Official ‘Godzilla’ Concept Art Blazes at Comic-Con

Published 5 years ago by

Godzilla Header Image Official Godzilla Concept Art Blazes at Comic Con

The 2010 Comic-Con provided a lot of material for moviegoers, and geeks in general, to fawn over – including a first look at the creature design of Godzilla, the iconic nuclear-powered beast who will grace the big screen once again in 2012.

Legendary Pictures set up a booth at the convention that provided a fully immersive experience for attendees – complete with plumes of black smoke and a floor that shook in the wake of an animated Godzilla passing by. Consider it unlikely that a 3D version of the impending reboot will be as engaging.

Godzilla made his first appearance in theaters back in 1954.  The creature has endured over the years since and has been brought to life by an actor in a rubber suit throughout all but one of its cinematic incarnations – that exception being Roland  Emmerich’s much-derided 1998 U.S. remake.

Now another modern day Godzilla is in the works and is scheduled to arrive in two years time.  A picture that claimed to show early conceptual art for the monster’s new look surfaced a few months back (see below), though its legitimacy was never officially confirmed or denied.

Godzilla Conceptual Art Official Godzilla Concept Art Blazes at Comic Con

The look of the creature in this photo bears a resemblance to the computer-generated Godzilla in the 1998 film, though the jaws are more narrows and its skin tone is overall darker and spikier in texture.  It could certainly look far more realistic in appearance than the classic monster suit – relatively speaking.

Does it match up with the Comic-Con image of the atomic fire-breathing beast?  The 2D artwork bears a resemblance to the head bust design, though that could just be a coincidence.  Godzilla’s new look is still a work in progress but it is fun to speculate all the same.

Check out the Comi-Con artwork (via Coming Soon) below:

Godzilla Official Godzilla Concept Art Blazes at Comic Con

There is one thing moviegoers can count on – the human protagonist  that will stand in Godzilla’s way in the reboot is not likely to be a worm scientist played by the star of a John Hughes pic from the 1980s. Especially not Anthony Michael Hall. icon wink Official Godzilla Concept Art Blazes at Comic Con

Godzilla is tentatively scheduled to attack theaters next in 2012.

Source: Talking Dog Studios (via Coming Soon)

TAGS: Godzilla
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. GODZILLA looks great-I just hope he is bigger, meaner badder than ever!!!

  2. Is it me or is Zilla trying to flip someone off in that full body pic. I mean that left middle finger is awfully hyper extended and to tell the truth, if that beast learns how to flip someone off, he’s gonna increase his scariness factor by a good factor.

    “oh, rit, Gorilla just flip us the biwd! We gonna get it now!” -Random Tokyo citizen watching Godzilla march ashore.

    • He’s aiming his finger at Roland Emmerich, lol.

  3. What is it about the 1998 version that is SO bad? My kids and I (and even my wife) love it. I am not saying it was Citizen Kane – but for a popcorn flick, it certainly does the trick – at least for me!

    • Thats what I think.

    • I enjoyed the 1998 Godzilla film, but I have issues with the inconsistent tone of the film.
      I loved the look, I loved the little winks and nods to the original Gojira (cardboard buildings with blank white windows during the helicopter chase scene, for example).

      My biggest critique of the film is that it just wasn’t scary. I DID like that Emmerich gave Godzilla a more-or-less logical “origin” story. And I quite understood the tack he took with making it a “fish out of water” type story, with the whole “it’s just an animal, it’s not really evil” approach.

      The problem is, that whole latter approach is what ruins the film. Well, that and David Arnold’s lush, beautiful, and entirely inappropriate soundtrack. Is it a 200ft high monster? Or is it “Bambi Returns”?

      I think the film makers couldn’t decide whether we were supposed to be in awe, as well as say “awwwww”, when the beast was on screen; or actually BE AFRAID of it. I think the latter would have been a far more successful approach.

      Godzilla shouldn’t be a “family movie”. Despite the fact that it WORKS as one, with the approach that Emmerich took. But it shouldn’t. The original Gojira was most definitely not a family flick, despite the grotesque kiddy-oriented sequels.

      • i had issues with it looking nearly like an iguana on steriods

        • while I disagree with Emmerich’s take on the Godzilla story (his choice to make it “merely an animal”), I DID actually like how he presented that it was just an animal, and in this case, it WAS an iguana on (nuclear) steroids.

          like I said, I liked some aspects of the film, even though I felt, and still do feel, that they detract from the actual subject matter.

      • The biggest mistake Emmerich made with his film was that he turned Godzilla into an animal, not a monster. The 98 film is good as “monster on the loose” film, but Gojira was soo much more than that. It’s unfortunate that the Americanized version (Godzilla, king of the monsters) took away all the depth the film had, and people left to believe the series is nothing more than camp.

    • Should I make a list?

      I know all film is subjective, but when Godzilla runs and hides, when the dumb blonde Maria whatshername is a dumb blonde and annoying, when the baby godzillas become raptors, when they misake humans for tuna fish when a fishing boat has CANNED fish, when a fella steps into a big footprint with no other footprints around and does not notice, when they cant find Godzilla under the NYC sewers when the military are airheads when …Godzilla is a SHE when Godzilla isn’t Godzilla…when size matters but small brains are required…stupid movie.

      I was always curious as to what the original draft of the script (Elliot & Russo) would have been under Jan DeBont instead of Dean Devlin and Emmerich who neutered Godzilla.

      But at least there’s two people that enjoyed the film. There’s hope yet.

      • You know what’s one thing I never understood about the film, How the HELL do they keep losing “Godzilla” (In Name Only)? It’s a 200 ft lizard, how do you loose that?

  4. As long as they don’t have a running joke as to the last name of one of the characters like in the last film,then I’ll be okay with this one.

  5. Meaning Matthew Brodrick’s character.

  6. Either the buildings are hiding his genitalia or that IS his genitalia.

    • WHen is the last time u saw genitalia on a lizard? They have them but they hidden.

  7. There’s nothing really wrong with the US remake, it’s a fun turn your brain off blockbuster. I find the constant scorn for it peculiar, the original films are hardly works of Shakespeare!!!

    • I would agree the sequels aren’t great, but Gojira is defintitely what I would say the second greatest film ever made. The 98 film was intended to be a remake, and it failed in every way (couldn’t even get the design right). If you ask me, Emmerich didn’t remake Gojira, he remade The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms.

      • Coulda been worse. They could have tried to remake The Bermuda Depths.

  8. I think it maybe had the same problems that Transformers has. Everyone wants to see the characters the movie is named for, not the corny human storyline that drives the movies.

  9. Why do they have 2 make this in “modern day”… I’ve said this b4 and I say it again, Take a page from Peter Jackson’s “King Kong” and set it back 50 to 60 yrs.

    • that was one of my favorite parts of King Kong. Modern technology and weapons would make it easier to take out a “monster” like King Kong. When I was a kid, the 80′s version of King Kong vs. the helicopters held up, but now as an adult, Jackson’s version is much stronger and more realistic.

      • Yeah, but the real Godzilla is nearly impossible to kill, even with futuristic weaponry.

        • With laser guided bombs it wouldn’t be that hard.

          • that’s why i kept my reference mostly towards King Kong. I remember in some of the old Godzilla movies, he was portrayed as being so large and indestructible, jets were like flies to him and most weapons didn’t have an effect.

            • Yeah pretty much the only thing that’s ever really killed him was the Oxygen Destroyer in the original movie.

              • The Oxygen Destroyer was a very effective ant-Gojira weapon. Too bad it’s genius inventor made the mistake of assuming that Gojira was the only species on Earth that consisted of a single member.

                To this day people still assume that Wile E Coyote was just a lone creature, rather than a series of ill-fated coyotes who (to us) all look and act alike.

                Have to agree with GetMoney;
                If I see this latest ‘zilla to emerge from the depths getting a chance to stomp tanks and swat airplanes out of the sky, the DOD has a lot of ‘splainin to do. Our taxes should pay for at least a few drones, cruise missiles and bunker busters.

          • Dude, a bomb is how Godzilla came to be made. The Hiroshima attacks caused the nuclear radiation of a Godzillasaurus egg (a real kind of dinosaur), which brought it back to life. When it became fully grown in 1954, it began to migrate, and destroyed a city in the process. They hit him with bombs, and he just got bigger. The only one ever killed by bombs was the 1998 version, and that’s legally a godzilla anymore. Toho bought him and renamed him “Zilla”, and officially killed him in 2004. Yeah. He sucked THAT BAD.

  10. In my eyes, Cloverfield is and will always be the greatest monster movie. Nothing will beat it! :D

    • lol, you gotta be kidding me

    • Oh Hell yes Eric! But as an old school Zilla lover, Have to admit I love this concept art! If we cannot have Clover and his Mum, then we need another Zilla that is more true to the orginal look!

      • Godzilla shouldn’t be called “Zilla”. In 2004, Toho (original Godzilla creators) bought the rights to the 1998 remake monster, and renamed him “Zilla” to have him fight the real Godzilla, and made Zilla lose in a matter of seconds. Sorry if this comment seemed dickish, but I’m ocd about these things.

    • Yeah, your obviously joking right? It’s a good movie, but nowhere near the best monster movie.

  11. How about a monster movie where you SEE the monster? IMOP I prefer to see the beast if they’re going to spend all this money on making a monster movie then show the darn thing!

  12. Hoping this film we get to see some character development from Godzilla. Why is he upset? What are his demands?
    Godzilla has always seemed so one dimensional to me… ^

    • Yeah that was Final Wars, the last Godzilla movie made. It was a god-awful movie, but entertaining as hell. I hope a Godzilla movie never sinks that low again, though.

  13. Why not just put a man in a suite again? That’s what we all expect and love. And hold a little more true to the Japenese version.

  14. I take it back. Everyone IS better off at remaking The Bermuda Depths…I dig Godzilla, but you might as well give me a Giant Snapping Turtle controlled by a 200yr old sea witch.

    Better yet, have Godzilla fight the new Mothra, and destroy Japan once and for all.

    • @”…I dig Godzilla, but you might as well give me a Giant Snapping Turtle controlled by a 200yr old sea witch.”

      Yeah, and they could call that film, Gamera (In Name Only).

  15. my only hope is that this upcoming godzilla doesnt die and kills EVERYTHING..

    i hated to see king kong die..

  16. I want to see a Godzilla rise out of every ocean, sea, and even the great lakes of the world and even some big ponds and start destroyin all headed for the North pole. When they arrive, around 50 of them or maybe a hundred, some get killed along the way, they start fightin. All the radiation and heat melt the polar ice cap and flood all the coastal cities all the islands sink and as the major nuclear nations’ Nuclear missles close in for a strike the combined heat blasts nuclear blasts and buttin Godzilla heads cracks the world and all the gidzillas fall into the massive hole that all the world scientists predict will blow the Earth up but one super scientists whose home made super bomb stops it from happenin just in time and that how the world almost gets destroid by the red nek Gidzilla war… ;)

  17. I find this whole ignorant post offensive to Godzilla lovers everywhere and speaking as a red nek I find the old man’s mis characterization of us as bad spellers doubly offensive. Thank you Screenrant for your support.

  18. Am I the only person who liked the 1998 version that featured Matthew Broderick and was directed by Roland Emmerich? I know Ememrich sems to catch a lot of hell lately (mainly because of 10,000 BC) but the 1998 GODZILLA wasn’t exactly a bomb financially nor critically so why does it get so much grief? Its one of my regulras meaning I watch it on average at least once during the year.

    GODZILLA (1998)
    Budget: 130 Million
    Box Office Take: 136 Million Domestically plus 242 Millon over seas for a total take world wide of 380 million. That was no small amount considering we’re talking 12 years ago.

    It also has won 8 awards although one is a RAZZIE award.

    So why does 1998′s Godzilla seem to catch so much hell? Did anyone go to see it thinking it was going to be the INCEPTION of its day or something? It is after all a movie about a 50 foot tall lizard.

    • The acting was awful especially Broderick…I just watched it the other day and I have always enjoyed it…I think Hank Azaria and Jean Reno were the standouts as I enjoyed their characters the most…I wanted cute little blond girl to get eaten though…I dislike the way Emmerich played out the military as being completely incompetent morons though..

    • No, fans went in thinking it would like the Godzilla films we grew up, but what we got was just an ordinary monster film.

      What worries me most about this film is that we can’t grasp something that our military can’t defeat. The military was able to defeat the decepticons, the monster from Cloverfield, King Kong, GINO (Godzilla In Name Only), and every other monster that was featured in film. But thankfully, it looks like LP will take this film seriously this time, and give us fans the film we should have gotten in 98.

    • The movie in and of itself isn’t bad. I actually enjoy it despite being a die-hard fan of the Japanese series. It’s big problem? It’s trying to pass itself off as a Godzilla movie. The creature in that movie isn’t Godzilla. As was said by Ken Satsuma, the actor in the Godzilla suit from 1984 to 1995, “it doesn’t have the spirit.” It acts like a stupid animal, it runs away from the military, most of the destruction it causes is accidental, it lacks the atomic ray, it was killed with a few volleys of missiles once they got it to stay still, and really, it looks virtually nothing like Godzilla beyond being a huge mutant theropod with spines on its back. Most fans dislike it because it was a gross misrepresentation of Godzilla that almost completely killed whatever mainstream credibility the series had to begin with, not so much because it was a bad movie.

      • Well Satsuma would be critical no actor in a suit means no acting job for an actor, him, or anyone else. So I think you have to balance critical comments like “It acts like a stupid animal, it runs away from the military” with the thoughts of the helicopter pilots (characters) being chased and outsmarted. True it’s a risk whenever you redefine a character and change that character. So, yes Emmerich and company tried unsuccessfully to bring Godzilla into a more sensible, modern,and closer to scientifically accurate story. Instead of an almost indestructible single creature they gave us a prolific creature that could threaten all of humanity everywhere simultaneously. Unlike nuclear weapons in the late 40′s which threatened devastation of major cities by the time the 60′s and 70′s rolled around entire countries were under threat from a proliferation of much more powerful weapons that were unmanned, faster,and harder to detect and destroy than conventional delivery systems. So yeah few really were on board with the parallel metaphorical idea being updated, many Godzilla’s that could do the same thing to humanity as a real modern unlimited Nuclear war could accomplish.

        The idea of a robust emerging species that could survive and perhaps thrive in a highly radioactive environment and reasonably powerful enough individually to threaten the existence of humanity is a frightening prospect. The thing that bothered me was that they didn’t have a highly radioactive creature able to spread contamination far and wide…

  19. I do like that she concept art shows the “atomic breath” in his mouth, ‘Zilla needs it to level the field against today’s stand-off weaponry. That and his characteristic roar need to be kept, even if his(?) shape is tweaked to be more believable.

    Back in ’54 the Japanese military was pretty limited, but America still had battleships. I wonder how the Big Guy would have handled a broadside of armor-piercing rounds from an Iowa class.

  20. That statue looked like the spinosaurus off Jurassic Park III.

    Didn’t we try Godzilla once? I mean I liked it, but a bunch of people didn’t. But hey let’s try again. Yay reboots! (sarcasm)… Oh! And don’t forget to put it in 3D! (also sarcasm)

    • “Didn’t we try Godzilla once?” No, they tried to call a movie “Godzilla” in the hopes that the name alone would attract viewers. For those who don’t know, Godzilla 1998 was not a faithful adaptation. Nothing of what made Godzilla an endurring character carried over into that movie, so please keep the cynical comments to yourself.

  21. The problem with the 98′s Godzilla movie had more to do with the story surrounding the main character than anything else. The movie was just filled with bad acting, uninteresting character development, out of place political correctness, and inappropriately dummying down the script for the overseas box office market just for the sake of making profit (French Secret Service, anyone?). The more “real” approach/spin they gave to that Godzilla wasn’t what people wanted to see. Believe it or not, they wanted a fire-breathing monster with lasers shooting out of his eyes; not the anatomically correct, over sized iguana that almost had the right look but failed to capture the iconic image that the Japanese original had.

    I’m not sure they can pull off a reboot considering the “been-there-done-that” theme where a city gets destroyed, hope survives, battle and love triangle ensues, only to end in tragedy or victory. I mean, how many times can you tell the same story without seeming too redundant? If this will be anything like going from “The Hulk” to “The Incredible Hulk”, which people seem to think there was big difference between the two (thanks to Edward Nortons sissy voice and big nose), then count me out. I’m getting tired of these unimaginative directors giving us regurgitated reboots with forgettable stories.

  22. I liked 98 Godzilla. I still watch it from time to time. And even though I kinda grew up with the original Godzilla I never really liked it. The design, the walk… When Godzilla came out in 98 I was happy because thats what I was expecting. Thats what Godzilla shouldve been all along (for me at least). More like King Kong, less like “power rangers stuff” (Meaning lasers, bombs, atomic breath and whatnot)

      • Except that Godzilla’s visual effects were a world ahead of anything the Power Rangers ever did. Stop basing the whole series on the movies from the seventies. And what do you mean Power Rangers ruined any credit Japanese film maker’s had? Do you really think anyone saw the Power Rangers as the typcial standard of Japanese films? It was low-budget and aimed at children. That’s like saying that the 1960s Batman series represents the pinnacle of American filmmaking. It’s just not so.

  23. does anyone know where i can find a shirt to buy?

  24. i’m sorry i mean’t find that Godzilla shirt.