakes of the original film, which this blog won’t trouble itself with, and an assortment of other, stranger movies, of which we will hear more anon.

Massive Organisms Approaching

Welcome, whoever you are, to this blog about giant monster movies.

Once a week over the course of 2024, in chronological order of cinematic release, I’ll post something about a movie, or occasionally about more than one. The blog won’t be exhaustive, by any means, although I do intend to cover all the Japanese Godzilla movies. Why? Because it’s the 70th anniversary year of Godzilla (1954), of course!

Up front, let’s clarify what this blog is and is not. It’s not about reviewing the movies (or not only that) – I’m not interested in rating and ranking them. I am interested in laying out my thoughts on them and hopefully sharing some of what excites me about them.

Why this? Why giant monster movies? I realise no one’s likely to think of them as High Art (barring, possibly and only on public holidays, the original King Kong (1933) and Godzilla (1954)), but what does High Art really tell us? High Art, in any medium, is rarely anything more than a way for middle-class people to show off to other middle-class people how clever they are. Pop culture actually tells us something about the world in which it was made. The creators are rarely expounding their grand vision at their leisure and are more likely struggling to churn out something entertaining on a budget and to a deadline. They might put in some intended socio-political message, but they’re as likely or more likely to reflect the prevailing mood without thinking about it, which makes their work a more useful socio-political document.

Taken out of the context of their time and source culture, pop cultural works can still be fascinating – intriguing in their strangeness to the viewer’s eyes. They might give us a mind-broadening glimpse into another society. (Equally, of course, they might exhibit attitudes and behaviours we wouldn’t find acceptable in our own society or time, or they might be reinterpreted in unintended new ways.) With a bit of effort, we can learn more about the works and the context within which they were made and maybe understand them a little better.

Not that I’m promising to do that for you, you understand. I just like watching giant monster movies and now I’m hoping to like writing about them. And you know, sometimes it’s just soothing to watch an actor in a rubber lizard costume trampling all over a tiny model city.

Most of the movies under discussion in this blog are Japanese, and will be known under English titles quite different from their original Japanese titles. The majority of them were produced by Toho Studios, and fortunately we know exactly what we should call those ones because Toho have clearly stated the titles under which they would prefer their films to be distributed in Anglophone markets. Those are the titles I’ll be using. I’ll be noting some of the alternative English titles they’ve been given by American distribution companies, but for the most part I won’t use those. For non-Toho, non-Anglophone movies, I’ll use what I think are the correct English titles.

I’m going to assume some familiarity on your part with the genre, but not too much. I imagine you’ll know the Japanese word kaiju (weird creature), or even daikaiju (giant weird creature), but maybe not much more than that. That’s fine – nearly all of the handful of Japanese words I know, I’ve picked up from watching kaiju eiga (monster movies). For the most part, when I make a confident statement about the meaning of a Japanese word or monster name, you can assume I’ve been led by the Kaiju Wiki (wikizilla.org) or by Google Translate (uh oh). I intend to present Japanese names in the Japanese style, family name first (although I might not get it right all the time).

Hopefully you’ll already know the words Shōwa and Heisei – these are formal names for periods in Japan’s history defined by the rule of a particular Emperor, and are also used to refer posthumously to the Emperors themselves. Because of the decline in Japanese genre cinema towards the end of the reign of Hirohito, the Emperor Shōwa, and their reviving fortune during his son’s reign, Japanese kaiju movies fall conveniently into Shōwa era and Heisei era groups. The term “Millennium era” is sometimes used to distinguish the third major wave of Godzilla movies from the Heisei era second wave. Although Akihito’s still alive as I write this, he abdicated in 2019 (so the Heisei era of Japanese history is already over, but Akihito isn’t yet referred to as “Emperor Heisei”). We’re now in the Reiwa era, defined by the reign of Emperor Naruhito, and some fans have taken to referring to a current Reiwa era of kaiju movies.

I imagine you’ll have seen at least the better-known American blockbusters under discussion here, but for convenience I’ll assume you’re not familiar with any specific film or films. It’s often convenient to be able to refer to the plot of a movie when discussing it, so I’ll be including brief summaries in most cases. Warning, therefore: this blog will contain spoilers. If you haven’t seen a particular movie and don’t want the plot spoiled, don’t read that entry. (Or at least, skip past the plot summary section.)

Beside the plot summaries, I’ll be throwing in what I might generously call my own insights or theories. These will be focused more on trying to understand the context around the movie than on the fictional world of the movie, although there might be a bit of that too. Because this is a scratch blog with a breakneck weekly pace, I won’t be rigorously footnoting everything. (I might come back in subsequent years and add in footnotes, but let’s not hold our breath on that.) There are a lot of excellent fan-written non-fiction books out there, and inevitably I’ll repeat some information from those around the production of these films, as well as from wikizilla.org. But rest assured, I have some thoughts of my own about them, and in a couple of cases, I’ve even done a little original online research in trying to place them in their historical context. What would be the point of doing this blog if I didn’t?

Since I’ve mentioned them, and before we go any further, here’s a curated list of relevant books that I’ve found informative, entertaining and useful, and you might too. You may have difficulty finding copies of some of them, but in a pinch there’s always Abebooks.com:

  • Carrozza, JL, Japanese Special Effects Cinema: Godfathers of Tokusatsu, vol 1, Orochi Books. 9798986077901.
  • Erb, Cynthia, Tracking King Kong: A Hollywood Icon in World Culture, Wayne State University Press. 9780814334300.
  • Kalat, David, A Critical History and Filmography of Toho’s Godzilla Series, McFarland. 9781476672946.
  • LeMay, John, The Big Book of Japanese Giant Monster Movies, Bicep Books. 9781734154641 (Showa Completion 1954-1989) and 9781734781649 (Heisei Completion 1989-2019).
  • Mustachio, Camille DG and Jason Barr (editors), Giant Creatures in Our World: Essays on Kaiju and American Popular Culture, McFarland. 9781476629971.
  • Rhoads, Sean and Brooke McCorkle, Japan’s Green Monsters: Environmental Commentary in Kaiju Cinema, McFarland. 9781476631349.
  • Ryfle, Steve, Japan’s Favorite Mon-Star: The Unauthorized Biography of “The Big G”, ECW Press. 9781550223484.




My fondness for kaiju movies dates back only as far as my 20s, quite late in life by comparison with a lot of other fans. I was certainly exposed to the stop-motion adventure romps of Ray Harryhausen, featuring such notable giant monsters as his Cyclops, Talos and Kraken, and it’s unthinkable that I wouldn’t have seen King Kong at some point in my childhood. But if the dubbed American versions of any of the Godzilla movies were shown on British TV, I don’t recall hearing about them. (I mean, they were, rarely – the old TV listings can be found online to prove it. I just didn’t hear about them.)  I would only have been aware of Godzilla through the Hanna-Barbera cartoon series – which got more than enough airtime in the UK – which means I would have thought of it only as a sort of tame sea monster that guest starred in the adventures of the human characters and their pet Godzooky, whatever the hell that thing was.

So three cheers for the much loathed Tri-Star Godzilla (1998), which spurred a flurry of British interest in the Japanese franchise that preceded it. BBC2 offered Monster Night, an evening’s programming hosted by comedian Bill Bailey that included Godzilla vs King Ghidorah (1991) and the Jeff Bridges King Kong (1976) – I enjoyed watching at least one of those – as well as a new documentary about the Japanese Godzilla. Through the framing gimmick of being set in a seedy gambling den, Monster Night also included monster “fights” that showed off clips from King Kong vs Godzilla (1962), Ebirah, Horror of the Deep (1966) and the bang-up-to-date Gamera, Guardian of the Universe (1995). None of this seems calculated to raise the audience’s interest in the American movie that justified its broadcast, but it was a fair introduction to the kaiju genre.

The local bookshop got in a few copies of Japan’s Favorite Mon-Star, a glossy coffee table paperback by Steve Ryfle that also seemed carefully timed to recruit new fans for the Japanese Godzilla franchise off the back of the American movie. I bought this and was duly amazed to discover how many previous movies there’d been.

Around the same time, 4 Front Video released about half of the Shōwa era Godzilla titles on VHS in the UK, with heavy advertising in genre magazines – I tracked down a couple of those, guided in my selection by the Ryfle book. On subsequent shopping trips, I was pleased to discover VHS copies of Godzilla vs King Ghidorah and Gamera, Guardian of the Universe, released by Manga Entertainment. And a little later again, around Christmas 1999, Channel Four broadcast a handful of movies in the very early hours of the morning under the banner heading “Vidzilla”.

In the decades since, it’s become a lot easier to get your hands on these old movies. (And I’m not talking about dodgy pirate copies – well, not only those. Most of these films can be bought legally, and as a general rule it’s a good idea to support niche home media distributors if you see them taking pre-orders for licensed Blu-ray releases of hard-to-find goodies. If they break even on one, maybe they’ll try again with others.) The market for giant monster movies – old and new, Japanese, American or other – seems to have blossomed in the last ten years or so, no doubt helped by the success of blockbusters like Pacific Rim (2013) and Legendary Pictures’ Godzilla (2014). I was fortunate to move to New Zealand right around the time local distributor Madman Entertainment put out four large Godzilla box sets on DVD – very nearly the full run up to Godzilla: Final Wars (2005), and a little online shopping helped fill the gaps. UK-based Arrow Films have done a sterling job of releasing box sets of other kaiju and kaiju-adjacent movies, and there’s more out there for those who are willing to look for it.

Which is one good reason for creating this blog now. I had planned to do this ten years ago, in time for Godzilla’s 60th anniversary, but ended up too busy with other things. Now seems like a more auspicious time for it, not least because of the tremendous global success of Godzilla Minus One (2023). That, and the increasing availability of his back catalogue, might make Godzilla’s 70th birthday his biggest yet.