Talk:Godzilla (1954 film)

Good articleGodzilla (1954 film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 9, 2021Good article nomineeListed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 3, 2018, November 3, 2021, and November 3, 2022.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 30 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gabesuarez21 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Dslaym (talk) 13:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nhyer.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Godzilla (1954 film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:26, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural Impact

If I were to add a section to this page, I would include more information about how the people of Japan were able to connect to this movie on an emotional level. The people of Japan were able to feel a sense of empathy with Godzilla because of their experiences of being bombed during World War II. Possibly a short discussion on the cultural impact within the United States as well, which helped begin the spread Japanese pop culture globally.

Possible Sources:

Allison, Anne. Millennial Monsters, edited by Anne Allison, University of California Press, 2006. ProQuest Ebook Central.


Ryfle, Steve. "Godzilla's Footprint." Virginia Quarterly Review, vol. 81, no. 1, Winter2005, pp. 44-63. EBSCOhost, proxysb.uits.iu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.proxysb.uits.iu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=15501530&site=ehost-live&scope=site.


Schnellbächer, Thomas. "Has the Empire Sunk Yet?--The Pacific in Japanese Science Fiction." Science Fiction Studies, vol. 29, no. 3, Nov. 2002, pp. 382-396. EBSCOhost, proxysb.uits.iu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.proxysb.uits.iu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=9155768&site=ehost-live&scope=site.


Nhyer (talk) 16:53, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Godzilla (1954 film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:51, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Godzilla (1954 film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:03, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More Expansion

This article is looking good, however I thing there can be a lot more information on the film's production, theatrical release added to the article. The production section feels incomplete and too short considering the abundance of information available on the film. The release section, specifically the film's theatrical release is also underdeveloped. The film was enormously popular in Japan and there is nothing even close to mentioning its complete box office run and gross in its native country. The article on the american version should probably be combined with this article as well since they are practically the same thing just added scenes. These are just a few things that need to happen so that this article is expanded to its fullest extent.--Paleface Jack 15:59, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Earlier use of music track

Hi! I'd like to add the text Ifukube had previously used a piano version of "Frigate March I" in the 1951 film The Tale of Genji (source -- not ideal, but verifies this much information) to the "Music" section of this article, but since the section currently consists entirely of a history of the soundtrack's release as an album in the 1990s and 2000s, and two track listings therefor, chronologically this information would have to go at the top of this section. However, "Frigate March I" isn't mentioned anywhere in the article except in the aforementioned track listing, isn't mentioned in the source (which is in Japanese -- perhaps by necessity, as the 1951 film seems to have fallen into obscurity outside Japan), and (I suspect) might be a name that was retroactively applied to the specific context in which it is used in this film, not in later or earlier films. Can someone verify whether there exists an "original" name of the piece of music as composed by Ifukube in c.1951 (if there is, it's definitely not "Frigate March I", since it plays as accompaniment for Hikaru Genji riding a horse in the hills north of Kyoto where he will meet Murasaki)? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 16:01, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Very difficult to find the name of the original. We could just add the information you managed to find about the piano version. Armegon (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1954 Awards

This article says Godzilla was nominated for Best Picture in 1954. I believe this is a myth which has spread over the English-speaking internet. Sources usually mention the movie losing to Seven Samurai in the end. Here are the things I cannot find which should exist if that were true:

  • A source for the original claim, or a Japanese source repeating the claim.
  • Toho Media promoting Gojira as an award winning film.
  • The name of the award, rather than "the Japanese Equivalent of the Academy Awards." This article says "Japan Movie Association Awards" which I can find no direct evidence of.
  • Mention of Best Picture being won by Seven Samurai. I can buy messiness for Godzilla, but Samurai is one of the highest profile films in history.
  • Mention of this earlier award when Shin Godzilla won Best Picture in 2016.
  • Something called the Japanese Academy Awards (roughly) began in '78. Sources on that make no attempt to distinguish it from an earlier film prize.

If anyone can find any of these, they could be placed on this article as a citation. Otherwise I believe the awards section should be modified and this claim should be watched for in the future.

I tried to look into this, since anyone who can read Japanese should logically be able to verify or falsify the claim with a quick Google search, but the problem is that searching "Japanese Movie Association" doesn't seemingly bring up the website any Japanese organization which this is the official English name but rather English-language websites that repeat this exact same claim about Godzilla and The Seven at the 1954 awards. Moreover, "Japanese Movie Association" doesn't sound like the formal name of a reputable association, and the Eiga.com entry for Seven Samurai doesn't imply that the film won such an award. "日本映画協会" doesn't appear to have been a thing prior to 2010,[1] while the 日本アカデミー賞 (the one Japanese film award not associated with a magazine that could be given a mistaken name and still be recognizable) didn't exist at the time.[2] The nearest I could find was the Motion Picture and Television Engineering Society of Japan but they don't seem to have, or at least list, nominations: this is perhaps something I've found on a lot of Wikipedia articles and their frequently-circular sourcing, where every Japanese film released in that year was somehow "in the running" for every award and we treat them as though they were nominated for those awards. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Film Stock

I am trying to find out what the film stocks and film speeds ASA / ISO was used in Godzilla 1954? 66.65.59.220 (talk) 22:54, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nihongo foot?

Should we replace nihongo foot (unlike video games) for readers it would be necessary. --49.150.96.127 (talk) 00:11, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A footnote is not necessary. That may be the procedure for video games but not for movies, per WP:NCF. Armegon (talk) 10:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gojira

The title of the movie is and always has been Gojira, Godzilla being an English adaptation of phonetic sound of the word not a translation. As the original film wasn't properly released in the west for decades it was never officially or semi-officially titled Godzilla until the 2000s rereleases. I don't believe that's sufficient to justify titling the article Godzilla. The pages for the original Star Wars films aren't listed according to the episode numbers they were retroactively given, they're listed under their original titles. 2600:8801:7116:4400:4850:2702:B33D:ADA6 (talk) 03:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Godzilla" has been the official and most common transliteration of "ゴジラ" since the American cut's original release in '56 across - to my knowledge - all English-language media in the franchise, including literally translated titles and the official releases of the Japanese cut. EN Wikipedia also cites House (1977) by the more common English transliteration rather than the phonetic Hausu. It's just how he spells his name in English, it's not less correct than the more phonetically strict version and if an English-speaker were looking for this film they would look under the name Godzilla (1954)
However, I agree it ought to be noted that common practice among fans is to refer to the uncut original movie as Gojira to distinguish it from the American cut and the 1998 and 2014 films, provided someone can source a solid citation. 144.121.150.162 (talk) 14:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's already a footnote in the lead (with cites) noting the various alternate titles the film has been released under in the U.S. Armegon (talk) 22:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have sources to back up these claims @144.121.150.162 [1] [2] GojiraFan1954 (talk) 11:38, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Toho has always considered the official English name and title to be Godzilla since 1954. When screened in America for Japanese-American audiences (prior to the 1956 edit), it was advertised as Godzilla, a name chosen by Iwao Mori, then-head of Toho's Production Department, who was presented with three possible translations: Gojira, Gozila, and Godila. After consultation from an English speaker, Mori decided the official translation of the name Gojira should be Godzilla. So Toho actively chose not to make his translated name Gojira, and to advertise the film under the name Godzilla in English speaking territories. By this logic, should the titles of the pages for Princess Mononoke and Run Lola Run instead be Mononoke-hime and Lola rennt, as those are the original titles in Japanese and German? Well since they have official translated titles in English, the English names work just fine.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Tokyo 1960 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 04:06, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Poster actors

In an addition to the four top-billed actors, we have at least 11 actors in the billing block of the official film poster, so that totals 15 actors. I took the liberty of boldly adding them in, but was swiftly reverted by Armegon per WP:MOSFILM and Template:Infobox film.

As per the Bold, revert and discuss cycle, I'm opening a discussion here for others to gain feedback on this. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:09, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any reason not to follow the MOS here. I support adding all the actors from the billing block. silviaA~H (inquire within) 05:33, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I guess Armegon added them back so the issue seems settled. silviaASH (inquire within) 05:36, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted my edit. A quick use of Google Lens and Translate did proved that you were right, there's additional actors billed in the poster. The previous hidden comment said 4 and I accepted it on blind faith, assuming that they did their research. Armegon (talk) 05:37, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No hard feelings. I always check the official film posters for how many cast members are listed in the billing blocks, even if some posters are not uploaded on Wikipedia. I also assume your edits were made in good faith. We all make mistakes sometimes. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:53, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this was an honest mistake. My bad, man.
"I'm afraid my Japanese is a little rusty" - Steve Martin LOL Armegon (talk) 06:09, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see an event settled by the time I come to it on a discussion page. I'll have to say that billing blocks are a bit curious for Japanese films as the Japanese text generally leaves a lot more room for prose than English does. I'll admit it looks long in the infobox, but that might only be an issue in the future if things get a bit giraffe like. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:36, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the cast billing is a little too long. I'd prefer if it were restricted to actors with blue links. Half of the listed cast don't even have Wiki articles -- or significant roles within the film itself. Armegon (talk) 04:14, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed new title: Gojira (film)

Reasoning for this: This started off as Shigeru Kayama's initial story treatment called the monster of the film "Gojira" (actually spelt as Godzira) ゴヂラ, spelled with the uncommon kana "ヂ", reflecting a vision for a gorilla-whale hybrid, combining the names gorilla (ゴリラ) and kujira (クジラ), making the name "Gojira" (ゴジラ) after Ishiro Honda and Takeo Murata started writing the script for the film. A rumor states that "Gojira" was the nickname of an imposing Toho employee at the time of the film's writing, but their identity hasn't been verified. The English name "Godzilla" was actually an invention of Toho's international sales department in 1955, and not any American distributors.

Sources: [1] [2] GojiraFan1954 (talk) 11:46, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OPPOSE. WP:NCFF: "Use the title more commonly recognized by English readers; normally this means the title under which it has been released in cinemas or on video in the English-speaking world." Masato.harada (talk) 16:00, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OPPOSED per WP:NCFF as well. Also add the fact that Toho themselves use the name/title "Godzilla" for English markets, check the official English site. They even used the English name on their own Blu-ray releases. Clearly Toho's stance is that the English title/name of the film and character is "Godzilla." Japanese titles should only be used on articles that don't have an official international title. Armegon (talk) 23:22, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per the relevant guidelines at WP:NCFF. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:28, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gojira-Toho employee rumor

According to page 15 of "Who Was Gojira?" by Richard Pusiteri, Japanese Giants #10, a prevalent rumour posits that "Gojira" was the nickname of an opposing Toho employee, but their name has never been verified. GojiraFan1954 (talk) 11:11, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Giant Monster from 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

August Ragone mentioned in his book that the proper word was "Leagues" and not "Miles". He elaborated further on the Classic Horror Film Board back in 2009. Here's what he said

As for the correct Japanese title for Tanaka's original treatment, it is 「海底二万哩から来た大海獣」 (Kaitei Niman-ri karakita Daikaiju) or "Giant Monster From 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea." It was original mistranslated as "The Big Monster From Twenty Thousand Miles Under the Sea," and the Japanese rendered in romaji as "Kaitei Niman Mairu karakita Daikaiju." The mistake was made in the reading of the measure of distance 「哩」 ("ri"), which can also be read as "wai" or "mairu" (the pronunciation of the English, "mile").

But, Tanaka took part of his title from the Japanese release of Disney's 1954 spectacular 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA, which was 『海底二万哩』 or "Kaitei Niman Mairu"... Without the proper context, the translation can go several ways. With this context, it gives us a better understanding of his titling -- but the reading of Tanaka's proposal would still be "On" form ("ri") and not the "Kun" forms ("wai" or "mairu"), since using "mairu" would be cumbersome. Of course, since his title borrows from the aforementioned Disney's film, 「二万哩」 ("niman-ri") should transliterate, in this case, as "20,000 Leagues."

Despite all of this, the Challenger Deep in the Mariana Trench is the deepest point in Earth's oceans, which is only 6.78 miles, approximately. So, of course, "20,000 Miles" does not make much sense. Of course, we'd also have to break down the translation from French to English of the Verne novel, where the "20,000 Leagues" refers to the distance through the Seven Seas Captain Nemo travels (over 15 times the radius of the Earth), and not straight to to the bottom -- the deepest point the Nautilus goes in the novel is 4 Leagues (approximately two miles). Suffice to say, that Tanaka took his title from the Disney film, and leave it at that.

To be public domain?

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2025/06/19/japan/crime-legal/osaka-man-arrest-godzilla/

The film is going to be public domain in 2032 in Japan of course. GojiraFan1954 (talk) 08:23, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. The article credits only Ishiro Honda as the "creator" but as we now know, Honda was not the only filmmaker responsible for Godzilla's creation. Additionally, Godzilla was created when all filmmakers were employed under Toho and made the film for Toho, so the company owns the copyright. For sure, they will renew it before it expires; there's always options offered to renew copyrights. That's how Universal continues to own the copyrights to King Kong vs. Godzilla and King Kong Escapes: the original copyright expired in 2004 but they renewed them. The article is misinformed. Armegon (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was right, the article is misinformed. According to this (CRIC Copyright Law of Japan), current Japan laws state that the copyright expires and enters public domain 70 years after the creator's death, not 38 years. If Honda were the sole copyright owner (which he's not), it wouldn't expire until 2063. Armegon (talk) 20:32, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's another article: https://soranews24.com/2025/06/19/osaka-man-arrested-for-selling-colorized-version-of-the-original-godzilla-from-1954/ GojiraFan1954 (talk) 09:27, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't trust that article considering it's not a reliable source: the author's name is "Master Blaster" (what self-respecting professional journalist goes by a username intended for YouTube?); the entire website is a blog (blogs are unreliable, the bottom page states "Powered by WordPress"), anyone can create a blog and pass their opinions as facts without oversight. It's pretty clear Master Ass-blaster is simply repeating (or misinterpreting) that same article you shared. Copyright Laws of Japan make it clear that Godzilla won't be public domain in 2032 -- and probably not ever. Armegon (talk) 15:06, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The link you showed to me is actually about copyright laws in Japan AFTER 1971, as there was the Kurosawa Rule, done PRIOR to 1971, which sets the copyright length to 38 years after the death of the director. It's even viral everywhere, everything has to become public domain at some point. GojiraFan1954 (talk) 03:59, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Variety article only talks about the Akira Kurosawa films, not Godzilla. This is a Blog and they're not acceptable as sources on Wiki, per WP:UGC.
This article confirms that the Honda family did try to reclaim the copyright from Toho, however, Toho states that whatever copyrights Honda did have were transfered over to the company. This also aligns with something the CRIC Copyright Law of Japan states under "Section 2 Authors, Authorship of a Work Made in the Course of Duty: if someone creates something while under employment of the company/corporation, then that work belongs to the company (I think that's what Toho means by "transfer over"). That was literally the case with Honda; also the fact that he didn't become involved with Godzilla until much later when the project had already gained traction.
Also keep in mind, copyrights can be renewed. Public domain only happens when the author fails to renew their copyright. The Japanese cops were misinformed. Remember, they're cops, not lawyers. Not even their lawyers are entertainment lawyers like Toho's legal department. Armegon (talk) 06:32, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the evidence of the cops being misinformed, if they were, then a follow-up article would have been made, and TOHO would have announced the copyright extension publicly.
Sure, copyrights can be renewed, but as I stated and I'll say it again, everything has to become public domain at some point, meaning not everything can stay copyrighted forever, there does hit a point where public domain is inevitable for said work.
Maybe we'll wait until 2032 to happen, because who knows, maybe the article could be true and that it could happen, we just need to wait for it to happen, and if it does happen, then that means the article I brought up is correct, but if nothing happens, then your point is correct. Let's just wait until 2032 to happen.
I also wonder, is it just this one film that allegedly could go public domain in 2032, or will it affect Honda's other work prior to 1971. As far as I'm aware, Godzilla isn't public domain in the U.S. until around 2050. GojiraFan1954 (talk) 08:30, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Godzilla qualifies as a horror film

Considering films like Attack of the 50 Foot Woman and King Kong are described on their wikipedia articles as horror movies and that the intention of the film was to be horrifying, I think it's fair to described Godzilla as a horror film. ~2025-37761-39 (talk) 10:19, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd refrain from categorizing Godzilla as a "horror film" simply for the fact that horror is insanely subjective. It opens a can of worms of "this is what horror is" and "No! this is what horror is," etc. When Godzilla is described as horror, it's more towards the horror of nuclear holocaust as opposed to the horror of the unknown, the paranormal, or a scary monster (human or inhuman) chasing teenagers in the woods or a demon possessing a child.
Godzilla's "horror" is rooted in reality similar to films like I Live in Fear (fear of another nuclear attack) and Red Dawn (fear of the Soviets invading America). Dirty Harry and Halloween share similar premises, a maniac is on the loose killing random people, yet one is considered a horror film and the other isn't. Just because a few monster films are also labelled as horror films doesn't mean Godzilla should follow suit. Films like Them! were intended to illicit horror, but Godzilla was intended to illicit food-for-thought in a social-political subtext, not horror. Armegon (talk) 20:02, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"[W]hose attacks trigger fears of nuclear holocaust in post-war Japan."

Other than what Yamane says at the end of the film, are fears of a nuclear holocaust as a result of Godzilla's attacks mentioned in the movie?

I'm not sure whether this should be in the article. Eatmorepies (talk) 04:52, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I revised it to more accurately reflect Godzilla's origin. Armegon (talk) 05:37, 28 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Godzilla_(1954_film)