8

I ask this question because of a review of the newest Godzilla trailer done by Beyond the Trailer on YouTube. She points out in the video that it is hard to suspend the belief that we have no way (so it seems) of hurting Godzilla even though he is flesh and bone.

I am just wondering if there is some explanation given or implied as to why we can't fire some sort of armor piercing weapons at him or a MOAB/Nuke/JDAM type of bomb. It may be too early to speculate given that this is the very first official main trailer and if that is the case then I can understand not having an answer.

Is this simply a case of "we have to accept it because its a movie" or is there some explanation why modern weaponry cannot hurt the beast.

Improve this question
9
  • 1
    Are you asking specifically about the new Godzilla, the original, the 2000 version, some other version? The new one would likely fall under "speculation" since nobody knows exactly what his new weaknesses may be.
    – phantom42
    Mar 6, 2014 at 17:55
  • @phantom42 The newest Godzilla
    – Andy
    Mar 6, 2014 at 17:56
  • Yeah, any answers here would be pure speculation at this point. This page goes over Godzilla's historical weaknesses and reasons for his durability.
    – phantom42
    Mar 6, 2014 at 17:59
  • @phantom42 Ahh ok! we'll have to wait and see! but thank you for the link it may give me an idea of how this new Godzilla will survive.
    – Andy
    Mar 6, 2014 at 18:01
  • 1
    How about shots into the Green Lantern's writhing body?
    – Oldcat
    Mar 6, 2014 at 21:20

5 Answers 5

Reset to default
18

It's very difficult to extrapolate on the basis of a single trailer but historically modern weaponry has been relatively useless against Godzilla (all canons) due to his size, armoured skin, skill at evading missiles and artillery and his ability to use his breath to avert impacts.

Nukes tend to be off the table because of the urban locations he attacks (or defends) and heavy weaponry is a bit useless when he goes underwater or into hiding.

He is, of course especially vulnerable to being choked to death with trees but, heck every superhero has to have an Achilles heel...

enter image description here

Improve this answer
4
  • 1
    And here I thought the answer was that Godzilla is the psychological manifestation of Japan's guilty conscience over World War 2, and as such, no physical weapon can hurt it. :)
    – TLP
    Mar 7, 2014 at 11:38
  • The point about nukes being off the table is a good one, and its a theme expanded upon directly by Neon Genesis Evangelion, where the city is rebuilt to submerge underground in the event of an attack by such a creature. Godzilla has come to destroy, dropping a nuke probably just gives him the afternoon off.
    – John Smith Optional
    Mar 7, 2014 at 12:06
  • Well, now after the film.. we know that Nukes weren't off the table.. neither they managed to kill Godzilla ( or more precisely, i think they named it like that in film, it's father/mother) when they were used against it in 1950s.. aand with that i totally go with 'we have to accept that' thingy, especially when I see JDAM/GBUs blowing on back of the 'enemy' monster during it's walk through Las Vegas without any harm, and yet it get's pierced& killed at the end with steel bar from wrecked skyscraper..
    – Hary
    Nov 4, 2014 at 20:25
  • Holy crap, I didn't expect that fallout at the bottom of the answer.
    – Clockwork
    Apr 2, 2021 at 8:12
2

Godzilla appears to be more than 300 meters tall, 450 meters long, and 90,000 tons (most accepted measurements) so I assume his skin is so thick that even an armour piercing bulit should get about a foot past his outer most layer of scales

He also lives at the bottom of the ocean, where the pressure alone is greater than what most weapons can dish out.

Also, he once took a meteor (about the same size as he is) straight to the chest and he never even flinched. Forget nukes.

Improve this answer
0

Remember that mere exposure to high levels of radioactivity only make him stronger; as such, nukes would not only fail to kill Godzilla, but when one takes into account that a nuke has a stronger blast force than any other (recently used) bomb/missile, this means that a direct hit would also make him fighting mad. Calling such an action counter-productive would be a massive understatement.

Improve this answer
0

I think if remember Godzilla can adsorb nuclear power so any weapon containing that would be futile , he would soak it up and become more powerful . He is the folly of man Godzilla .

Improve this answer
2
  • 1
    Nukes are only one possible modern weapon; there are also MOABs, and in theory it's possible to build a shaped charge/EFP large enough to penetrate any thickness of armour. You could also improve this by pointing to evidence that Godzilla could withstand not simply nuclear radiation, but also ground-zero temperatures and blast overpressure. As it is this is far too brief for a proper answer and seems more like a comment.
    – DavidW
    Apr 1, 2021 at 21:36
  • Sure thats the smart way , but of course we wouldn't learn are lesson and attack him with what we created him by . You have to factor in movie logic . Your way wouldn't be used until he caused billions in damage and thousands killed .
    – ace92678
    Apr 3, 2021 at 19:33
0

It's actually said on the wiki and in one of the movies that Godzilla is made up of G-cells which give him his power, and the ability to heal incredibly fast.

Improve this answer
3
  • 2
    Hi there, welcome! :) could you add the quote and its source? Maybe a YouTube clip or something? This would help in making your answer more consistent.
    – Jenayah
    Jul 23, 2018 at 23:31
  • See the "regeneration" section of this article for a source. But this plot point was only stated in the 1984-1995 Heisei era as far as I know, so it may not be part of the 2014 movie's canon.
    – Hypnosifl
    Apr 1, 2021 at 21:32
  • It is my view that kaiju exist according to alternate physical laws, other than the laws that the rest of the Earth lives by. This explains how such huge animals would even be able to exist, instead of collapsing under their own weight.
    – Stanley Webb
    Oct 19, 2022 at 14:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.