Between the Funimation dub of Kai and their dub of Super, which would you say is better?

[Dbzfan94]

With respect, I don’t think comparisons to the dub of the Bardock special are warranted. That dub was so disrespectful to the Japanese version that it changed a number of plot points, and did a complete overhaul of Bardock’s character. “I forgot my tractor” doesn’t in anyway alter the story, nor does it interfere with the mood of the scene. There’s also nothing that could be considered cringe worthy about it, at least in my opinion. It’s not referencing a meme, it’s not an out of place pop culture reference and it doesn’t strike me as being out of character for Goku.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[VegettoEX]

What I meant is, sub fans shouldn't watch the dub just to say "this dub is trash it's not exactly like my precious Japanese." Same as dub fans shouldn't watch the sub and say "Goku sounds like a squeaky grandma wtf is this shit." Both statements are silly. Just watch the version you enjoy and leave it at that.

You're putting words in our mouths, you're projecting what you think is being said instead of what is actually being said, we keep telling y'all this over and over, and I don't know how else to get this across.

We want the English dub to be a fantastic, accurate, faithful representation of the thing that we love dearly.

At various points in time it reaches various levels of accomplishing this. We want people to have the necessary context and historical background to understand the why and how when it isn't there. Meanwhile, we'd love for you to switch over so we can legitimately always be having the same base-level conversation.

It's impossible to have these conversations on any kind of deeper level with the constant whataboutism and moving goalposts.

[gokaiblue]

Well, I just saw the “I forgot my tractor” clip, and...I don’t get it. Why exactly is that line such a big deal? If it was said during a serious moment, it would definitely be out of place, but it was said during a completely goofy scene that’s part of a filler episode. Seriously, I would think that Nappa’s “I hate the media” line in Kai would be much more controversial.

As Robo4900 just explained, they are easy-to-remember examples that are symbolic of the larger, systemic problem with the way FUNimation approaches these dubs.

See indeed: the consistent references to Nappa's "I hate the media!" in the All Systems Goku podcast, multiple arcs after said line was used (which, yes, was a line that I called out in my review at the time).

But why is the “I forgot my tractor” line symbolic of anything? Contrary to what people here have assumed, I couldn’t care less about the Funimation dub, the same way that I don’t at all dislike the Japanese version (seriously, why did people assume that to begin with?), but I would think that if you want to cite problematic lines of dialogue in the dub, there should be much better examples than that. It’s like citing some random, jokey line of dialogue in a Marvel movie, and then claiming that one joke is symbolic of some larger problem in the MCU. I just don’t get it.

Same. If there is a line in the Super dub that drastically alters the story, then that's a problem, but so far, I haven't seen anything like that in Funimation's dub of Super.

[Kunzait_83]

Kunzait, I believe I understand your point, but you can't divorce the performance from the character. If the character is acting 'insane and whacked out', then the performances should reflect that. If the character is acting subtle, so then should the performance. I think we're in at least fundamental agreement.

Oh of course. Obviously. I've even said in multiple threads now that one of the VERY rare characters who I think that style of "cartoon acting" actually FITS is Pilaf, since Pilaf's entire POINT is that he's basically a dumb cartoon of a character.

The issue of course is that the FUNimation dub has always taken this "have everyone sound like a one dimensional cartoon caricature" for nearly EVERY character across the board, and across MOST scenes, regardless of tone or context. So in scenes where, in the Japanese version, characters are simply carrying on a normal, everyday conversation and are performed by the original actors in a grounded and believable fashion, the dub will still have their own actors in that same scene "doing a voice" rather than just use an organic, naturalistic conversational style.

By and large overwhelmingly, organic naturalistic conversations are something that simply DOES NOT EXIST within the various FUNimation dubs: everyone is made to just about ALWAYS sound like an absurd Saturday morning cartoon stereotype, even when they aren't in a fight and are just talking amongst themselves. Contrast this with the Japanese version, and note how incredibly often the Japanese actors aren't "doing their over the top cartoon voice" but instead are simply having their character speak like regular, everyday people.

This does SO MUCH to help level out, ground, and anchor all the deranged insanity of the DB world and its going ons, to keep the audience engaged and emotionally invested in what's happening (no matter how otherwise fantastical it might be), and to prevent the whole thing from devolving into a bunch of irritating, chaotic nonsense and loudness for the sake of loudness.

Basically my point is, the dub feels the need to constantly ASSAULT the viewer with sensory overload (its not enough that the visuals and story be broad and crazy, so too must the voices, dialogue, and at one point even the musical score) in order to keep their attention, whereas the Japanese version trusts that the viewer isn't in any danger of checking out or having their attention wander just because characters aren't delivering the vast overwhelming majority of their lines "GRRRRR!!!! JUST!!! YAAAGGH!!! LIKE!!! GYAAAAAH!!!! THIIIIIIIIIIS!!!!! RAAAAAAAH!!!" and that it doesn't need to go the extra mile to keep their focus; that the viewer will understand and appreciate emotional subtlety.

This is such a simple, basic thing that's easy to take for granted, but it acts as part of the VAST difference that also separates so much of typical TV children's media from most normal "adult" media.

Perhaps, but it still feels like an unnecessary personal attack (kinda like callong the actors "hacks" would be one for the actors).

Look man, I get that the point I was raising there was an uncomfortable one, I do. There's a reason that I opened it up with this:

And look man, I don't in any way like doing this at all, but...

These aren't just words I throw out there for no reason: when I get into points in a post on here that possibly go into the other person's own personal views on something, that ISN'T something that I take lightly. Because I 100% get that EVERYONE is an individual, everyone has feelings and thoughts and perspectives of their own that are unique, and everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt and to be treated with even just the basic bare minimum of respect, empathy, and decency. This clearly isn't 4chan, and I'm obviously not some typical internet troll of any kind.

I understand that I was delving into sensitive territory there, and if you felt put on the spot then I do sincerely apologize for that: but I also at the same time extended you EVERY possible courtesy of respect in the process. You were NEVER at ANY point personally insulted. Ever. Go back and look through what I wrote again and REALLY take a moment to read it.

The fact that I made a point of saying (and moreover, genuinely meaning) things like the following:

I don't mean to be the "taste police" here, and I sincerely apologize if any of what I said about your list of favorite media just now comes across that way in the slightest: I'm just illustrating a larger, community-wide point here that I think has been long, LONG lurking behind the heart of a LOT of the disagreements we've been having over the years now.

...and yet your response is STILL "Well I felt personally insulted anyways!"

That paints you as having either A) not bothered to actually read over what I wrote yet feeling the need to respond to it anyways or B) being INCREDIBLY and unreasonably over-sensitive and LOOKING to be offended.

And I'm sorry, but while I have EVERY POSSIBLE intention and genuinely heartfelt desire to be respectful to the other community members as people and to abide by the site's conduct rules, at the same time I am in NO way interested in sugarcoating my views (about a stupid fucking children's cartoon no less; a topic which is about as frivolous as it gets, all the more so considering the current world we're in at the moment) nor do I have any remote interest in walking on eggshells to avoid offending people's personal hangups regarding such a frivolous topic.

If you're unable to handle having your views about a silly children's cartoon, or for that matter the broader media context in which you might view it under, be challenged in even the most cordial and genteel manner possible... then I simply don't know what else to tell you, other than to get some MUCH thicker skin ASAP.

Because if you think that a guy like me - someone who enters into a discussion about even something as inconsequential and silly as this one with the intent to respectfully and sincerely challenge your ideas in good faith - is too much for you to deal with emotionally, then I can only assume that you're still a VERY young kid who is in for a WORLD of hurt when you venture out into the real world and get a taste of what THAT'S like.

For the record, my tastes aren't as limited as they seem.

That's fantastic if that's the case: but I can only go off of what you've presented here, as I'm neither psychic nor omniscient.

Long posts are fine. That wasn't the issue. It was unnecessary length over the most minor of changes

People are free to do long posts on here about pretty much ANYTHING relating to DB. Its both within the site's rules, and its actively and enthusiastically encouraged (as Mike himself already said). This whole tangent of yours feels like tone-policing: and needlessly over-sensitive tone-policing at that. If someone in here says or does something that is legitimately against the site's conduct rules (which includes being needlessly disrespectful and genuinely rude to other forum members), you can be DAMN sure one of the mods will be all over it in due course.

The whole thing started when the actors were called "hacks," which can be seen as a personal attack on them as actors (being something of an actor myself, I would take being called a "hack" personally). Even if those who threw this assertion around didn't mean for it to be read as one, those who felt it eas uncalled for (such as myself) continued to harp on them about it. This fight went on and on, and each criticism thrown towards the dub was mixed in with that.

Again, as I outlined in an earlier post on here: while the term "hack" is a VERY harsh criticism, it is ultimately relating PURELY to the actors' work as PROFESSIONAL ACTORS. Again, the literal dictionary definition of a "hack" is "someone who does mediocre, substandard professional work regularly"... that's a TOTALLY FAIR viewpoint and criticism for someone to have regarding the professional output of people who have been at this for over 20 years, yet continue to STILL regularly turn in work that some (such as myself) find to be greatly, greatly lacking.

Furthermore, you are not these actors' friends or family: there's simply NO reason to "get offended for them", especially when what's being discussed here (as has been pointed out time and time and time again) is SIMPLY JUST THEIR PROFESSIONAL WORK and NOT themselves as people or individuals.

From my very first post in this thread:

What dub fans have always failed to realize is that from people like me, THIS HAS NEVER BEEN ANYTHING PERSONAL with these guys. I don't give a flying shit about Chris Sabat or Sean Schemmel or Sonny Straight or Eric Vale or any of the rest of the "old guard" as individuals. They're complete and utter abject strangers to me. I wish them absolutely NO ill will or bad fortune in their personal lives whatsoever, obviously. None of this has a DAMN thing to do with them as people.

I simply do not know how I could've made this any fucking crystal clearer than that. What I said and what Kamiccolo said earlier are all TOTALLY within fair reasonable criticisms of a professional actors' work, however harsh it may also have been: harsh criticism IS NOT the same thing or tantamount as a "personal insult".

Also, friendly word of advice: if you're actually serious about getting into the acting business yourself? Having THIS overly-sensitive of an attitude - like getting personally outraged and insulted when someone calls ANOTHER actor who ISN'T you, but a total abject stranger, an "untalented hack" - almost assures that you will not make it in that industry. Be fully prepared to expect way, way, WAY INFINITELY fucking worse words hurled DIRECTLY your way by casting directors, producers, and even general audience members/fans off the street or online.

Think this is bad? What people are saying in here is going to sound like the TOTAL AND COMPLETE NOTHING that is actually is once you get even the SLIGHTEST taste of what the real life entertainment industry is ACTUALLY like to people. If you actually are seriously deciding to be a real actor, then trust me when I say that before very long, you'll be wistfully LONGING for the days when some random jackass on a random internet site called some random actor (who is NOBODY to you) untalented was the worst thing you ever had to listen to or deal with.

There was also an issue of users perhaps hearing things slightly differently, and this went over and over until it escalated to the point of people's tastes in entertainment being questioned and challenged.

Having one's media diet be challenged in a respectful manner is in NO WAY whatsoever anything that is the LEAST bit insulting or out of line. People challenge one another's media tastes EVERY DAY, and in NO WAY is it absolutely ALWAYS (or even USUALLY) meant as an insult. Having one's viewpoints (in this case, one's frame of reference around the topic of media) be challenged is generally a GOOD thing, something that should lead to fruitful discussion: at least when its done in good faith and in a respectful manner (as it was here).

Leave aside that the specific topic here was media diet, what you're effectively saying here is "I don't like to have my views on something be challenged". In which case I have to ask: what the hell are you even DOING on an internet forum in the first place? If you're on here simply looking to have your personal views be reaffirmed and validated and NEVER dare to be challenged at all in even the most courteous manner possible... then I can once again only conclude that you're still a VERY young kid who is in for a WORLD of hurt out in the real world.

That's my problem. It's not the post length but the escalating tensions throughout this thread.

The "tensions were escalated" because a couple of people expressed a harsher-than-usual viewpoint about the acting performances of some VAs for a kids' cartoon, and people in here, quite ridiculously, took it as a personal attack. Which is beyond silly and senseless. It is in NO WAY out of line for someone to think that an actor is bad at their job. That is a COMPLETELY reasonable, and frankly BENIGN, opinion to hold.

It is absolutely, excuse my frankness once again, downright childishly petulant and absurd for someone who isn't the actor in question (or a close friend or relative of theirs) to take it as a personal insult on their behalf. Honestly, if someone is a professional actor who's been in the (incredibly cut-throat and merciless) entertainment business for over 20 years, THEY shouldn't still be at a point in their life and career where someone who thinks that they suck as a performer is enough to get them personally offended.

Remember what I said earlier about fans of the dub having a long history of overly internalizing the dub and its voices to the point where ANY criticism leveled at it is taken by them as a personal attack? You're only further proving my point here with all this.

I could be wrong in my assessment of the situation, but that's what I felt as things went on, causing me to claim people were going "crazy" over what I feel is a quality dub, and the criticsims to me seemed either rather minor or baseless. I was literally not hearing what they were hearing at times.

First of all: calling an actor who's performances you consistently have not liked for over 20 years untalented and not good at their job? That in NO WAY constitutes anyone "going crazy" over anything.

Secondly: not everyone holds the same standard of quality as you do. Not everyone has the same opinions and outlooks. People in here have gone out of their way to assert that my personal views are in no way factual (as if I don't know that): well that particular door happens to swing both ways. What you hear in the performances and what YOU hold to be "a quality dub" is ALSO not factual nor a universal standard that we all abide by.

In my case, I've been on this forum since it first started in 2004: I've been in the Dragon Ball fanbase overall for more than 10 years longer than THAT. I've watched entire generations come and go, I've watched the overall makeup of the fanbases for both DB as well as broader anime as a whole in the U.S. shift and change in some pretty dramatic ways.

One of the BIGGEST overall shifts in the fanbase that I've noticed for the better part of close to 15 solid years now has been U.S. Dragon Ball/anime fans whose main/primary media diet seems to almost SOLELY and exclusively consist of children's television, showing an abject lack of experience, enthusiasm, or even very much in the way of basic intellectual curiosity for most forms of media that don't fit within a Toonami, Nickelodeon, Disney, or Fox Kids-esque mold. The "overton window" so to speak of media absorption and discourse within broader Western anime fandom has overall gotten INCREDIBLY fucking narrow throughout the course of the 2000s and 2010s.

This, I have found, plays a HUGE role in how these kinds of discussions tend to go about: part of the reason that many of us ARE hearing such dramatically different things when we talk about things like the DB dub is that for many (usually younger) fans, they are coming at it from a perspective of being mainly and overwhelmingly used to primarily listening to over the top childrens' cartoons, TV shows, and films, with similar styles of caricaturized acting being the norm.

What we primarily absorb media-wise has a PROFOUND impact on our sensibilities and standards: if what someone mainly absorbs on a regular basis is stuff like Pokemon, Power Rangers, Sonic the Hedgehog, and Disney films, and not much else that is more emotionally or intellectually sophisticated than a primetime network TV sitcom, then that is UNQUESTIONABLY going to DRAMATICALLY impact where their overall critical gauge is generally set at.

By contrast, some of us (such as myself) generally aren't all that interested in most children's media: Dragon Ball happens to be an exception to that, but otherwise some of us are MUCH more used to works of a vastly more broad and eclectic nature in their approach to things like acting, scoring, etc. This, in turn, will ALSO dramatically impact OUR critical standards just the same.

THIS IS LITERALLY ALL I WAS GETTING AT HERE.

You had earlier in this thread, when nicely asked by another user, had given off a list of favorite works (that I acknowledge was clearly incomplete, but once more, it was all I had to go on) that seemed to only further prove my point in this kind of disparity that's been going on in fandom for quite some time now.

NO personal insult to you WHATSOEVER was meant with ANY of this. I don't know how much clearer I could've POSSIBLY made this.

You can still criticize it (the dub), yes, but criticize the product and the performances given by the actors, not necessarily them as a whole. Likewise, it's not best to attack those or make generalizations about those who do like the dub.

NOTHING OF THE SORT WENT ON IN HERE.

Nobody attacked or criticized the actors personally as people, nobody insulted anyone (among other users) in here personally. AT. ALL. And no, the term "hack" does NOT count as such.

You're COMPLETELY blowing this RIDICULOUSLY out of proportions, all because the word "hack" was too strong for you. Think about that for a moment. Think about how ridiculously over-sensitive and absurd you're needlessly making this.... all because people in here happen to not like something that you like, and feel more strongly about it than you're personally comfortable with. A goddamn children's cartoon no less.

You like the dub. You think its high quality. Fine. More power to you. No one in here is insulting you for that personally, nor are they trying to take that away from you. There just happens to exist OTHER people however who (respectfully) disagree with your assessment and think that it is absolute and utter crap that's 100% unlistenable across the board.

I'm going to echo Kamiccolo's sentiments here: get over it.

[DHM211]

I would say Kai as a whole. You could tell that at the beginning of Super, Funimation was rushing to get the episodes to Toonami on time. This is evident with the numerous redubs throughout the first two arcs (Episodes 2 and 26 especially). The Voice acting for Super also seemed weird for these first 27 episodes, as a lot of the lines were just ripped straight from the BoG and R'F' scripts and didn't really seem natural when spoken. Not to mention, after a phenominal performance in Kai and R'F', Chris Ayers Frieza did not sound nearly as good(for totally understandable reasons). Even more jarring was when Frieza's voice constantly switched out between Ayres and Mills in the final two episodes of the arc. The Tournament of Destroyer's arc has to be one of the most mediocre and boring arcs in DB, so I didnt pay attention to the English Dub in that. I really enjoyed the English Dub for the Future Trunks arc. Sean Schemmel was great as Black, and Marsters knocked it out of the park as Zamasu. Without a doubt, Marsters Zamasu is my favorite take on a Dragon Ball villain. For the few changes that Funimation did, I was fine with most of them. Only negative was making Trunks sound somewhat more cringey with his "Hope" speeches, but this was an arc where I was more invested in the villain(s) anyway, and Funimation hamming up merged Zamasu's speech's was something I loved.

TL:DR: Kai english dub - 9.5/10, Super english dub - 7.5/10, 9.5/10 for the future Trunks arc on its lonesome.

[Dbzfan94]

What I meant is, sub fans shouldn't watch the dub just to say "this dub is trash it's not exactly like my precious Japanese." Same as dub fans shouldn't watch the sub and say "Goku sounds like a squeaky grandma wtf is this shit." Both statements are silly. Just watch the version you enjoy and leave it at that.

You're putting words in our mouths, you're projecting what you think is being said instead of what is actually being said, we keep telling y'all this over and over, and I don't know how else to get this across.

We want the English dub to be a fantastic, accurate, faithful representation of the thing that we love dearly.

At various points in time it reaches various levels of accomplishing this. We want people to have the necessary context and historical background to understand the why and how when it isn't there. Meanwhile, we'd love for you to switch over so we can legitimately always be having the same base-level conversation.

It's impossible to have these conversations on any kind of deeper level with the constant whataboutism and moving goalposts.

I didn't intend to put words into anyone's mouth. I just used a made-up extreme example from both ends of the spectrum to point it out. My bad if it came off that way. But what I have noticed in this very thread and other places, is that some wishes sub fans have for the dub (i.e recast Schemmel/Sabat,) will likely never happen in the forseeable future. Knowing that, I'm legit cirious why are they(generally speaking), continuing to watch?

I understand wanting to be on the same page with people. I do too. Which is why even as (primarily) a dub fan, I want to know what the correct lines are. For me as an individual, I tried switching over with watching Super subbed first, but it just didn't do it for me. Now whether it was influenced because of my thoughts as Super as a story compared to the original run, that's a different story. Even dubbed, while it's "better" to me because it's the cast I prefer, it's still far from perfect. Some criticisms here and the DBS dub thread I agree with, while others I feel like are reaching a biiiit too far just to find something to hate.

Moving goalposts and bringing this community together on at least some level is definitely something needed. For a looooooooong time. in not just the same old sub v dub debates either. I agree there. But how many times can one have this conversation without it getting old?

[Cure Dragon 255]

What I meant is, sub fans shouldn't watch the dub just to say "this dub is trash it's not exactly like my precious Japanese." Same as dub fans shouldn't watch the sub and say "Goku sounds like a squeaky grandma wtf is this shit." Both statements are silly. Just watch the version you enjoy and leave it at that.

You're putting words in our mouths, you're projecting what you think is being said instead of what is actually being said, we keep telling y'all this over and over, and I don't know how else to get this across.

We want the English dub to be a fantastic, accurate, faithful representation of the thing that we love dearly.

At various points in time it reaches various levels of accomplishing this. We want people to have the necessary context and historical background to understand the why and how when it isn't there. Meanwhile, we'd love for you to switch over so we can legitimately always be having the same base-level conversation.

It's impossible to have these conversations on any kind of deeper level with the constant whataboutism and moving goalposts.

I didn't intend to put words into anyone's mouth. I just used a made-up extreme example from both ends of the spectrum to point it out. My bad if it came off that way. But what I have noticed in this very thread and other places, is that some wishes sub fans have for the dub (i.e recast Schemmel/Sabat,) will likely never happen in the forseeable future. Knowing that, I'm legit cirious why are they(generally speaking), continuing to watch?

I understand wanting to be on the same page with people. I do too. Which is why even as (primarily) a dub fan, I want to know what the correct lines are. For me as an individual, I tried switching over with watching Super subbed first, but it just didn't do it for me. Now whether it was influenced because of my thoughts as Super as a story compared to the original run, that's a different story. Even dubbed, while it's "better" to me because it's the cast I prefer, it's still far from perfect. Some criticisms here and the DBS dub thread I agree with, while others I feel like are reaching a biiiit too far just to find something to hate.

Moving goalposts and bringing this community together on at least some level is definitely something needed. For a looooooooong time. in not just the same old sub v dub debates either. I agree there. But how many times can one have this conversation without it getting old?

Wait WHAT!? Moving Goalposts is necessary!? WHAT!? WTF!? Since when Moving Goalposts is a good thing!?

[gokaiblue]

Kunzait, I believe I understand your point, but you can't divorce the performance from the character. If the character is acting 'insane and whacked out', then the performances should reflect that. If the character is acting subtle, so then should the performance. I think we're in at least fundamental agreement.

Oh of course. Obviously. I've even said in multiple threads now that one of the VERY rare characters who I think that style of "cartoon acting" actually FITS is Pilaf, since Pilaf's entire POINT is that he's basically a dumb cartoon of a character.

The issue of course is that the FUNimation dub has always taken this "have everyone sound like a one dimensional cartoon caricature" for nearly EVERY character across the board, and across MOST scenes, regardless of tone or context. So in scenes where, in the Japanese version, characters are simply carrying on a normal, everyday conversation and are performed by the original actors in a grounded and believable fashion, the dub will still have their own actors in that same scene "doing a voice" rather than just use an organic, naturalistic conversational style.

By and large overwhelmingly, organic naturalistic conversations are something that simply DOES NOT EXIST within the various FUNimation dubs: everyone is made to just about ALWAYS sound like an absurd Saturday morning cartoon stereotype, even when they aren't in a fight and are just talking amongst themselves. Contrast this with the Japanese version, and note how incredibly often the Japanese actors aren't "doing their over the top cartoon voice" but instead are simply having their character speak like regular, everyday people.

This does SO MUCH to help level out, ground, and anchor all the deranged insanity of the DB world and its going ons, to keep the audience engaged and emotionally invested in what's happening (no matter how otherwise fantastical it might be), and to prevent the whole thing from devolving into a bunch of irritating, chaotic nonsense and loudness for the sake of loudness.

Basically my point is, the dub feels the need to constantly ASSAULT the viewer with sensory overload (its not enough that the visuals and story be broad and crazy, so too must the voices, dialogue, and at one point even the musical score) in order to keep their attention, whereas the Japanese version trusts that the viewer isn't in any danger of checking out or having their attention wander just because characters aren't delivering the vast overwhelming majority of their lines "GRRRRR!!!! JUST!!! YAAAGGH!!! LIKE!!! GYAAAAAH!!!! THIIIIIIIIIIS!!!!! RAAAAAAAH!!!" and that it doesn't need to go the extra mile to keep their focus; that the viewer will understand and appreciate emotional subtlety.

This is such a simple, basic thing that's easy to take for granted, but it acts as part of the VAST difference that also separates so much of typical TV children's media from most normal "adult" media.

I honestly only occasionally hear that to be honest (mainly from characters I also hear it from in the original Japanese such as Master Roshi and Pilaf, though I do admit Sabat's Vegeta often falls into that trap). Most characters do have a naturalistic and conversational sound to them in most scenes that are more peaceful. In fights is where that type of sound comes in to play slightly, but it's at this point ingrained into the anime style. It's expected, and it's even heard in the original Japanese versions of anime from time to time.

Perhaps, but it still feels like an unnecessary personal attack (kinda like calling the actors "hacks" would be one for the actors).

Look man, I get that the point I was raising there was an uncomfortable one, I do. There's a reason that I opened it up with this:

And look man, I don't in any way like doing this at all, but...

These aren't just words I throw out there for no reason: when I get into points in a post on here that possibly go into the other person's own personal views on something, that ISN'T something that I take lightly. Because I 100% get that EVERYONE is an individual, everyone has feelings and thoughts and perspectives of their own that are unique, and everyone deserves the benefit of the doubt and to be treated with even just the basic bare minimum of respect, empathy, and decency. This clearly isn't 4chan, and I'm obviously not some typical internet troll of any kind.

I understand that I was delving into sensitive territory there, and if you felt put on the spot then I do sincerely apologize for that: but I also at the same time extended you EVERY possible courtesy of respect in the process. You were NEVER at ANY point personally insulted. Ever. Go back and look through what I wrote again and REALLY take a moment to read it.

The fact that I made a point of saying (and moreover, genuinely meaning) things like the following:

I don't mean to be the "taste police" here, and I sincerely apologize if any of what I said about your list of favorite media just now comes across that way in the slightest: I'm just illustrating a larger, community-wide point here that I think has been long, LONG lurking behind the heart of a LOT of the disagreements we've been having over the years now.

...and yet your response is STILL "Well I felt personally insulted anyways!"

That paints you as having either A) not bothered to actually read over what I wrote yet feeling the need to respond to it anyways or B) being INCREDIBLY and unreasonably over-sensitive and LOOKING to be offended.

It was a knee jerk reaction, I admit, but I did read the whole post, and it still felt like my tastes in entertainment were on trial.

Long posts are fine. That wasn't the issue. It was unnecessary length over the most minor of changes

People are free to do long posts on here about pretty much ANYTHING relating to DB. Its both within the site's rules, and its actively and enthusiastically encouraged (as Mike himself already said). This whole tangent of yours feels like tone-policing: and needlessly over-sensitive tone-policing at that. If someone in here says or does something that is legitimately against the site's conduct rules (which includes being needlessly disrespectful and genuinely rude to other forum members), you can be DAMN sure one of the mods will be all over it in due course.

The whole thing started when the actors were called "hacks," which can be seen as a personal attack on them as actors (being something of an actor myself, I would take being called a "hack" personally). Even if those who threw this assertion around didn't mean for it to be read as one, those who felt it eas uncalled for (such as myself) continued to harp on them about it. This fight went on and on, and each criticism thrown towards the dub was mixed in with that.

Again, as I outlined in an earlier post on here: while the term "hack" is a VERY harsh criticism, it is ultimately relating PURELY to the actors' work as PROFESSIONAL ACTORS. Again, the literal dictionary definition of a "hack" is "someone who does mediocre, substandard professional work regularly"... that's a TOTALLY FAIR viewpoint and criticism for someone to have regarding the professional output of people who have been at this for over 20 years, yet continue to STILL regularly turn in work that some (such as myself) find to be greatly, greatly lacking.

Furthermore, you are not these actors' friends or family: there's simply NO reason to "get offended for them", especially when what's being discussed here (as has been pointed out time and time and time again) is SIMPLY JUST THEIR PROFESSIONAL WORK and NOT themselves as people or individuals.

From my very first post in this thread:

What dub fans have always failed to realize is that from people like me, THIS HAS NEVER BEEN ANYTHING PERSONAL with these guys. I don't give a flying shit about Chris Sabat or Sean Schemmel or Sonny Straight or Eric Vale or any of the rest of the "old guard" as individuals. They're complete and utter abject strangers to me. I wish them absolutely NO ill will or bad fortune in their personal lives whatsoever, obviously. None of this has a DAMN thing to do with them as people.

I simply do not know how I could've made this any fucking crystal clearer than that. What I said and what Kamiccolo said earlier are all TOTALLY within fair reasonable criticisms of a professional actors' work, however harsh it may also have been: harsh criticism IS NOT the same thing or tantamount as a "personal insult".

Also, friendly word of advice: if you're actually serious about getting into the acting business yourself? Having THIS overly-sensitive of an attitude - like getting personally outraged and insulted when someone calls ANOTHER actor who ISN'T you, but a total abject stranger, an "untalented hack" - almost assures that you will not make it in that industry. Be fully prepared to expect way, way, WAY INFINITELY fucking worse words hurled DIRECTLY your way by casting directors, producers, and even general audience members/fans off the street or online.

Think this is bad? What people are saying in here is going to sound like the TOTAL AND COMPLETE NOTHING that is actually is once you get even the SLIGHTEST taste of what the real life entertainment industry is ACTUALLY like to people. If you actually are seriously deciding to be a real actor, then trust me when I say that before very long, you'll be wistfully LONGING for the days when some random jackass on a random internet site called some random actor (who is NOBODY to you) untalented was the worst thing you ever had to listen to or deal with.

We're going to have to agree or disagree on being called a "hack" as being an insult. Criticism of one's work is fine, but callong someone hack is uncalled for. If you see it as just harsh criticism, then that's fine.

There was also an issue of users perhaps hearing things slightly differently, and this went over and over until it escalated to the point of people's tastes in entertainment being questioned and challenged.

Having one's media diet be challenged in a respectful manner is in NO WAY whatsoever anything that is the LEAST bit insulting or out of line. People challenge one another's media tastes EVERY DAY, and in NO WAY is it absolutely ALWAYS (or even USUALLY) meant as an insult. Having one's viewpoints (in this case, one's frame of reference around the topic of media) be challenged is generally a GOOD thing, something that should lead to fruitful discussion: at least when its done in good faith and in a respectful manner (as it was here).

Leave aside that the specific topic here was media diet, what you're effectively saying here is "I don't like to have my views on something be challenged". In which case I have to ask: what the hell are you even DOING on an internet forum in the first place? If you're on here simply looking to have your personal views be reaffirmed and validated and NEVER dare to be challenged at all in even the most courteous manner possible... then I can once again only conclude that you're still a VERY young kid who is in for a WORLD of hurt out in the real world.

Like I said, knee jerk reaction but still felt like my tastes were on trial.

That's my problem. It's not the post length but the escalating tensions throughout this thread.

The "tensions were escalated" because a couple of people expressed a harsher-than-usual viewpoint about the acting performances of some VAs for a kids' cartoon, and people in here, quite ridiculously, took it as a personal attack. Which is beyond silly and senseless. It is in NO WAY out of line for someone to think that an actor is bad at their job. That is a COMPLETELY reasonable, and frankly BENIGN, opinion to hold.



It is absolutely, excuse my frankness once again, downright childishly petulant and absurd for someone who isn't the actor in question (or a close friend or relative of theirs) to take it as a personal insult on their behalf. Honestly, if someone is a professional actor who's been in the (incredibly cut-throat and merciless) entertainment business for over 20 years, THEY shouldn't still be at a point in their life and career where someone who thinks that they suck as a performer is enough to get them personally offended.

Remember what I said earlier about fans of the dub having a long history of overly internalizing the dub and its voices to the point where ANY criticism leveled at it is taken by them as a personal attack? You're only further proving my point here with all this.

I could be wrong in my assessment of the situation, but that's what I felt as things went on, causing me to claim people were going "crazy" over what I feel is a quality dub, and the criticsims to me seemed either rather minor or baseless. I was literally not hearing what they were hearing at times.

First of all: calling an actor who's performances you consistently have not liked for over 20 years untalented and not good at their job? That in NO WAY constitutes anyone "going crazy" over anything.

You're right, but I do still feel that it got out of hand (on both sides mind you)

Secondly: not everyone holds the same standard of quality as you do. Not everyone has the same opinions and outlooks. People in here have gone out of their way to assert that my personal views are in no way factual (as if I don't know that): well that particular door happens to swing both ways. What you hear in the performances and what YOU hold to be "a quality dub" is ALSO not factual nor a universal standard that we all abide by.

You're right, and I wasn't trying to imply that my standards were factual or universal but just stating my opinion.

In my case, I've been on this forum since it first started in 2004: I've been in the Dragon Ball fanbase overall for more than 10 years longer than THAT. I've watched entire generations come and go, I've watched the overall makeup of the fanbases for both DB as well as broader anime as a whole in the U.S. shift and change in some pretty dramatic ways.

One of the BIGGEST overall shifts in the fanbase that I've noticed for the better part of close to 15 solid years now has been U.S. Dragon Ball/anime fans whose main/primary media diet seems to almost SOLELY and exclusively consist of children's television, showing an abject lack of experience, enthusiasm, or even very much in the way of basic intellectual curiosity for most forms of media that don't fit within a Toonami, Nickelodeon, Disney, or Fox Kids-esque mold. The "overton window" so to speak of media absorption and discourse within broader Western anime fandom has overall gotten INCREDIBLY fucking narrow throughout the course of the 2000s and 2010s.

This, I have found, plays a HUGE role in how these kinds of discussions tend to go about: part of the reason that many of us ARE hearing such dramatically different things when we talk about things like the DB dub is that for many (usually younger) fans, they are coming at it from a perspective of being mainly and overwhelmingly used to primarily listening to over the top childrens' cartoons, TV shows, and films, with similar styles of caricaturized acting being the norm.

What we primarily absorb media-wise has a PROFOUND impact on our sensibilities and standards: if what someone mainly absorbs on a regular basis is stuff like Pokemon, Power Rangers, Sonic the Hedgehog, and Disney films, and not much else that is more emotionally or intellectually sophisticated than a primetime network TV sitcom, then that is UNQUESTIONABLY going to DRAMATICALLY impact where their overall critical gauge is generally set at.

By contrast, some of us (such as myself) generally aren't all that interested in most children's media: Dragon Ball happens to be an exception to that, but otherwise some of us are MUCH more used to works of a vastly more broad and eclectic nature in their approach to things like acting, scoring, etc. This, in turn, will ALSO dramatically impact OUR critical standards just the same.

THIS IS LITERALLY ALL I WAS GETTING AT HERE.

You had earlier in this thread, when nicely asked by another user, had given off a list of favorite works (that I acknowledge was clearly incomplete, but once more, it was all I had to go on) that seemed to only further prove my point in this kind of disparity that's been going on in fandom for quite some time now.

NO personal insult to you WHATSOEVER was meant with ANY of this. I don't know how much clearer I could've POSSIBLY made this.

I definitely see your point, and I do get where your coming from.
Compared something such as a TV drama, there is a disparity. However, that doesn't mean the performances are bad perse, just different. There is a bit more of a cartoony vibe to some of the voices, but it is a cartoon. Furthermore, whilebyes, in the original Japanese version it is more naturalistic sounding, it's still pretty over the top during many moments where it should be, which translates into over the top moments in the English version. Aside from maybe Piccolo and Vegeta, and don't hear much of the "Saturday morning cartoon" voice archetype that you're talking about, and no, this isn't because I supposedly only consume children's media or whatever but because that's simply how I hear it.

You can still criticize it (the dub), yes, but criticize the product and the performances given by the actors, not necessarily them as a whole. Likewise, it's not best to attack those or make generalizations about those who do like the dub.

NOTHING OF THE SORT WENT ON IN HERE.


Nobody attacked or criticized the actors personally as people, nobody insulted anyone (among other users) in here personally. AT. ALL. And no, the term "hack" does NOT count as such.

Agree to disagree
Also, generalizations were made

The outraged responses to Kamiccolo's above post I find to be the most telling. I've found time after time after time throughout the years that people give these actors a pass for two main reasons:

1) Stubbornly clung-to nostalgic goodwill, resulting in a personal investment in them as people.

and 2) Ridiculously lowered standards stemming from mainly consuming cartoons made for insanely small, young children and incredibly limited experience with "real" actors in actual works for grown-ass adults.

You're COMPLETELY blowing this RIDICULOUSLY out of proportions, all because the word "hack" was too strong for you. Think about that for a moment. Think about how ridiculously over-sensitive and absurd you're needlessly making this.... all because people in here happen to not like something that you like, and feel more strongly about it than you're personally comfortable with. A goddamn children's cartoon no less.

You like the dub. You think its high quality. Fine. More power to you. No one in here is insulting you for that personally, nor are they trying to take that away from you. There just happens to exist OTHER people however who (respectfully) disagree with your assessment and think that it is absolute and utter crap that's 100% unlistenable across the board.

I'm going to echo Kamiccolo's sentiments here: get over it.

The reason I got a bit carried away was more out of shock than anything. Most people, even if they don't like the dub, at least respect the actors. Again, I think that calling an actor a "hacl" just because you don't prefer his or her performance is a bit harsh and uncalled for, but that's just my opinion.

Let's just drop this whole thing and get back to the topic at hand.

[Kamiccolo9]

I mean, if a bunch of people are getting offended by the idea that someone thinks they are oversensitive.....

[Dbzfan94]

Wait WHAT!? Moving Goalposts is necessary!? WHAT!? WTF!? Since when Moving Goalposts is a good thing!?

Um, what? Don’t you think you’re overreacting? I may have misunderstood but I took goalposts as goals we want to for the community and you move them to get closer to a common ground. What was that exaggerated response for?

[Zephyr]

Criticism of one's work is fine, but callong someone hack is uncalled for. If you see it as just harsh criticism, then that's fine.

Calling someone a hack is a criticism of their work. By definition:


Is that really the ultimate point of contention here? Not knowing what the word 'hack' actually means, as indicated by the dictionary? This is incredibly cut-and-dry, and was solved pages ago. I fail to grasp how there's still a misunderstanding.

Calling someone a hack is criticizing their work. By saying "calling someone a hack is uncalled for" you are saying, by definition, that criticizing their work is uncalled for. And even if it is a harsh criticism of their work, still saying "calling someone a hack is uncalled for" is then saying that significantly criticizing their work is uncalled for. As if there was only a certain amount of displeasure that someone is allowed to take with a performance, as if "strongly disliking" is out of line.

And I'm not earnestly suggesting that you actually think significant dislike is out of line. But if you stick by "calling someone a hack is uncalled for", then it entails that you think significant dislike is out of line. By definition. Because words mean things.

[gohann]

I think what gokaiblue is trying to say is that the word "hack" shouldn't be used as a replacement for actual criticism. It's not an insult on its own, but words do have implications. He had every right to be "offended" by an actor he liked being called a hack. There's no room for actual discussion or any potential for the topic to branch out, as we saw here: the only place for the topic to go is downhill.

[VegettoEX]

I think what gokaiblue is trying to say is that the word "hack" shouldn't be used as a replacement for actual criticism.

I think if you read through these posts which span multiple (dozens?!) of paragraphs at times, it's certainly not being used as a "replacement". It's a starting point. One that is expanded upon in excruciating detail.

He had every right to be "offended" by an actor he liked being called a hack.

These actors are (likely) not your friends and you do not have any investment in them or the franchise as a whole. As bizarre as it may be for someone like me who runs this nonsense to say something like this: do not be so solely identified with these products/people that you take criticism of them as a personal affront.

That all being said, I think it's a super-hack move to start getting so pedantic you're quoting dictionaries.

[gohann]

I think what gokaiblue is trying to say is that the word "hack" shouldn't be used as a replacement for actual criticism.

I think if you read through these posts which span multiple (dozens?!) of paragraphs at times, it's certainly not being used as a "replacement". It's a starting point. One that is expanded upon in excruciating detail.

He had every right to be "offended" by an actor he liked being called a hack.

These actors are (likely) not your friends and you do not have any investment in them or the franchise as a whole. As bizarre as it may be for someone like me who runs this nonsense to say something like this: do not be so solely identified with these products/people that you take criticism of them as a personal affront.

That all being said, I think it's a super-hack move to start getting so pedantic you're quoting dictionaries.

There's actual criticism scattered amongst everything else in the thread, but it's overshadowed by the "hack" stuff. I don't think it's hard to see why one might take offense.

Quoting dictionaries is what Kunzait_83 did, he used a dictionary definition to try and dismiss the criticisms of others who called him out for the things he said about the actors.

[WittyUsername]

I think what gokaiblue is trying to say is that the word "hack" shouldn't be used as a replacement for actual criticism.

I think if you read through these posts which span multiple (dozens?!) of paragraphs at times, it's certainly not being used as a "replacement". It's a starting point. One that is expanded upon in excruciating detail.

He had every right to be "offended" by an actor he liked being called a hack.

These actors are (likely) not your friends and you do not have any investment in them or the franchise as a whole. As bizarre as it may be for someone like me who runs this nonsense to say something like this: do not be so solely identified with these products/people that you take criticism of them as a personal affront.

That all being said, I think it's a super-hack move to start getting so pedantic you're quoting dictionaries.

There's actual criticism scattered amongst everything else in the thread, but it's overshadowed by the "hack" stuff. I don't think it's hard to see why one might take offense.

Quoting dictionaries is what Kunzait_83 did, he used a dictionary definition to try and dismiss the criticisms of others who called him out for the things he said about the actors.

One thing is for sure, if I was a voice actor, I would not want to be involved in Dragon Ball. A low paying job like anime dubbing isn’t worth all the potential backlash.

[Cure Dragon 255]

Wait WHAT!? Moving Goalposts is necessary!? WHAT!? WTF!? Since when Moving Goalposts is a good thing!?

Um, what? Don’t you think you’re overreacting? I may have misunderstood but I took goalposts as goals we want to for the community and you move them to get closer to a common ground. What was that exaggerated response for?

Um...moving goalposts isnt that. I commend you that you comprise to reach a common goal (Because that's the right term, Compromise.) Moving goalposts is the EXACT opposite. Its NOT compromising and making contrived excuses as to why someone is right even when proven wrong. And that's not good at all.

[Fionordequester]

From the way you're describing things here, and from my own experience with the general atmosphere of the Episode Discussion Threads, it sounds like the first time around you were excessively caught up thinking about in-universe minutia and consistency, and logical power scaling, rather than trying to pick up on any thematic underpinning. From the sound of it, you weren't terribly happy in these departments.

Your second time around viewing them, you already knew what to expect in these departments, so they would have had less reason to take you out of the moment. And as such, I think it makes plenty of sense that you would've noticed things that you hadn't the first time around.

I'm not calling you a liar or suggesting that you don't know yourself or anything like that, but I dunno, I wouldn't sell yourself so short. I don't think you needed things spelled out for you like that at all. From what you've said about the matter, I think you just needed to go into it with a different frame of reference, is all. That the dub happened to over-explain things for your second go around is more coincidence, I think.

This, actually, was a pretty interesting post you made. You have some good points! Good enough that I actually thought about them while I was sleeping last night. After doing so, I've come to this conclusion...

What you said about me would probably hold up for other shows. Shows like Breaking Bad; where the quality was consistently high throughout the entire series. But...this is Dragon Ball Super. A show that's been incredibly inconsistent in quality, from beginning to end.

I'll tell you what. I did use to try really hard to analyze each episode. I'd always be trying to come up with rational explanations for things that set most people's hair on end. For example, Vegeta suddenly being able to overpower Black in Episode 63, after an entire arc hammering in the point that Black just kept getting stronger and stronger with each battle...

Well, the Episode 63 Discussion thread seems to be gone, but I believe I was the first one to come up with the "Zamasu stole a stronger Goku than our present Goku, and Vegeta finally leapfrogged what that Goku had been capable of" theory. Said theory, IIRC, was also posited by Geekdom101 in this vid here...

Geekdom101's Review of Episode 63

In Episode 66, when it first came out, I again came up with this really long, really complicated theory about how Trunks was suddenly able to overpower Merged Zamasu. Said theory involved the fact that Merged Zamasu inexplicable lost the echo in his voice immediately after getting his by the Final Kamehameha. It's conclusion was that Vegetto actually killed the Black half of Merged Zamasu's fusion, and drastically lowered his power level as a result...

Guys...Episode 66...Vegetto DID kill Black! Just not Zamasu!

Said theory was popular enough that most everyone who posted there voiced their support of said theory.

Then the "#17 is strong enough to go toe-to-toe with Super Saiyan Blue?!?" debacle started, and once again, I came up with a long and detailed theory as to how that was possible...

How to Justify #17 Maybe Being as Strong as Goku

...And then sometime during the Tournament of Power...I just gave up. There came a point where I felt like I was putting way more thought into what was happening than the actual writers were. I felt like I was trying to come up with excuses to cover for what was actually just bad writing. And I'm not gonna lie; I got sick of doing that.

So yes, perhaps I would've uncovered Episode 66's themes on my own. Perhaps Crunchyroll's subs would've eventually been enough. But even then, there would've always been that question in the back of my head: "Are the writers really being that clever? Or is this just another example of bad writing?". And to have FUNi go out of it's way to tell me "Yes, don't worry, there IS actually a point to this"...I take a good deal of solace in that.

Heck, Episode 66 had ANOTHER example of this; where Gowasu was explaining how Potara Fusion worked. The Japanese script in Episode 66 just said "fusions between gods last forever, but fusions between mortals is temporary"; but the English script further clarified that by saying "Any fusion involving a god is permanent...[So they don't BOTH need to be gods; we just need a god in there to make it permanent]" (hence why Old Kai's fusion with a mortal has never diffused. And why Merged Zamasu didn't defuse like Vegetto did).

And I think that's part of why I enjoy their little tweaks as much as I do. It's like every episode is getting a second chance to tell me what's going on! And that's exciting to me! You can understand that, right?

[ABED]

And I think that's part of why I enjoy their little tweaks as much as I do. It's like every episode is getting a second chance to tell me what's going on! And that's exciting to me! You can understand that, right?

I can't. You bring up Breaking Bad and its consistently excellent writing. One of the things that makes it so good is its ability to subtlety but clearly convey its points. I still don't see how the example you gave is any more clear. It's the same dialog, though maybe slightly more on the nose. I don't know how on the nose dialog doesn't just compound problematic plotting.

[gokaiblue]

And I think that's part of why I enjoy their little tweaks as much as I do. It's like every episode is getting a second chance to tell me what's going on! And that's exciting to me! You can understand that, right?

I can't. You bring up Breaking Bad and it's consistently excellent writing. One of the things that makes it so good is its ability to subtlety but clearly convey its points. I still don't see how the example you gave is any more clear. It's the same dialog, though maybe slightly more on the nose. I don't know how on the nose dialog doesn't just compound problematic plotting.

It clarifies thing just a bit more for those who might've missed it. I see bo harm in explaining, but at the same time, it probably didn't need to be clarified more

[Kunzait_83]

There's actual criticism scattered amongst everything else in the thread, but it's overshadowed by the "hack" stuff. I don't think it's hard to see why one might take offense.

Its only being "overshadowed by the hack stuff" because people who are fond of the dub in this thread MADE IT into an issue in the first place. A reasonable human being, someone who doesn't consider these random VAs (that once again, they've never met and have no personal connection with whatsoever) to be extensions of their individual identity whose "personal honor" they must step up to defend, wouldn't care one iota about a term like "talentless hack" being used by someone who thinks that they're bad at acting as a whole.

Do you know how many actors I've considered myself a TREMENDOUS fan of? Quite a damn lot. Know how many times random people I've known or spoken with (both online and IRL) have called them shitty actors with no talent? Countless times. How many times have I taken those comments SO personally to heart that I've started a multi-page long shitstorm over it demanding that they "show some respect" to these random professionals they've never met, nor will ever meet?

Never. Zero. Donut.

Because getting genuinely upset with and feeling personally insulted by someone for simply thinking that an actor that they're fond of is shitty at their job is absolutely fucking insane.

Quoting dictionaries is what Kunzait_83 did, he used a dictionary definition to try and dismiss the criticisms of others who called him out for the things he said about the actors.

For the record: I wasn't even the one who first used the term "hack" in the first place. That was Kamiccolo: I simply came to his defense and backed up his sentiments with my own. I wasn't the one who called the actors hacks myself: I simply said the rough equivalent of "Yep, that sounds about right to me."

And even if I DID call them hacks straight out... fuck-a-doodle-doo. They're professional actors. They aren't war heroes nor are they working to cure cancer. If someone - ANYONE, be it myself, Kamiccolo, his mom, whomever - thinks that an actor, someone who's JOB is to put themselves out there in front of millions and work a craft that requires TALENT to pull off and will ALWAYS garner criticism (even HARSH criticism), is shitty at that job... they are COMPLETELY within their rights to say "Yeah, that guy/girl/person/whatever is a shitty actor." without being accused of personally attacking their character in some manner that steps over the lines of decency.

Because saying that an actor is bad at acting is IN NO WAY the same thing, not even within LIGHTYEARS, as insulting their personal characters. It is purely about their job and nothing more.

THAT'S the reason that (with respect to Mike/EX's sentiments just now) myself, and then later on Zephyr, went so far as to bust out the actual dictionary definitions here: like Zephyr correctly pointed out, words have meanings and its impossible to have any kind of forward momentum in this conversation (absurd as it has gotten) when we're all seemingly working off of two COMPLETELY different definitions of the key word that sparked this whole mess to begin with.

A "hack" does NOT relate to a person's personal fucking character: it doesn't denote them as being a bad person, or an evil piece of subhuman filth, or even as intellectually stupid or "lesser-than" on ANY level relating to them as individuals. All it relates to is PURELY to their job as professionals, and their level of skill therein. That's it. That is the OBJECTIVE, academic fucking definition of the word as it is understood in the English language.

Taking it as ANYTHING MORE than that, especially on an emotional level, is pure and absolute fucking projection on the part of over-sensitive dub fans in here who are simply getting unreasonably and personally hurt and upset that negativity (beyond a COMPLETELY arbitrary threshold that they're personally comfortable with) is being spoken about actors whose work they've clearly internalized MUCH too deeply. Which is all the more ironic given that the original purpose of the very thread in question was to ask people what they thought of the dub.

Idol worshiping these people to the point where you take even harsh criticism of their work from others as personal insults (be it on them, or on yourselves) is ridiculously infantile, to the point of being genuinely unhealthy. These people, Chris Sabat, Sean Schemmel, etc... they're just actors. Moreover, they're just actors on a fucking children's cartoon and who mainly do other children's cartoons in general. Their work in NO way earns them automatic "Hey man, do you know who you're talking to?! Show some respect!!" type of knee-jerk deference: this isn't exactly the Royal Shakespeare Company here. Some perspective is GREATLY needed here.

In NO way would I feel the need or be compelled to go to THESE lengths and get THIS defensive and upset if someone said something similar about one of the Japanese VAs; or any other actor ANYWHERE for that matter, even ones who's work I otherwise slobberingly adore and admire. Most people in general wouldn't.