Revisiting Episode 67 of Super

[TekTheNinja]

A BUNCH OF STUFF ABOUT TRUNK'S LEGACY AND STUFF.

I couldn't agree more, and it makes me even more sick to think that Frieza might be gaining a happy ending of sorts where he gets to live and maybe become a god of destruction if some theories are correct. Ruining Trunks' legacy and then turning around and giving Frieza a happy ending would be fucking disgusting. Super broke me a lot earlier than it did you though. I got my current pessimistic attitude about the show after Piccolo's crushing defeat in the Universe 6 Tournament Arc. That was when I knew that anyone not named Goku or Vegeta was going to be a damn joke in this series. Hell, I hated Buu falling asleep but assumed Piccolo finally getting his first badass moment in ages would make up for it, but then the episode quickly became my most hated Super episode when he was made a fool of the whole damn time. Now the tournament of power is here and it's doing the same garbage on a bigger scale and hyping up just to screw over even more characters. And to replace Buu with Frieza this time? The character who's legacy might also be altered for the worse now? Fuck this show.

[Asura]

Something I've noticed while reading this thread is that most of the people who thought the episode was good only put down one reason for why they thought that.

It was different.

And so because it was different, that means it's good. Because it divulges from the usual formula and introduces the concept of consequence for a series that usually has none, that makes it good. Remember the Shadow Dragon Arc from GT? Remember how people thought the concept was amazing, finally some consequence in Dragon Ball! Except the execution mostly sucked, and I think we can all agree on that. Similarly, the execution sucked here too. Being different doesn't automatically make it better. Bringing in consequence doesn't automatically make the series better either, but that's a different issue.

If you wanted to introduce the concept of consequence into Dragon Ball, Future Trunks is literally the worst possible candidate out of any other character in the series to apply this concept to. Trunks' entire life was shit, an absolute horror show fighting for survival every single day in a war-torn, fucked up world. All of his friends are dead, his master is dead, and this was a timeline in which the Dragon Balls don't exist anymore. There's no get out of jail free card, everyone who died is dead forever. Trunks' arc in DBZ ended with him going back to the past and killing 17, 18, and Cell. This doesn't reverse any of the consequences though. Everyone is still dead, most of the Earth's population is still gone, none of his friends are coming back to life, and the world (which will eventually be rebuilt over a period of years and years) is still a flaming, desolate pile of shit. There is not a single character in the entire franchise who has suffered even close to the amount that Trunks has suffered.

Nothing will ever take back the suffering that the Androids have caused Trunks, but the end of his arc gives closure to the fact that even though he can't undo everything like every other character can with the Dragon Balls, he eventually won in the end, and all of his hard work paid off to finally save his world. So why then, when Super decides to introduce the concept of the villain winning in the end, is it applied to the character that has already suffered the most? Why is it applied to the character who has already had the villain win in his timeline for years upon years upon years killing almost everyone he's ever known and loved? Why is undoing all the hard work of a character who has been tortured for the majority of his life by villains a good thing? Why is it a "welcome change"? All it's doing is showing us what would have happened if Trunks returned to his timeline to face the Androids and Cell, and lost. If that happened in the original DBZ, wouldn't you be asking yourself what the hell the point was of his entire story arc?

An ending with consequence isn't a bad idea. I don't think it fits the tone of this series at all, but it's certainly not a bad idea. What is a bad idea however is applying it to the only character in the series who we've already seen go through consequences, and go through suffering. It's just a repeat of what's happened before, except this time there's not the satisfaction of him winning after facing impossible odds. Instead, it's just torturing a character who has already been flayed alive and has somehow managed to survive despite facing a lifetime of horror and sadness.

A true story of hope, all reversed and destroyed and meant to mean absolutely nothing. Apparently all that Trunks deserves is non-stop suffering and torture, and to a lot of people that's a good thing, and a "welcome change". That ends my rant.

[precita]

I liked it because it felt well done. Trunks lost everyone, he's supposed to be one of the few tragic heroes Dragonball has.

Also considering Trunks was 17 in the Cell arc when he first appeared, and then 31 in the Black arc, then his timeline had a good nearly 15 years of peace. We also know Trunks stopped Babidi and killed Dabura and prevented them from releasing Majin Buu, so he was a hero twice over already.

The fact that some people have such a strong negative reaction to this episode is really something. Even with Trunks as one of your favorite characters, and he is one of mine, I don't think having this type of knee-jerk reaction to the point where some of you hate the Black arc or Super in general retroactively because of it is a proper reaction. Especially now a year later when you've had more than enough time to reflect upon it besides when it first aired.

[Rebel Instinct]

Something I've noticed while reading this thread is that most of the people who thought the episode was good only put down one reason for why they thought that.

It was different.

And so because it was different, that means it's good. Because it divulges from the usual formula and introduces the concept of consequence for a series that usually has none, that makes it good. Remember the Shadow Dragon Arc from GT? Remember how people thought the concept was amazing, finally some consequence in Dragon Ball! Except the execution mostly sucked, and I think we can all agree on that. Similarly, the execution sucked here too. Being different doesn't automatically make it better. Bringing in consequence doesn't automatically make the series better either, but that's a different issue.

You just touched on something I've been stewing on since the last time I posted here (I was literally stewing on it all morning at work yesterday). It's actually a trend I caught onto back when the episode first dropped and have had it in the back of my mind ever since. The ones who were pleased by the end of the arc tended to all bring up the word "consequences" and the idea of a disruption to the status quo as the reason why they were so happy about it. It usually went along the lines of "Finally some real consequences in Dragon Ball! At last, characters died for real this time. It's such a refreshing change, it barely feels like a Dragon Ball arc!" I'm generalizing a bit, but you get what I'm saying.

I feel like a major change like that isn't a good thing unless it brings something meaningful to the overall narrative. The shake up in the Future Trunks arc didn't have any long-lasting effect on the nature of the series. The main timeline was almost entirely unchanged by the events of the arc, neither Goku or Vegeta were humbled or learned a lesson and no new powers or transformations were gained to carry over into the next arc (the manga does have this at least, however). Trunks and Mai were foisted off to another timeline, so any effect it had on them doesn't really matter going forward. That leaves the deviation in the writing feeling kinda pointless. Yeah, it deviated from the norm, but it meant nothing in the long run. So, what was good about it? How does bringing in consequences for one arc that have no real affect on the main characters make the series better? If it's just that it was different, it seems kinda shallow.

If you wanted to introduce the concept of consequence into Dragon Ball, Future Trunks is literally the worst possible candidate out of any other character in the series to apply this concept to. Trunks' entire life was shit, an absolute horror show fighting for survival every single day in a war-torn, fucked up world. All of his friends are dead, his master is dead, and this was a timeline in which the Dragon Balls don't exist anymore. There's no get out of jail free card, everyone who died is dead forever. Trunks' arc in DBZ ended with him going back to the past and killing 17, 18, and Cell. This doesn't reverse any of the consequences though. Everyone is still dead, most of the Earth's population is still gone, none of his friends are coming back to life, and the world (which will eventually be rebuilt over a period of years and years) is still a flaming, desolate pile of shit. There is not a single character in the entire franchise who has suffered even close to the amount that Trunks has suffered.

Nothing will ever take back the suffering that the Androids have caused Trunks, but the end of his arc gives closure to the fact that even though he can't undo everything like every other character can with the Dragon Balls, he eventually won in the end, and all of his hard work paid off to finally save his world. So why then, when Super decides to introduce the concept of the villain winning in the end, is it applied to the character that has already suffered the most? Why is it applied to the character who has already had the villain win in his timeline for years upon years upon years killing almost everyone he's ever known and loved? Why is undoing all the hard work of a character who has been tortured for the majority of his life by villains a good thing? Why is it a "welcome change"? All it's doing is showing us what would have happened if Trunks returned to his timeline to face the Androids and Cell, and lost. If that happened in the original DBZ, wouldn't you be asking yourself what the hell the point was of his entire story arc?

An ending with consequence isn't a bad idea. I don't think it fits the tone of this series at all, but it's certainly not a bad idea. What is a bad idea however is applying it to the only character in the series who we've already seen go through consequences, and go through suffering. It's just a repeat of what's happened before, except this time there's not the satisfaction of him winning after facing impossible odds. Instead, it's just torturing a character who has already been flayed alive and has somehow managed to survive despite facing a lifetime of horror and sadness.

A true story of hope, all reversed and destroyed and meant to mean absolutely nothing. Apparently all that Trunks deserves is non-stop suffering and torture, and to a lot of people that's a good thing, and a "welcome change". That ends my rant.

I agree with this so much it hurts. Why must Future Trunks be the whipping boy of the series? His life is the definition of permanent consequences. He even goes through the exact same character arc as last time. It feels like Toriyama took the basic idea of Trunks' story from back in the Androids/Cell saga and just multiplied the despair twofold. To me it feels like an unnecessary retread of the exact same takeaway from Trunks' story just to hammer in the same idea a second time, but this time more depressing and significantly less cathartic.

Trunks' world had already broken up the status quo of DBZ. It permanently killed off Goku and the Z Fighters in the future timeline and forced Trunks to defeat the Androids and Cell without them to rebuild the future. It showed us that death mattered there, that the heroes don't always win despite their best efforts and that sometimes all you can do is have hope, move forward and live with what you still have left. The Future Trunks arc wasn't the first time we've had these things in Dragon Ball, so why do it a second time? Especially if there's nothing gained or a satisfying narrative payoff like Trunks' epilogue in the Cell saga on the second time around. It actually feels like beating a dead horse (or more like re-crippling a horse that had just finished recovering).

[Rebel Instinct]

I liked it because it felt well done. Trunks lost everyone, he's supposed to be one of the few tragic heroes Dragonball has.

Trunks was already a tragic hero. He had his character arc and it was concluded. What does bringing him back and making him even more tragic accomplish that wasn't already accomplished before? I'd also contest that it was "well done". The ending in the anime at least required several majorly contrived developments and some significant suspension of disbelief to accomplish (Super Saiyan Rage and the Spirit Sword). Unless you meant well done thematically, then that's more of a subjective thing.

Also considering Trunks was 17 in the Cell arc when he first appeared, and then 31 in the Black arc, then his timeline had a good nearly 15 years of peace. We also know Trunks stopped Babidi and killed Dabura and prevented them from releasing Majin Buu, so he was a hero twice over already.

I'm confused why the amount of time the future was peaceful matters when it was ravaged and erased in the end. It doesn't make the loss any more palatable. Same goes for stopping Babidi and Dabura from releasing Buu. Trunks' heroics were ultimately wasted since his timeline was doomed anyway.

The fact that some people have such a strong negative reaction to this episode is really something. Even with Trunks as one of your favorite characters, and he is one of mine, I don't think having this type of knee-jerk reaction to the point where some of you hate the Black arc or Super in general retroactively because of it is a proper reaction. Especially now a year later when you've had more than enough time to reflect upon it besides when it first aired.

With respect, I don't think it's fair for you to say what constitutes a "proper reaction". It's easy to say something like that as someone who actually liked the ending in question. If the developments of a series are a major turn off to the viewer, it's entirely reasonable to be put off of the entire series because of them. Time passing doesn't make those developments go away and reflecting on them has only solidified my dislike of them. They're still a part of the series as a whole even if some cool things happen afterwards. Unless the events of that arc are somehow reversed later in the series, it will always be a personal black mark on Dragon Ball Super for me. I don't think it's wrong to feel that way.

[Freeza9000]

A true story of hope, all reversed and destroyed and meant to mean absolutely nothing. Apparently all that Trunks deserves is non-stop suffering and torture, and to a lot of people that's a good thing, and a "welcome change". That ends my rant.

To be fair, not everything Trunks has fought has for and accomplished in the Cell arc has been for naught. Although you may argue the timeline Whis proposed for Trunks and Mai is just a mere replica of their original home that was burned to nonexistence, it was still a destination in time where the Earth was recovering all thanks to Trunks's efforts in ending the reign of the Androids and Cell. Both Trunks and Mai may have to co-exist with their parallel counterparts, but specifically the more experienced Trunks can use this opportunity to train his duplicate self for extra support in defending the world they're living in.

[TekTheNinja]

Something I've noticed while reading this thread is that most of the people who thought the episode was good only put down one reason for why they thought that.

It was different.

And so because it was different, that means it's good. Because it divulges from the usual formula and introduces the concept of consequence for a series that usually has none, that makes it good. Remember the Shadow Dragon Arc from GT? Remember how people thought the concept was amazing, finally some consequence in Dragon Ball! Except the execution mostly sucked, and I think we can all agree on that. Similarly, the execution sucked here too. Being different doesn't automatically make it better. Bringing in consequence doesn't automatically make the series better either, but that's a different issue.

If you wanted to introduce the concept of consequence into Dragon Ball, Future Trunks is literally the worst possible candidate out of any other character in the series to apply this concept to. Trunks' entire life was shit, an absolute horror show fighting for survival every single day in a war-torn, fucked up world. All of his friends are dead, his master is dead, and this was a timeline in which the Dragon Balls don't exist anymore. There's no get out of jail free card, everyone who died is dead forever. Trunks' arc in DBZ ended with him going back to the past and killing 17, 18, and Cell. This doesn't reverse any of the consequences though. Everyone is still dead, most of the Earth's population is still gone, none of his friends are coming back to life, and the world (which will eventually be rebuilt over a period of years and years) is still a flaming, desolate pile of shit. There is not a single character in the entire franchise who has suffered even close to the amount that Trunks has suffered.

Nothing will ever take back the suffering that the Androids have caused Trunks, but the end of his arc gives closure to the fact that even though he can't undo everything like every other character can with the Dragon Balls, he eventually won in the end, and all of his hard work paid off to finally save his world. So why then, when Super decides to introduce the concept of the villain winning in the end, is it applied to the character that has already suffered the most? Why is it applied to the character who has already had the villain win in his timeline for years upon years upon years killing almost everyone he's ever known and loved? Why is undoing all the hard work of a character who has been tortured for the majority of his life by villains a good thing? Why is it a "welcome change"? All it's doing is showing us what would have happened if Trunks returned to his timeline to face the Androids and Cell, and lost. If that happened in the original DBZ, wouldn't you be asking yourself what the hell the point was of his entire story arc?

An ending with consequence isn't a bad idea. I don't think it fits the tone of this series at all, but it's certainly not a bad idea. What is a bad idea however is applying it to the only character in the series who we've already seen go through consequences, and go through suffering. It's just a repeat of what's happened before, except this time there's not the satisfaction of him winning after facing impossible odds. Instead, it's just torturing a character who has already been flayed alive and has somehow managed to survive despite facing a lifetime of horror and sadness.

A true story of hope, all reversed and destroyed and meant to mean absolutely nothing. Apparently all that Trunks deserves is non-stop suffering and torture, and to a lot of people that's a good thing, and a "welcome change". That ends my rant.

Thing is, people say they want an arc with real consequences, but why should Trunks, the guy who's one of the most responsible characters in the series, get those consequences? Why not the main cast? Goku and Vegeta are reckless as hell and rarely get real consequences for those faults. The closest thing to that was Resurrection F when Frieza blows up Earth, but that's completely reverse immediate;y afterward. You'd also think Goku and Vegeta would have learned some responsibility from that experience, but nope. They've learned nothing. So what was the point there? What was the consequence. There was none. But when it's another timeline, suddenly consequences are allowed. That's just bullshit. Why does the character who's already faced more than enough consequence and had his story arc FINISHED get the depressing ending? And really, what's there to take away from the ending? They lost. That's really it. No real deeper meaning.

On another note, why the hell did Goku go retrieve future Zeno? Why did he think adding ANOTHER destructive hellish child to his universe was a good idea? Maybe to keep him occupied so he doesn't get bored and decide to destroy everything, but if that's the case it's not really stated. Goku just kinda thinks the genocidal monster deserves a friend for some reason it seems.

[RedShift]

I was never a Trunks fan. I've always thought that while he was portrayed to be the time time traveling cool guy with the sword.. He really just was a plot device who accomplished next to nothing besides delivering the cure for the heart virus. He accomplished nothing against the Androids or Cell in the primary timeline. Even in his own timeline he only killed off the Androids & Cell after having massively boosted his own power. So much so that it would have been grossly incompetent of he couldn't eliminate those threats.

My problem with episode 67 is its own lack of critical thinking. Why can't the overdiety of the multiverse erase just Zamasu? Why does he have to obliterate an entire universe, Super Dragonballs or not? Why is there no real reaction or mourning over the events, the scene cuts a couple times and everything is forgotten. Why do Beerus & Whis have to go through mental gymnastics to justify Trunks exit? Trunks already altered the primary timeline before, let him stay instead of tampering with yet another timeline. Instead of letting Trunks & Mai stay as established characters they have to start completely over again as awkward doppelgangers somewhere else.

I just do not like the conclusion of the Arc at all. There's so many missed opportunities and strange decisions it just irks me. And for it to come after the nonsense that was Episode 66 it just makes it worse. The future Trunks arc had great promise & a strong start, but 66 & 67 really ruined it.

[emperior]

A true story of hope, all reversed and destroyed and meant to mean absolutely nothing. Apparently all that Trunks deserves is non-stop suffering and torture, and to a lot of people that's a good thing, and a "welcome change". That ends my rant.

To be fair, not everything Trunks has fought has for and accomplished in the Cell arc has been for naught. Although you may argue the timeline Whis proposed for Trunks and Mai is just a mere replica of their original home that was burned to nonexistence, it was still a destination in time where the Earth was recovering all thanks to Trunks's efforts in ending the reign of the Androids and Cell. Both Trunks and Mai may have to co-exist with their parallel counterparts, but specifically the more experienced Trunks can use this opportunity to train his duplicate self for extra support in defending the world they're living in.

I believe we may see the two Trunks, in the future. Having a sparring partner will be extremely beneficial for them and could justify them getting much stronger.

[Torturephile]

This is one of those few episodes were my thoughts about it are in a constant conflict I can't even form an overall opinion of it. It doesn't help that the saga was on an ongoing decline started back in episode 64 (or earlier if I put more thought into it), and there are many holes in the story that weren't covered up by episode 67, but rather more were created.

I, one one hand, believe that it was nice that for once that the heroes lost since no person ever can win all the time. On the other hand, like others said above, it was the wrong character that suffered the crushing defeat, even if he did get a similar timeline to live on, which that by itself was an awkward choice to conclude that character's (and his companion's) story. Had Future Trunks' conclusion in Z not being satisfying, it may have made more sense to bring him back, then give him a good ending. The problem is the opposite occured. I believe that Goku and Vegeta should have been the ones suffering that crushing defeat instead, as they both have been stagnant since Super began. Goku did ease off his childish stupidity since the ToP arc began, which is a plus, but he is still otherwise mostly the same (UI), and Vegeta regresses back to his Androids/Cell saga ways depending on the episode since the ToP itself began.

[Master Xar]

Something I've noticed while reading this thread is that most of the people who thought the episode was good only put down one reason for why they thought that.

It was different.

And so because it was different, that means it's good. Because it divulges from the usual formula and introduces the concept of consequence for a series that usually has none, that makes it good. Remember the Shadow Dragon Arc from GT? Remember how people thought the concept was amazing, finally some consequence in Dragon Ball! Except the execution mostly sucked, and I think we can all agree on that. Similarly, the execution sucked here too. Being different doesn't automatically make it better. Bringing in consequence doesn't automatically make the series better either, but that's a different issue.

If you wanted to introduce the concept of consequence into Dragon Ball, Future Trunks is literally the worst possible candidate out of any other character in the series to apply this concept to. Trunks' entire life was shit, an absolute horror show fighting for survival every single day in a war-torn, fucked up world. All of his friends are dead, his master is dead, and this was a timeline in which the Dragon Balls don't exist anymore. There's no get out of jail free card, everyone who died is dead forever. Trunks' arc in DBZ ended with him going back to the past and killing 17, 18, and Cell. This doesn't reverse any of the consequences though. Everyone is still dead, most of the Earth's population is still gone, none of his friends are coming back to life, and the world (which will eventually be rebuilt over a period of years and years) is still a flaming, desolate pile of shit. There is not a single character in the entire franchise who has suffered even close to the amount that Trunks has suffered.

Nothing will ever take back the suffering that the Androids have caused Trunks, but the end of his arc gives closure to the fact that even though he can't undo everything like every other character can with the Dragon Balls, he eventually won in the end, and all of his hard work paid off to finally save his world. So why then, when Super decides to introduce the concept of the villain winning in the end, is it applied to the character that has already suffered the most? Why is it applied to the character who has already had the villain win in his timeline for years upon years upon years killing almost everyone he's ever known and loved? Why is undoing all the hard work of a character who has been tortured for the majority of his life by villains a good thing? Why is it a "welcome change"? All it's doing is showing us what would have happened if Trunks returned to his timeline to face the Androids and Cell, and lost. If that happened in the original DBZ, wouldn't you be asking yourself what the hell the point was of his entire story arc?

An ending with consequence isn't a bad idea. I don't think it fits the tone of this series at all, but it's certainly not a bad idea. What is a bad idea however is applying it to the only character in the series who we've already seen go through consequences, and go through suffering. It's just a repeat of what's happened before, except this time there's not the satisfaction of him winning after facing impossible odds. Instead, it's just torturing a character who has already been flayed alive and has somehow managed to survive despite facing a lifetime of horror and sadness.

A true story of hope, all reversed and destroyed and meant to mean absolutely nothing. Apparently all that Trunks deserves is non-stop suffering and torture, and to a lot of people that's a good thing, and a "welcome change". That ends my rant.

Thing is, people say they want an arc with real consequences, but why should Trunks, the guy who's one of the most responsible characters in the series, get those consequences? Why not the main cast? Goku and Vegeta are reckless as hell and rarely get real consequences for those faults. The closest thing to that was Resurrection F when Frieza blows up Earth, but that's completely reverse immediate;y afterward. You'd also think Goku and Vegeta would have learned some responsibility from that experience, but nope. They've learned nothing. So what was the point there? What was the consequence. There was none. But when it's another timeline, suddenly consequences are allowed. That's just bullshit. Why does the character who's already faced more than enough consequence and had his story arc FINISHED get the depressing ending? And really, what's there to take away from the ending? They lost. That's really it. No real deeper meaning.

On another note, why the hell did Goku go retrieve future Zeno? Why did he think adding ANOTHER destructive hellish child to his universe was a good idea? Maybe to keep him occupied so he doesn't get bored and decide to destroy everything, but if that's the case it's not really stated. Goku just kinda thinks the genocidal monster deserves a friend for some reason it seems.

It isn’t about the consequences Trunks faces it’s about the consequences of Time Travelling and how bad the results can be, there’s a reason why so many in the story up until this point have said “fucking with time is bad don’t fucking do it it’s illegal” it’s not about who got the consequence, it doesn’t really matter how responsible anyone is Time Travel if done wrong is possibly the most irresponsible thing you could do, Black and Zamasu said it themselves regardless how psychotic they are they had a point, Trunks’ time traveling only made things much worse in hindsight and it’s that one irresponsible act that only made things worse for him and his timeline, was it the right thing to do because he was trying to save people? Not really.

Stated or not, not listening or obeying Zen’ō is stupid, if you knew someone was willing to kill you like nothing or someone you love, they can reach you, and you can’t fight back, and they give you an order and you don’t listen to it, you’re a dumbass, plain and simple, even if you don’t like it, it’s better to get on his good side in the long-run anyway...

[ekrolo2]

My most loathed conclusion to any story alongside Mass Effect 3.

[Super_Divine_Genki]

To quote another user on how I felt...

- snip -

We know this user as Cipher, and that post best sums up my thoughts exactly. Particularly these gems:

that journey now has far greater meaning than it ever did in the original run because the arc posits that the worthiness of Trunks' actions is inherent, rather than dependent upon a series of favorable outcomes outside of his control as in the Cell arc. What he does is valuable for the lives he touches, personal happy ending or not.

On the whole, and especially through its finale, the arc manages to take Trunks, who exists more or less a plot device and catalyst for action in the original run, and turn him into a poignant character all his own.

If anything, my stance on the storyline is that it's a great ending in want of a substantially better arc.

My biggest takeaway was what it did for F.Trunks worth as a character. Yeah, he/they failed, but it was the value in effort fighting for the hope and survival of that world/timeline and the people that counts -- especially considering all that F.Trunks had lost already. I also liked how F.Trunks didn't defer to Goku and Vegeta to save the day at a certain point through to the end once his vigor had been renewed.

At the very least, the conclusion to this arc leaves a lot to think about. Some of us are still processing that emotional whiplash. However, I do understand why so many are conflicted, or downright loathe how things went down. It leaves more than a few ways at looking at what is the most controversial conclusion to an arc in all of DB. The writing choice there and its execution onscreen both had serious (dragon)balls. Very memorable, for good or bad.

[Vegard Aune]

Episode 67 - the episode that decisively killed any and all desire for me to follow Dragon Ball Super in any serious capacity. Easily my most hated episode in all of Dragon Ball.

- incoming emotional rant, buckle up boys -

Up until episode 67, I had been regularly following Dragon Ball Super and enjoying it for the most part. I had my misgivings, but overall, I was happy to have more Dragon Ball content and none of my grievances were severe enough to break my enthusiasm for the series. Episode 67 broke me.

No other episode in the history of Dragon Ball (including Dragon Ball, Dragon Ball Z and Dragon Ball GT) has ever so thoroughly killed my interest in the series. I actually liked GT despite it's faults, but my enthusiasm for Super dropped like a stone the moment Future Trunks' timeline was erased and it became apparent that it was not going to be undone, I had never been more disappointed and frustrated in Dragon Ball as a series. It took an arc full of promise with interesting ideas, excellent villains and the return of a fan favorite character and found a way to make me hate it.

To me, permanently erasing Future Trunks' timeline completely undermines the entire legacy of his character. By the end of the Cell Saga, Trunks had returned to his own timeline with newfound power and destroyed Android 17 and 18 and Cell, thus saving his timeline and fulfilling his promise to his mother and his deceased master. His story arc was complete and tied up in a neat, yet mildly bittersweet little bow. A fitting end for Future Trunks and a satisfying conclusion. The Future Trunks arc completely undoes all of this.

Despite my excitement at the thought of seeing Future Trunks again, his story should've ended at the Cell Saga. In my opinion, the ending was already perfect. There was nothing left to add to it. Anything else was unnecessary. The Future Trunks arc was quite literally my personal worst case scenario - perfectly capped off by episode 67. I genuinely could not have imagined a worse way for the arc to have played out, Though there were several parts of the arc as a whole that irritated me (Black's inexplicable resistance to injury and instantaneous power-ups, Super Saiyan Rage going completely unexplained, Black's ridiculous dimensional smoke clones, the way the Mafuba was handled, the Potara retcon, Trunks' Spirit Sword), I could've tolerated all of it if Trunks had actually beaten Zamasu for good and saved his timeline in the end.

I could have accepted the loss of Future Bulma, the ravaging of Earth and the death of all of the future timeline's gods as collateral for the arc. Even though I wouldn't necessarily like it, that alone was enough permanent consequence for the arc to have weight. However, building up Trunks as the hope of the future, having all of the survivors looking up to and believing in Trunks as their hero, giving the uplifting and inspiring message of never underestimating the power of mortals in the face of adversity, only to then have everyone watch as their hero fails them and have Zamasu kill everyone Trunks swore to protect (including sweet little Haru and Maki) and then erasing everything afterwards was just too much for me to accept. The fact that all of this was permanent and that Future Trunks and Mai went off to spend the rest of their days as refugees in a timeline where they don't belong, amongst copies of themselves and surrounded by doppelgangers of everyone they failed to save is just the horrible, existential nightmare cherry on top.

I hated it. I still hate it even now. I'd never felt that way about Dragon Ball before and I'll unfortunately always remember Super for that. They changed Future Trunks' legacy from "triumphant hero and savior of the future" to "colossal failure and broken refugee". I couldn't believe Dragon Ball of all things could do something so screwed up to a character whose story was already satisfactorily concluded, to one of my favorite characters no less, and just leave it that way. Not only that, the ending rendered the rest of the entire arc pointless. Nothing of value was gained by the end of the arc. The only thing that really changed was the addition of a second Zeno. So far, the two of them together haven't accomplished anything for the narrative that one Zeno couldn't do alone, so what was the point? All the arc served to do was to permanently destroy Future Trunks' peaceful life for no good reason. Was a second Zeno really worth that?

Since the end of the Future Trunks arc, I've only been loosely following Dragon Ball Super and that saddens me greatly. It wasn't just episode 67 alone though, it was just my breaking point. When Super was first announced, I was just as ecstatic as everyone else, I relished the return of Dragon Ball after so many years and was eager to watch each new episode every week. Over time though, I started having more and more issues with the series. I was feeling a little underwhelmed, but I stuck with it and enjoyed it for what it was. It took until episode 67 to finally break me. No one can say I went in wanting to hate it or didn't give the series a chance. 66 episodes is more than fair, I should think. I now follow Dragon Ball Super purely out of a morbid curiosity to see what will become of one of my favorite franchises. More specifically, I primarily follow the manga since it has avoided many of my personal issues with the anime (I'm fair in my grievances though, since I still don't like the same plot points from Toriyama's outline that I didn't like in the anime and I still hate the way the Future Trunks arc panned out regardless of version). That said, I do stay abreast of the goings on in the anime so that I can at least continue to have informed discussions. I simply don't take Super as seriously anymore and a lot of my enthusiasm is gone.

This post perfectly summarized just about everything I think about this absolute abomination of an ending and I thank you for articulating it better than I ever could. I mean, what was even the point of this entire story? "You can't fight fate"? That's about the only thing I can get out of it, but while there are certainly stories out there that can pull off a theme like that... Dragon Ball is not one of them. At no other point in the franchise's history has it ever been this cynical and mean-spirited, and it really gives off the idea that Trunks's quest was doomed to fail from the beginning. While I've still been watching the show past this point, I think it's safe to say that any enthusiasm I had about DBS died with this episode.

[Asura]

that journey now has far greater meaning than it ever did in the original run because the arc posits that the worthiness of Trunks' actions is inherent, rather than dependent upon a series of favorable outcomes outside of his control as in the Cell arc. What he does is valuable for the lives he touches, personal happy ending or not.

That word, inherent, I'm trying to understand what the context is in regards to its use here. Inherent means a permanent characteristic of someone or something's character/nature. So the worthiness of Trunks' actions here are caused by a characteristic of his own character, whereas in the Cell arc it's not? So all that stuff about hope, all that stuff about saving his future, and him defeating the Androids and Cell was not caused by a characteristic trait of his? Maybe I'm tired but I honestly have no idea what this sentence is trying to say. Trunks's world is fucked in both arcs, he goes back to the past to get help from Goku/Vegeta in both arcs, and then he goes to fight the big bads in both arcs. In one he wins, in one he loses. I don't see how his actions in either arc are different from each other or how one is inherent and the other is dependent.

And what he does is valuable for the lives he touches? What lives? They're all dead LOL. I should think what he did in the Cell arc was a lot more valuable for the lives he touched because y'know, they actually lived.

On the whole, and especially through its finale, the arc manages to take Trunks, who exists more or less a plot device and catalyst for action in the original run, and turn him into a poignant character all his own.

Poignant means something that moves your emotions, or touches you deeply. So somehow Trunks' horror story of him losing everyone he loves and the Androids torturing him and him alone for his entire life since he was a baby is not poignant? We really needed this arc to make him into a poignant character, because he wasn't one before?

And remind me how Trunks isn't a plot device for this arc? He's the catalyst for the events that happen in this arc, or the reason why it even exists.

[Super_Divine_Genki]

What I assume was being inferred in that quote, was that F.Trunks stood more on his own, more or less, for most of his Super arc. Throughout the Cell arc -- as much as it is my favorite major arc -- F.Trunks played more a bystander role (why many call him a plot device to some degree) after he'd returned for almost the entire time, with just a couple exceptions. In Super, there came a point when F.Trunks really took the reigns -- in other words, he deferred to nobody and it was his arc more than anyone else's when all was said and done, execution notwithstanding. He was the primary conduit in which most everything else flowed through. That is perhaps thanks to having those experiences in his initial arc where he got to stand along side others for the first time.

Yeah, all of those that he cared for -- and those that idolized him -- met their untimely demise anyway after the dust had settled. The circumstances of this arc were unlike any other, where they were dealing with an antagonist that was immortal. However, the main point is seeing the value in F.Trunks efforts despite what became an impossible situation for everyone for the first time in DB (I mean, even Goku(!) didn't have an answer). The fight may appear that it was for nothing, but it really wasn't. This F.Trunks gets to retain those experiences, and gets to share them with the woman that he presumably loves -- he didn't experience mindwipe and he will continue on because of strength of character. The sad thing is that all of those that he was fighting for will not know of he and F.Mai's efforts, but they at least get to exist in a world/timeline now where none of those events will ever take place to begin with (which is what he and F.Mai would rather have). And yeah, it's still very strange that there will also exist their counterparts (who probably don't even know eachother) who will not have those experiences. It's complicated. It's conflicting. It's an arc -- and conclusion -- that has clearly covered a full spectrum of reaction. And as always, for good or bad.

Don't get me wrong, I understand why so many are conflicted. It's all very strange, but I'm satisfied with how things concluded -- mostly because nobody (nobody, nobody, NO-body) could have predicted that the writing would go there. I also like how it leaves with the prospect of F.Trunks and F.Mai possibly returning down the road in some capacity.

But yeah, I agree that F.Trunks had a character in his initial arc -- he just didn't have quite, or nearly, the same depth in character as in his return in Super (for all of Super's faults, they almost completely stuck the landing with his character here, imo). I feel that we got a more complete character throughout the events of his more recent story. I was invested, and really felt where he was coming from more than before (not at all to downplay what he went through with the cyborgs).

Now, I feel compelled to go back and revisit those episodes for some reason. I just may have to.

(Except the part where Goku and everyone merrily proceeded onwards the next episode like nothing ever happened )

[Rebel Instinct]

Since it's been brought up several times by other users in this thread, I feel like I should mention that I have indeed read both Cipher and Lord Beerus' posts on the matter some time ago (longtime lurker, recent user) and I still hold the opinions I've expressed in the discussion so far. I understand the point of view they offer, but I don't feel the same way and their interpretations of the ending haven't altered mine in any significant way. I've had plenty of time to reflect on the ending of the arc and have spent a lot of time (far too much time, if I'm being honest) contemplating my feelings on it. It's the one and only arc in Dragon Ball to give ever me a visceral, negative gut reaction - and not in a "this is different and unexpected" sort of way, in an "I hate this development and do not want it" sort of way. I appreciate Cipher and Lord Beerus' opinions, but I don't agree.

(Except the part where Goku and everyone merrily proceeded onwards the next episode like nothing ever happened )

That's one of the other big issues I had with the arc. There was no real reaction to the horrific resolution to things. Goku and Vegeta just went on like nothing ever happened, no ruminating over their failure or redoubling of there training to prevent such an occurrence from happening in the future. In fact, no one really had any hard feelings after the arc was over. Bulma was more worried about building a new time machine than she was the tragic fate of her future son. With how the series progressed, one could remove the entire Future Trunks arc from the story and with the exception of having two Zeno's, no one would be able to tell the arc ever even happened.

Goku didn't even have any special reaction to seeing Gowasu erased during the Tournament of Power. It was like Goku didn't even know him and reacted the same way as if it were any other universe. Back in DBZ, the events of the previous arc weighed on the story and characters made references and callbacks to what happened before to put the current arc in perspective. So far, we haven't seen anything like that with the Future Trunks arc in the Universe Survival arc. Goku and Vegeta aren't even taking the threat of erasure that seriously and are instead choosing to goof around and risk losing their universe in order to have fun, despite witnessing first hand what Zeno can do. It's overall a very strange and surprisingly disconnected follow up to such a big loss for the heroes.

[Super_Divine_Genki]

I completely agree, Rebel Instinct. Nice observations. The lasting impact of previous events, and even the borderline nigh implications of potential happenings -- such as complete erasure -- is just another on the list of Super's problems (there was no real opening ceremony to begin the ToP ). The series has been wanting to have too much fun to care, it seems. Back in Z, if major events had occurred, there would always have been references made that made it feel like there was lasting impact on the world and characters. A short time skip following the Zamasu stuff, coupled with some narration to start, could've done a lot to make those events feel that they reached into the ones that were there (Goku, Vegeta, Bulma).

But, Super kinda whistled off and away with that.