What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Discussion regarding the entirety of the franchise in a general (meta) sense, including such aspects as: production, trends, merchandise, fan culture, and more.

Moderators: General Help, Kanzenshuu Staff

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 19, 2018 1:37 pm

ABED wrote:You are literally just quoting me. What's your point?
I am saying your just being cynial as always look how much love frieza got in the past all across the world and before super and now that he is back for toriyama will continue to develop him along with other projects.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by ABED » Sat May 19, 2018 1:39 pm

I'm not being cynical at all. I understand Freeza's popular, but so what? Plenty of Toriyama's villains are popular but he doesn't keep bringing them back without changing them in significant ways. And writers shouldn't just keep things around because they are popular. They need to be coming up with new ideas.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 19, 2018 1:45 pm

ABED wrote:I'm not being cynical at all. I understand Freeza's popular, but so what? Plenty of Toriyama's villains are popular but he doesn't keep bringing them back without changing them in significant ways. And writers shouldn't just keep things around because they are popular. They need to be coming up with new ideas.
Yeah Frieza kinda broke that rule and so he will continue to be developed for the future better or worse besides some fans wanted Cell to return due to his potential cause you know having Saiyan and frieza dna that would probably make keep up with the cast but most people aren't sure and besides Cell is less popular in japan than Frieza and his design is tedious to due.
Sometimes new ideas don't always work out the way you hope but Frieza would be getting new development due to toriyama and toei.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by ABED » Sat May 19, 2018 2:24 pm

Sometimes new ideas don't always work out the way you hope
That's the nature of risk, but something everyone needs to do regardless.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

User avatar
Kunzait_83
I Live Here
Posts: 2974
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 5:19 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Kunzait_83 » Sat May 19, 2018 2:28 pm

Breaking a rule or not breaking a rule... ultimately what mainly matters is the end result of the creative process. If something turns out well, then great: but if not, then what's the point?

The issue that many (myself included) have with Freeza coming back is purely because nothing creative or unique was done with it. At least in Revival of F anyway: in Revival of F, you have all this build up to what effectively just amounts to "Freeza fights Goku and Vegeta some more" with almost NOTHING in the way of fresh or interesting ideas to spice it up and make the return actually worth something or be particularly meaningful (and no, giving him a lazy recolor of a "new form" hardly qualifies as such).

If Freeza returning to life in that arc actually yielded something of genuine interest... almost NOBODY would be complaining. I certainly wouldn't. Most of us are all generally in agreement that Freeza has been (up till Super at least) one of the all time best ever and best liked villains in all of Dragon Ball. As I recall in fact, most fans on average were genuinely EXCITED for the Revival of F film during the initial lead-up to its release... and were only disappointed and let down after actually seeing it. And the "recap arc" version of it in Super hardly did it any favors either.

As far as Freeza's return in the Tournament of Power goes, at a bare minimum THAT at least actually shakes things up by doing something genuinely different with the character (giving him a genuinely uneasy and shaky temporary alliance with the Goku and the others): but apart from numerous individual criticisms of the actual execution of that idea, it still ultimately culminates in... Freeza returning to his EXACT status quo from the beginning of the original Freeza arc: he's back in charge of his original space empire. Presumably to go on from there and start more trouble for the heroes later on.

So unless Super (in whatever form it returns in from its present "hiatus") goes on from there to do something REALLY unique or special with Freeza... then this current status of the character almost seems to set him up as some sort of perpetual, ongoing mild pain in the ass constantly pestering Goku and co. Positing Freeza less as a genuinely special and iconic villain of the Dragon Ball pantheon, and more as just a tiresome and repetitive "Saturday Morning Cartoon Villain" ala Megatron, Shredder and Krang (from the 80s TMNT cartoon), Mumm-Ra from Thundercats, etc.

And while this may sit just fine with the segment of Western DB fandom who LIKES those kinds of shows and actively WANTS Dragon Ball to be more like them and continue on more in that kind of direction... I'M certainly not in that camp (like, at all) and I'm very, very much VIOLENTLY against that whole entire notion. So yeah, I'm damn sure not gonna voice any kind of support even remotely for that kind of direction, either for Freeza as an individual character, or Dragon Ball as an overall series.

And I'm coming from all this as someone who genuinely LOVES Freeza to pieces and considers him (as many others do) one of the single all time greatest villains in the entire series. But a big PART of what made him such a great villain is that the original series also knew enough when he'd done his time and had him exit appropriately and permanently. Better to leave the audience wanting more than leave them tired and sick to death of repetitive and predictable shtick.
http://80s90sdragonballart.tumblr.com/

Kunzait's Wuxia Thread
Journey to the West, chapter 26 wrote:The strong man will meet someone stronger still:
Come to naught at last he surely will!
Zephyr wrote:And that's to say nothing of how pretty much impossible it is to capture what made the original run of the series so great. I'm in the generation of fans that started with Toonami, so I totally empathize with the feeling of having "missed the party", experiencing disappointment, and wanting to experience it myself. But I can't, that's how life is. Time is a bitch. The party is over. Kageyama, Kikuchi, and Maeda are off the sauce now; Yanami almost OD'd; Yamamoto got arrested; Toriyama's not going to light trash cans on fire and hang from the chandelier anymore. We can't get the band back together, and even if we could, everyone's either old, in poor health, or calmed way the fuck down. Best we're going to get, and are getting, is a party that's almost entirely devoid of the magic that made the original one so awesome that we even want more.
Kamiccolo9 wrote:It grinds my gears that people get "outraged" over any of this stuff. It's a fucking cartoon. If you are that determined to be angry about something, get off the internet and make a stand for something that actually matters.
Rocketman wrote:"Shonen" basically means "stupid sentimental shit" anyway, so it's ok to be anti-shonen.

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 19, 2018 2:37 pm

Kunzait_83 wrote:Breaking a rule or not breaking a rule... ultimately what mainly matters is the end result of the creative process. If something turns out well, then great: but if not, then what's the point?

The issue that many (myself included) have with Freeza coming back is purely because nothing creative or unique was done with it. At least in Revival of F anyway: in Revival of F, you have all this build up to what effectively just amounts to "Freeza fights Goku and Vegeta some more" with almost NOTHING in the way of fresh or interesting ideas to spice it up and make the return actually worth something or be particularly meaningful (and no, giving him a lazy recolor of a "new form" hardly qualifies as such).

If Freeza returning to life in that arc actually yielded something of genuine interest... almost NOBODY would be complaining. I certainly wouldn't. Most of us are all generally in agreement that Freeza has been (up till Super at least) one of the all time best ever and best liked villains in all of Dragon Ball. As I recall in fact, most fans on average were genuinely EXCITED for the Revival of F film during the initial lead-up to its release... and were only disappointed and let down after actually seeing it. And the "recap arc" version of it in Super hardly did it any favors either.

As far as Freeza's return in the Tournament of Power goes, at a bare minimum THAT at least actually shakes things up by doing something genuinely different with the character (giving him a genuinely uneasy and shaky temporary alliance with the Goku and the others): but apart from numerous individual criticisms of the actual execution of that idea, it still ultimately culminates in... Freeza returning to his EXACT status quo from the beginning of the original Freeza arc: he's back in charge of his original space empire. Presumably to go on from there and start more trouble for the heroes later on.

So unless Super (in whatever form it returns in from its present "hiatus") goes on from there to do something REALLY unique or special with Freeza... then this current status of the character almost seems to set him up as some sort of perpetual, ongoing mild pain in the ass constantly pestering Goku and co. Positing Freeza less as a genuinely special and iconic villain of the Dragon Ball pantheon, and more as just a tiresome and repetitive "Saturday Morning Cartoon Villain" ala Megatron, Shredder and Krang (from the 80s TMNT cartoon), Mumm-Ra from Thundercats, etc.

And while this may sit just fine with the segment of Western DB fandom who LIKES those kinds of shows and actively WANTS Dragon Ball to be more like them and continue on more in that kind of direction... I'M certainly not in that camp (like, at all) and I'm very, very much VIOLENTLY against that whole entire notion. So yeah, I'm damn sure not gonna voice any kind of support even remotely for that kind of direction, either for Freeza as an individual character, or Dragon Ball as an overall series.

And I'm coming from all this as someone who genuinely LOVES Freeza to pieces and considers him (as many others do) one of the single all time greatest villains in the entire series. But a big PART of what made him such a great villain is that the original series also knew enough when he'd done his time and had him exit appropriately and permanently. Better to leave the audience wanting more than leave them tired and sick to death of repetitive and predictable shtick.
Well at this point Frieza is Goku's default arch enemy even with possible new villains coming . I sure toriyama and the others will find a way to make Frieza great again do something with his character like adding kuriza his son. Also the western fandom some of them wanted cell to return instead of Frieza due to cell's popularity in the west but is less popular in Japan and also toriyama really disliked drawing cell due to those spots. Also doubt toriyama will kill him off again considering that he brought him back twice.

User avatar
Kunzait_83
I Live Here
Posts: 2974
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 5:19 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Kunzait_83 » Sat May 19, 2018 2:49 pm

Toxin45 wrote:Well at this point Frieza is Goku's default arch enemy even with possible new villains coming.
Freeza ISN'T Goku's "arch enemy". Goku doesn't HAVE an "arch enemy". This isn't Marvel or DC, this isn't Superman vs Lex Luthor, Batman vs The Joker, The Fantastic Four vs Dr. Doom or Galactus, Captain America vs The Red Skull, the X-Men vs Magneto or Apocalypse, etc. Dragon Ball IS NOT THAT KIND OF STORY, has NEVER BEEN that kind of story, and Goku and Freeza are NOT these sorts of "eternally dueling" Western superhero archetypes.

Freeza was a standout and remarkably well done and well executed villain in Dragon Ball's original run, and one who ended up having heavy ties to Goku's space alien past: but beyond that THAT'S IT. There's NOTHING that makes him any more or less of an "arch enemy" to Goku than Piccolo (Daimao OR Ma Junior), Vegeta, Cell, Boo, Tao Pai Pai, The Red Ribbon Army, fucking Pilaf even, etc. all were.

Dragon Ball has NEVER been that type of series to have one eternally set-in-stone fixture of a character: even Goku himself has (for relatively few and brief stretches granted) dropped out of the series spotlight at times: the one main constant through-line of Dragon Ball has ALWAYS been martial arts and its martial arts narrative themes of self-improvement. Even more so than Goku himself I would argue, Dragon Ball IS fantasy martial arts/Wuxia as filtered through the unique and particular creative lens of Akira Toriyama. That's the central theme that everything else revolves around, even Goku and the titular Dragon Balls themselves.

This idea that these two characters (Goku and Freeza) "are destined to do this forever" (to pull from Nolan's Batman) is TOTALLY antithetical to what kind of series Dragon Ball is and always has been from the beginning and throughout its entire lifespan. Its a series that has ALWAYS predicated itself (up until Super at least) of being something that is, like real life itself (ironically, given how much of a pure mythical fantasy series DB otherwise is), always constantly changing shape, evolving, in flux, and ultimately FINITE. Even GT, for all its own issues, at least understood and did right by that crucial aspect.
Last edited by Kunzait_83 on Sat May 19, 2018 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://80s90sdragonballart.tumblr.com/

Kunzait's Wuxia Thread
Journey to the West, chapter 26 wrote:The strong man will meet someone stronger still:
Come to naught at last he surely will!
Zephyr wrote:And that's to say nothing of how pretty much impossible it is to capture what made the original run of the series so great. I'm in the generation of fans that started with Toonami, so I totally empathize with the feeling of having "missed the party", experiencing disappointment, and wanting to experience it myself. But I can't, that's how life is. Time is a bitch. The party is over. Kageyama, Kikuchi, and Maeda are off the sauce now; Yanami almost OD'd; Yamamoto got arrested; Toriyama's not going to light trash cans on fire and hang from the chandelier anymore. We can't get the band back together, and even if we could, everyone's either old, in poor health, or calmed way the fuck down. Best we're going to get, and are getting, is a party that's almost entirely devoid of the magic that made the original one so awesome that we even want more.
Kamiccolo9 wrote:It grinds my gears that people get "outraged" over any of this stuff. It's a fucking cartoon. If you are that determined to be angry about something, get off the internet and make a stand for something that actually matters.
Rocketman wrote:"Shonen" basically means "stupid sentimental shit" anyway, so it's ok to be anti-shonen.

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 19, 2018 2:51 pm

Kunzait_83 wrote:
Toxin45 wrote:Well at this point Frieza is Goku's default arch enemy even with possible new villains coming.
Freeza ISN'T Goku's "arch enemy". Goku doesn't HAVE an "arch enemy". This isn't Marvel or DC, this isn't Superman vs Lex Luthor, Batman vs The Joker, The Fantastic Four vs Galactus, the X-Men vs Magneto or Apocalypse, etc. Dragon Ball IS NOT THAT KIND OF STORY, has NEVER BEEN that kind of story, and Goku and Freeza are NOT these sorts of "eternally dueling" Western superhero archetypes.

Freeza was a standout and remarkably well done and well executed villain in Dragon Ball's original run, and one who ended up having heavy ties to Goku's space alien past: but beyond that THAT'S IT. There's NOTHING that makes him any more or less of an "arch enemy" to Goku than Piccolo (Daimao OR Ma Junior), Vegeta, Cell, Boo, Tao Pai Pai, The Red Ribbon Army, fucking Pilaf even, etc.

Dragon Ball has NEVER been that type of series to have one eternally set-in-stone fixture of a character: even Goku himself has (for relatively few and brief stretches granted) dropped out of the series spotlight at times: the one main constant through-line of Dragon Ball has ALWAYS been martial arts and its martial arts narrative themes of self-improvement. Even more so than Goku himself I would argue, Dragon Ball IS fantasy martial arts/Wuxia as filtered through the unique and particular creative lens of Akira Toriyama. That's the central theme that everything else revolves around, even Goku and the titular Dragon Balls themselves.

This idea that these two characters (Goku and Freeza) "are destined to do this forever" (to pull from Nolan's Batman) is TOTALLY antithetical to what kind of series Dragon Ball is and always has been from the beginning and throughout its entire lifespan. Its a series that has ALWAYS predicated itself (up until Super at least) of being something that is, like real life itself (ironically, given how much of a pure mythical fantasy series DB otherwise is), always constantly changing shape, evolving, in flux, and ultimately FINITE. Even GT, for all its own issues, at least understood and did right by that crucial aspect.
Well he is now whether you like it or not he is the most recurring villain of the franchise things change just like how super did to prove you wrong about that.

Muffin Man
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 4:25 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Muffin Man » Sat May 26, 2018 2:24 am

The problem is "villain decay".

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VillainDecay

Obviously it's possible to write a recurring villain without succumbing to villain decay, but the modern DB writers lack such capabilities.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by ABED » Sat May 26, 2018 8:10 am

Muffin Man wrote:The problem is "villain decay".

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VillainDecay

Obviously it's possible to write a recurring villain without succumbing to villain decay, but the modern DB writers lack such capabilities.
What recurring villain can you think of that didn't succumb to that?
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 26, 2018 9:38 am

Muffin Man wrote:The problem is "villain decay".

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VillainDecay

Obviously it's possible to write a recurring villain without succumbing to villain decay, but the modern DB writers lack such capabilities.
Well actually read this
Resurrection 'F' downplays Freeza's decay and even reverses some of it: He is shown to be able to overwhelm Goku post-Battle Of Gods after being wished back to life, is actually feared by a good deal of the lesser cast, and is shown to actually be clever enough to come up with a back-up scheme in spite of his confidence. All of this gets lessened, however, as between the constant presence of Beerus and Whis, his iron grip on the Villain Ball, and Goku and Vegeta having more than enough power to defeat him if they had bothered to work together, Frieza does not manage to be quite as menacing as he was in the Namek arc. However, the fact that the heroes don't take him as seriously as they should winds nearly bringing about the planet's destruction, with Frieza arguably comming closer to reaching his goal than he did on Namek.
His decay is fully reversed when he returns in Dragon Ball Super, as he has fully mastered his golden form and its power, and become a more pragmatic, manipulative villain who actively tries to avoid making the same mistakes he did on Namek and Earth before. In the end, he even earns his life back and returns to ruling his galactic empire.

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 26, 2018 9:40 am

ABED wrote:
Muffin Man wrote:The problem is "villain decay".

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VillainDecay

Obviously it's possible to write a recurring villain without succumbing to villain decay, but the modern DB writers lack such capabilities.
What recurring villain can you think of that didn't succumb to that?
Well Frieza's villain decay is reversed by the universal survival arc. Again as he has fully mastered his golden form and its power, and become a more pragmatic, manipulative villain who actively tries to avoid making the same mistakes he did on Namek and Earth before. In the end, he even earns his life back and returns to ruling his galactic empire.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by ABED » Sat May 26, 2018 1:58 pm

It hasn't reversed at all. You don't get the concept of villain decay. It's an application of the law of diminishing marginal returns.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 26, 2018 2:37 pm

ABED wrote:It hasn't reversed at all. You don't get the concept of villain decay. It's an application of the law of diminishing marginal returns.
No it did in the universal survival arc dude you didn't even watched it. Bessie's that is not what villain decay means Frieza decay happened in fillers and gt ressurection f downplays it, and it's reversed in universal survival arc. Villain decay makes them jokes and that was undone in universal survival arc.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by ABED » Sat May 26, 2018 2:55 pm

Toxin45 wrote:
ABED wrote:It hasn't reversed at all. You don't get the concept of villain decay. It's an application of the law of diminishing marginal returns.
No it did in the universal survival arc dude you didn't even watched it. Bessie's that is not what villain decay means Frieza decay happened in fillers and gt ressurection f downplays it, and it's reversed in universal survival arc. Villain decay makes them jokes and that was undone in universal survival arc.
It's not just filler. He was brought back only to be killed by Trunks. He was brought back in Super to be killed by Goku for making the same mistakes. Now he's back to square one.

Villain decay isn't just making them jokes. It's a simple fact of continually brining them back again and again and again.
Last edited by ABED on Sat May 26, 2018 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 26, 2018 2:59 pm

ABED wrote:
Toxin45 wrote:
ABED wrote:It hasn't reversed at all. You don't get the concept of villain decay. It's an application of the law of diminishing marginal returns.
No it did in the universal survival arc dude you didn't even watched it. Bessie's that is not what villain decay means Frieza decay happened in fillers and gt ressurection f downplays it, and it's reversed in universal survival arc. Villain decay makes them jokes and that was undone in universal survival arc.
It's not just filler. He was brought back only to be killed by Trunks. He was brought back in Super to be killed by Goku for making the same mistakes. Now he's back to square one.

Villain decay isn't just making them jokes. It's a simple fact of continually brining them back again and again.
Nah he can improve in later arcs even with new villains and has learned his mistakes thought. Universal survival did fixed Frieza in a way though making him more bearable besides he is gonna appear in the movie in December we still see him improving himself and you really need to stop comparing his return with villain decay he has gotten smarter in the tournament of power and also did you even play video games? You never watched the universal survival and he has gotten stronger and can possibly continue to do so in future arcs.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by ABED » Sat May 26, 2018 3:01 pm

Not one thing you wrote disproved my point. It doesn't matter if he's improved, which is arguable. That has no bearing on the issue.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 26, 2018 3:04 pm

ABED wrote:Not one thing you wrote disproved my point. It doesn't matter if he's improved, which is arguable. That has no bearing on the issue.
He did undid his decay in the universal survival arc and how can you judge him in that arc if you didn't even watched it? He got more smarter by being pramagtic and manipulative in that arc and evens earned his life back and rebuilding his empire. That does undoes his decay in previous arcs.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by ABED » Sat May 26, 2018 3:11 pm

Toxin45 wrote:
ABED wrote:Not one thing you wrote disproved my point. It doesn't matter if he's improved, which is arguable. That has no bearing on the issue.
He did undid his decay in the universal survival arc and how can you judge him in that arc if you didn't even watched it? He got more smarter by being pramagtic and manipulative in that arc and evens earned his life back and rebuilding his empire. That does undoes his decay in previous arcs.
You can't undo the decay. He's been defeated every single time he's been brought back which as of now is 3 times. And please stop telling us the same things over and over again. Two of your last posts contained the same exact paragraph.

A villain coming back again and again and again can't undo the decay. It's the law of diminishing marginal returns.

I can judge him because he's come back 3 more times. How does one arc undo all that? He's inherently less special given that he's been defeated every single time. That's what villain decay is. Putting him back to square one does nothing to disprove that.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

Toxin45
Regular
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 12:35 pm

Re: What's so bad about the idea of a recurring villain?

Post by Toxin45 » Sat May 26, 2018 3:14 pm

ABED wrote:
Toxin45 wrote:
ABED wrote:Not one thing you wrote disproved my point. It doesn't matter if he's improved, which is arguable. That has no bearing on the issue.
He did undid his decay in the universal survival arc and how can you judge him in that arc if you didn't even watched it? He got more smarter by being pramagtic and manipulative in that arc and evens earned his life back and rebuilding his empire. That does undoes his decay in previous arcs.
You can't undo the decay. He's been defeated every single time he's been brought back which as of now is 3 times. And please stop telling us the same things over and over again. Two of your last posts contained the same exact paragraph.

A villain coming back again and again and again can't undo the decay. It's the law of diminishing marginal returns.

I can judge him because he's come back 3 more times. How does one arc undo all that? He's inherently less special given that he's been defeated every single time. That's what villain decay is. Putting him back to square one does nothing to disprove that.
Nah you never watched it Frieza actually helped saved universe 7 and got his life back it didn't matter anymore about his decay since he played it smart and you still haven't watched the universal survival arc so nope you don't get it.

Post Reply