What we experience “will be reflected in the kaiju films,” says Yuji Kaida, an illustrator of kaiju, including Godzilla

Kaijus are strange beasts, giant monsters, from Japan, the most famous of which is Godzilla. For 45 years, Yuji Kaida has represented the kaijus, robots and superheroes of Japanese pop culture on different media (posters, toys, books, etc.). He shared his vision of kaijus with us and gave us his opinion on Godzilla, whom he has been working with since the beginning.

The term kaiju was born in 1954, with the release of the film Godzilla. These beasts are not animals like the others, they are much more than that. In some films, we distinguish dinosaurs and kaijus, the latter are considered strange creatures. They are often the result of manipulations: the atomic bomb, space, pollution…

franceinfo: Is there a difference between kaijus and monsters?

Yuji Kaida: For me, a monster is something that a human being can defeat, while a kaiju is not possible. I think that the kaiju has an almost divine presence. It is not a god, but it is something that transcends human understanding, it is a kind of chaos that is quite incomprehensible, that cannot be assimilated to a human system. That is why I speak of a superior existence.

Unlike monsters in films made outside of Japan, kaiju often have a connection to the climate. How do you explain this?

In many cases, Godzilla can represent factors of nature, of the environment. It is a perfect way for a director who wants to convey an environmental or ecological message. The kaiju allows for the development of extremely many themes, sometimes it can be an allegory on the concept of chaos, on something that escapes order, the system. Sometimes, it can just be an icon that is there for entertainment. It is a concept that can adapt to several approaches depending on the directors.

How do you express the immensity of a kaiju in your illustrations?

If we imagined that the roof of the Parc des Expositions de Villepinte was smashed by a 50-meter monster, we would be floored by something we would not understand. If you found yourself facing a 3-meter bear, it is something you could assimilate, but in terms of proportions, as soon as you go beyond 50 meters, you do not understand. The idea is to manage to depict this incomprehension.

I always focus on perspective. To represent gigantism, the best way is to think about perspective when composing the illustration.

You are very respectful of the design of each kaiju. The 1954 Godzilla does not look like the one in Shin Godzilla. Do you have any guidelines when creating an illustration or do you just rely on the original design?

My posture is to, all the time, represent and illustrate what I see. It is very important to me. So, if I have to do something on Shin GodzillaI represent what I saw of Shin Godzilla. The important thing is that people who are looking for an illustration feel the same thing as what I saw. So it would be absurd to put things that are not in what I saw. That’s why it’s important to represent things as they are in the film.

You have illustrated Godzilla in all eras. Which one do you prefer and why?

The 1954 Godzilla has the strongest presence in me. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that I worked more on that one, but I’m very focused on making the spirit of that film felt. I also really like the way in which Shin Godzilla takes up the spirit of allegory that was very strong in the first Godzilla (the one from 1954). It is a film that has understood very well the spirit of the first film and has been able to adapt it to our times.

Do you think Godzilla will continue to be so successful in the years to come?

It’s obviously a commercial franchise and so the logic is: you release a film, it works, you make a sequel, it works, you make a sequel and so on. During the Shōwa (1954-1975) and Heisei (1984-1995) periods, there was almost one Godzilla per year and we felt a certain creative exhaustion.

I really like the current approach. We make a well-thought-out film and if it works, we analyze what worked and we think about an interesting project for the future, even if it takes several years. I think that if we keep this position, Godzilla will be able to maintain itself in the future.

So it’s a bit of a reflection of the times in which it appeared?

Absolutely, it is a very important factor in the kaiju film, especially Godzilla. If we talk about our time, we are in a situation where it is increasingly difficult to define absolute justice. Defining justice is increasingly difficult, even in entertainment. We have human conflicts that do not stop, there are many ideologies that clash and there is no longer a bipolarity between good and evil as before. This will be reflected in the kaiju films.

The first Godzilla, which came out in 1954, depicts a destruction that is reminiscent of war. There is a very strong anti-war sentiment in this film, but there is also an entertainment factor with this monster destroying the city. You could say that it is counterproductive to make entertainment when you are anti-war. It is this paradox that struck people. If we had made a film that was just anti-war, people would not have found it funny and it would have been forgotten. There are several factors that reflect needs, frustrations of their time, which are found in this.

Isn’t this a way of de-dramatizing what happened?

In the 1954 film, there is a scene where Godzilla destroys the National Assembly. At the time, the people in the room applauded and screamed. The conditions of the defeat (in World War II) had caused a lot of frustration and there was a lot of frustration with political power. This frustration was released with a single scene in an entertainment setting. But that wouldn’t work today. If you show the Parliament being destroyed, it would have a tragic side.

Depending on the era, the same scene will not have the same impact. In 1954, the scene of the destruction of the Assembly brought a very important catharsis for the spectators and that is what made the film extremely striking. So there are several factors that combine, the reflection of the era, the frustration, but we must not forget that it remains entertainment with action. There is a feeling of excitement to see destruction. It is a childish, primary feeling, which speaks and which can be handled in this context in relation to allegories, metaphors and in relation to the frustrations of an era.