I think Toriyama's time is over with the Dragonball series

[kn83]

I guess technically you could include Roshi as an antagonist. But without accounting for ODB DBZ had literally exlclusively main villains who were evil solely for the sake of being evil. Vegeta, Freeza, Cell and Buu at their introduction were never anything other than "I am evil for the sake of being evil and plot" . The 4 major arcs never had anything further complexity or nuances than the Zamasu Arc and the ToP was never meant to be a deeply developing plot it is just a tournament. To me it is a better version of the Tenshinhan tournament arc in original dragon ball. certainly the best tournament arc in the history of the franchise.

But yeah looks like I will just have to agree to disagree with you on this one.

You're doing a disservice to the original series. Vegeta may have started as an 'evil for the sake of being evil' character, as you call it, but he developed in a natural and organic way throughout the series and actually presents example of an original and nuanced conflict in this series during the Boo arc. Mr. Boo also wasn't evil, merely misunderstood, and his relationship with Mr. Satan and the way their connection shapes both of their characters is one of the best parts of the Boo arc and the entire series. The Zamasu arc didn't have any nuance. It was literally in your face with the 'exterminating ningen' shit, Zamasu's motivation was obvious and didn't leave room to much interpretation and his archetype has been done much better elsewhere, you don't even need to look far. I say this as someone who both likes Zamasu as a character and his arc.

Further, I don't understand how you can say that the ToP was "never meant to be a deeply developing plot." It's a tournament with the erasure of multiple universes at stake, each one with their own societies and characters, with their own backstories and lives; the universe that we've been following included. It's a death-match created by Gods that don't really seem to give a shit about the mortals they're supposed to be protecting and governing over and that could have been the source of some interesting conflict considering how much Goku & co rely on the Gods. A death-match that also owes its existence to Goku's meddling, and him being such a reckless and dangerous individual could have also been the source of some reflection and introspection not only on his part but for everyone else too. If any premise in the ENTIRE Dragon Ball franchise had the potential for a 'deeply developing plot', it was the Tournament of Power. But they fucked it up. They introduced the premise, presented us with all these plot points only to drop them a few episodes later as if the arc had no stakes and the complexities of the premise mattered to nobody. The arc, structurally, is a mess. Artistically, it's nobody's vision.

Vegeta and Piccolo only started to get character development after they stopped being the main antagonist, same with Fat Buu and the present android twins (notice a pattern?)

And enough with the "ToP was Goku fault" nonsense. Zeno himself outright stated before the arc even began that he was gonna erase the universes anyway. Goku suggesting the tournament actually give everyone a chance to survive, Vados even pointed that out in one episode.

[sintzu]

The manga version ruined Black's character.

I'll give the anime that, it truly made Black one of if not DB's best villain.

[GTx10]

Dragon Ball was never deep and let's not forget Goku taking the Rabbit gang to the moon YET he can't breathe in space during Namek plot hole. I fail to see how Super is so bad, outside of the Future Trunks arc's time travel confusion the series is pretty standard. Plus the BoG arc feeds into the narrative of F, the 7 vs 6 Tournament, FT, and now the ToP.
I'd say Toriyama is a lazy genius who's managed to make all of Super connect to each other in a cohesive way. So he is a good writer by that example.

[Doctor.]

Saiyan saga Vegeta, Piccolo and his dad, The Crane School, Frieza, The Red Ribbon army, The Future Androids, Cell, Evil Buu, anyone from the movies and the Shadow Dragons were all "evil for the sake of being evil" characters, so stop lying to yourself

I didn't say they weren't? I'm saying that, on top of those villains, we also had antagonists that were either good or in a grey area.

Roshi was never an antagonist

Yes he was. Jackie Chun was the main antagonist of the 21st TB.

Jiren (who isn't even a villain), Goku Black and Zamasu are all types of antagonist that Dragonball had never seen before and had better motivations for who they are than the majority of the original villains.

Jiren is a villain at this point. All semblance of interesting character traits that he has were thrown out of the window with his generic backstory and motivations. He's basically Pain, who was also a villain.

Goku Black and Zamasu were interesting characters but their archetype has been done better elsewhere. And yes, both of them were also evil.

Trying to downplay the quality of ep.130 show how blinded by nostalgia you are.

I literally said, in this thread, that I have no nostalgic attachment towards the original series. If you want to ignore the entire discussion and come here and post nonsense fueled by nothing but emotion, then that's your prerogative, but don't go around and accuse me of doing it.

Goku vs Jiren was essentially a fight between different ideals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyaKrvRipXY, rather than the usual battle between good vs evil. Its like these delusional nostalgia-tards refuse to admit it whenever Super does anything better than Z and Early DB.

I'm aware it was a fight between different ideals. I'm saying it was melodramatic, poorly executed, not fit for Dragon Ball and dissonant with what the previous episodes had established. It was flash over substance, cheap melodrama masquerading as 'deep' to suck in the fans of lesser Shounen, as I've said before.

Super has done plenty of things better than the original series but unfortunately they don't amount to much.

[PFM18]

The manga version ruined Black's character.

I'll give the anime that, it truly made Black one of if not DB's best villain.

As far as the manga goes the only thing they did better is pacing. They gave Goku the freaking Hakai Trunks gained some strange healing abilities Trunks could match SSJ3 when he showed up, Zamasu cloned himself for no reason. The manga made no sense to me

[Doctor.]

Vegeta and Piccolo only started to get character development after they stopped being the main antagonist, same with Fat Buu and the present android twins (notice a pattern?)

No, Fat Boo and the present androids (them especially) were presented as morally ambiguous from the start. Fat Boo stopped being the main antagonist after he changed and the androids were only interested in killing Goku for the fun of it, they weren't interested in killing innocent people; this difference between the present and future versions was pointed out in-universe. Piccolo Jr., too, was shown to have redeemable qualities before the tournament if you want to count anime filler.

And enough with the "ToP was Goku fault" nonsense. Zeno himself outright stated before the arc even began that he was gonna erase the universes anyway. Goku suggesting the tournament actually give everyone a chance to survive, Vados even pointed that out in one episode.

The ToP is Goku's fault. It doesn't matter if the Omni-Kings were going to destroy the universes regardless, the tournament format itself is Goku's fault. Furthermore, Bergamo managed to convince the Omni-Kings not to erase anyone and Goku still went full-power and didn't seem to have any remorse in what he did because he's reckless, naive and selfish, as Beerus pointed out a few episodes prior. That's an interesting concept and plot point. Too bad it's ignored and thrown out of the window the moment the tournament starts.

[kn83]

Saiyan saga Vegeta, Piccolo and his dad, The Crane School, Frieza, The Red Ribbon army, The Future Androids, Cell, Evil Buu, anyone from the movies and the Shadow Dragons were all "evil for the sake of being evil" characters, so stop lying to yourself

I didn't say they weren't? I'm saying that, on top of those villains, we also had antagonists that were either good or in a grey area.

Roshi was never an antagonist

Yes he was. Jackie Chun was the main antagonist of the 21st TB.

Jiren (who isn't even a villain), Goku Black and Zamasu are all types of antagonist that Dragonball had never seen before and had better motivations for who they are than the majority of the original villains.

Jiren is a villain at this point. All semblance of interesting character traits that he has were thrown out of the window with his generic backstory and motivations. He's basically Pain, who was also a villain.

Goku Black and Zamasu were interesting characters but their archetype has been done better elsewhere. And yes, both of them were also evil.

Trying to downplay the quality of ep.130 show how blinded by nostalgia you are.

I literally said, in this thread, that I have no nostalgic attachment towards the original series. If you want to ignore the entire discussion and come here and post nonsense fueled by nothing but emotion, then that's your prerogative, but don't go around and accuse me of doing it.

Goku vs Jiren was essentially a fight between different ideals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyaKrvRipXY, rather than the usual battle between good vs evil. Its like these delusional nostalgia-tards refuse to admit it whenever Super does anything better than Z and Early DB.

I'm aware it was a fight between different ideals. I'm saying it was melodramatic, poorly executed, not fit for Dragon Ball and dissonant with what the previous episodes had established. It was flash over substance, cheap melodrama masquerading as 'deep' to suck in the fans of lesser Shounen, as I've said before.

Super has done plenty of things better than the original series but unfortunately they don't amount to much.

1. Roshi was not an antagonist in any real sense of the term.

2. Claiming Jiren a villain because of his actions in ep.130 is extremely retarded

3. I never said Black and Zamasu weren't evil (learn how to read), I just said they weren't "evil for evil's sake" like the majority of the franchise's antagonist.

4. How is it "flash over substance" when you had the whole episode laying out the motivations? You're not make any fucking sense.

[PFM18]

Saiyan saga Vegeta, Piccolo and his dad, The Crane School, Frieza, The Red Ribbon army, The Future Androids, Cell, Evil Buu, anyone from the movies and the Shadow Dragons were all "evil for the sake of being evil" characters, so stop lying to yourself

I didn't say they weren't? I'm saying that, on top of those villains, we also had antagonists that were either good or in a grey area.

Roshi was never an antagonist

Yes he was. Jackie Chun was the main antagonist of the 21st TB.

Jiren (who isn't even a villain), Goku Black and Zamasu are all types of antagonist that Dragonball had never seen before and had better motivations for who they are than the majority of the original villains.

Jiren is a villain at this point. All semblance of interesting character traits that he has were thrown out of the window with his generic backstory and motivations. He's basically Pain, who was also a villain.

Goku Black and Zamasu were interesting characters but their archetype has been done better elsewhere. And yes, both of them were also evil.

Trying to downplay the quality of ep.130 show how blinded by nostalgia you are.

I literally said, in this thread, that I have no nostalgic attachment towards the original series. If you want to ignore the entire discussion and come here and post nonsense fueled by nothing but emotion, then that's your prerogative, but don't go around and accuse me of doing it.

Goku vs Jiren was essentially a fight between different ideals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyaKrvRipXY, rather than the usual battle between good vs evil. Its like these delusional nostalgia-tards refuse to admit it whenever Super does anything better than Z and Early DB.

I'm aware it was a fight between different ideals. I'm saying it was melodramatic, poorly executed, not fit for Dragon Ball and dissonant with what the previous episodes had established. It was flash over substance, cheap melodrama masquerading as 'deep' to suck in the fans of lesser Shounen, as I've said before.

Super has done plenty of things better than the original series but unfortunately they don't amount to much.

1. Roshi was not an antagonist in any real sense of the term.

2. Claiming Jiren a villain because of his actions in ep.130 is extremely retarded

3. I never said Black and Zamasu weren't evil (learn how to read), I just said they weren't "evil for evil's sake" like the majority of the franchise's antagonist.

4. How is it "flash over substance" when you had the whole episode laying out the motivations? You're not make any fucking sense.

Hey man I think you could do without the insults and rudeness.

The point is during DBZ there was never a main villian or antagonist who was anything other than "Evil for evil's sake" and Super has already given us two. You could argue that Roshi would fit the mold of not an evil main antagonist during original dragon ball but that is the only time in the original series and even that is shaky. Having more complexities as fas antagonists go is something that Super has been creative enough to do differently (or better depending on your opinion). Among several other things. To say Toriyama isnt what he was before he is just inaccurate to me

[Doctor.]

1. Roshi was not an antagonist in any real sense of the term.

This is ridiculous.

antagonist
anˈtaɡ(ə)nɪst/Submit
noun
1.
a person who actively opposes or is hostile to someone or something; an adversary.

Roshi opposed Goku and Kuririn winning the tournament because he feared that they would gain an ego and lose motivation. He's clearly an antagonist in every sense of the term.

2. Claiming Jiren a villain because of his actions in ep.130 is extremely retarded

Do you think Pain is not a villain?

3. I never said Black and Zamasu weren't evil (learn how to read), I just said they weren't "evil for evil's sake" like the majority of the franchise's antagonist.

You're gonna get yourself banned at this rate.

And yes, they were. They started off with... "good" intentions and gradually got consumed by their own ego and narcissism. Zamasu enjoyed killing mortals and was in denial about his motivations, to the point that no amount of reason could get through to him. At the end of the arc, he was about as "evil for the sake of evil" as Cell was, for thinking he's perfect so everyone else is automatically beneath him.

4. How is it "flash over substance" when you had the whole episode laying out the motivations? You're not make any fucking sense.

I'm just gonna quote myself because apparently you didn't get it.

I'm saying it was melodramatic, poorly executed, not fit for Dragon Ball and dissonant with what the previous episodes had established. It was flash over substance, cheap melodrama masquerading as 'deep' to suck in the fans of lesser Shounen, as I've said before.

It was flash over substance specifically because the whole episode tried to shove this superficial, generic dialogue and this conflict with no identity down your throat. It's flash over substance because you could literally replace Goku and Jiren with a protagonist and antagonist from any other garbage Shounen and the dialogue would fit just as well. It was flash over substance because the drama contradicts themes established in previous episodes and is nothing like the way Dragon Ball is written all for the sake of having some cool action scenes and a spectacle.

The point is during DBZ there was never a main villian or antagonist who was anything other than "Evil for evil's sake" and Super has already given us two

I gave you a lot of examples already. Roshi, Tenshinhan, the androids and Majin Vegeta were all major antagonists with more nuanced motivations than being evil for the sake of being evil.

[kn83]

Vegeta and Piccolo only started to get character development after they stopped being the main antagonist, same with Fat Buu and the present android twins (notice a pattern?)

No, Fat Boo and the present androids (them especially) were presented as morally ambiguous from the start. Fat Boo stopped being the main antagonist after he changed and the androids were only interested in killing Goku for the fun of it, they weren't interested in killing innocent people; this difference between the present and future versions was pointed out in-universe. Piccolo Jr., too, was shown to have redeemable qualities before the tournament if you want to count anime filler.

And enough with the "ToP was Goku fault" nonsense. Zeno himself outright stated before the arc even began that he was gonna erase the universes anyway. Goku suggesting the tournament actually give everyone a chance to survive, Vados even pointed that out in one episode.

The ToP is Goku's fault. It doesn't matter if the Omni-Kings were going to destroy the universes regardless, the tournament format itself is Goku's fault. Furthermore, Bergamo managed to convince the Omni-Kings not to erase anyone and Goku still went full-power and didn't seem to have any remorse in what he did because he's reckless, naive and selfish, as Beerus pointed out a few episodes prior. That's an interesting concept and plot point. Too bad it's ignored and thrown out of the window the moment the tournament starts.

1. Piccolo jr. only started having redeemable qualities after he took Gohan, which was long after he stopped being the Big Bad. The present Androids wanting to kill Goku for fun is extremely psychopathic, the only reason they weren't interested in killing civilians was because they thought that was boring, not because of any moral standards. And Fat Buu was a psycho manchild that killed for fun too, nothing sympathetic about that either.

2. The tournament give everyone a chance to live, are you too slow to see that? How can you blame Goku for something that was gonna happen anyway under a worse scenario. Zeno warned Goku not to hold back against Bergamo during the match or else the deal was off, so Bergamo's offer was doomed from the start.

[Hawk9211]

It isn't necessarily an excuse. i am not excusing anything considering I didn't concede the notion that Super needs fixing and then make an excuse for it. I was just trying to rationalize the hatred for it because I don't really understand it. Like I said episode 130 is to many(including me) the single greatest episode of the entire franchise. And for good reason it had everything going for it. If anything the story elements have progressed further especially from the painfully generic villain who is "evil just for the sake of being evil" in contrast with Zamasu and his motives and Jiren being the main antagonist but still a good person.

You never just had just 'evil for the sake of being evil' characters considering Majin Vegeta, Roshi, Tenshinhan, the androids, Piccolo and Mr. Boo were all antagonists in the original series. 130 is everything but good in terms of its writing. It's a vast departure from the way that the original series portrayed itself and it seems to me more like a ploy to grab the fans of modern, lesser Shounen that rely heavily on emotional manipulation and melodrama masquerading as 'deep' character drama to gain viewers. I won't blame this on Toriyama though; I'm almost sure it was Toei's doing, but this doesn't excuse Toriyama's terrible plot points and ideas all throughout the modern DB revival, starting with Resurrection 'F' way back in 2015.

Saiyan saga Vegeta, Piccolo and his dad, The Crane School, Frieza, The Red Ribbon army, The Future Androids, Cell, Evil Buu, anyone from the movies and the Shadow Dragons were all "evil for the sake of being evil" characters, so stop lying to yourself. Roshi was never an antagonist/villain in the first place either. Jiren (who isn't even a villain), Goku Black and Zamasu are all types of antagonist that Dragonball had never seen before and had better motivations for who they are than the majority of the original villains. Even TeamFourStar of all people pointed that out. Trying to downplay the quality of ep.130 show how blinded by nostalgia you are. And what exactly is so "cheap" about the way Jiren was potrayed in ep.130, what exactly was the major writing problems? Goku vs Jiren was essentially a fight between different ideals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyaKrvRipXY, rather than the usual battle between good vs evil. Its like these delusional nostalgia-tards refuse to admit it whenever Super does anything better than Z and Early DB.

Majin vegetable,piccolo was basically a misunderstood motivated by revenge,tenshinhan even though was the arrogant kung fu guy,before the final showdown by which I mean when he was the upper hand,reveals he doesn’t want to be an assassin.,fat buy?,antagonist is someone who opposes the protagonist,so yes roshi was a antagonist just like jiren.
Without going into much detail,extremely generic shonen which deviates from dragon ball in not a good way.The antagonists of dragon ball are defined by their charisma and actions,not backstories.Jiren power,character,actions everything is defined by his backstory which is a two minute flashback and heavily resembles a character arch type which is despised even by fan’s of that franchise.

Now,there isn’t anything inherently wrong with that,but most of things in fiction are generic and they are distinguished by their execution and guess what?you can’t do that in a two minutes flashback.The two minutes thing is a figure of speech.


Now,a lot of writing is subjective,but I think that inconsistency will generally be considered objectively bad writing.

Second,it’s dragon ball not one piece or naruto.Hell,it isn’t even one piece it’s trying to do what one piece and other shonen do without doing what makes it work.

They spend dozens chapters/episodes to build up this kind of thing.They don’t do two minute flashbacks and leave their antagonist meditating and staring.

[Doctor.]

1. Piccolo jr. only started having redeemable qualities after he took Gohan, which was long after he stopped being the Big Bad.

...which is why I said that he has redeemable qualities before the tournament if you want to count anime filler, where we get to see his childhood. I'm starting to think that maybe you're the one with some difficulty in reading.

I also don't see a problem with characters like Piccolo and Vegeta developing into good guys after their arcs. If they developed during the arc they were villains, would that somehow make them better characters? No, their development would probably be rushed and terrible (*cough* Jiren *cough*).

The present Androids wanting to kill Goku for fun is extremely psychopathic, the only reason they weren't interested in killing civilians was because they thought that was boring, not because of any moral standards. And Fat Buu was a psycho manchild that killed for fun too, nothing sympathetic about that either.

The present androids had far more nuanced motivations than you're giving them credit for. Android 17 had an interest in inherently 'human' things, something that is picked up again in Super to further his arc. Android 18 didn't really seem interested in anything and just went with the flow. And Android 16 was 100% a good guy haunted by his programming. Claiming they were evil for evil's sake is objectively wrong.

2. The tournament give everyone a chance to live, are you too slow to see that? How can you blame Goku for something that was gonna happen anyway under a worse scenario. Zeno warned Goku not to hold back against Bergamo during the match or else the deal was off, so Bergamo's offer was doomed from the start.

Except I didn't say Goku had to lose. I literally said that Goku winning and feeling no remorse is an interesting concept. My problem is that they backtracked and dropped it after going through the whole Zen Exhibition putting the blame on Goku from all sides.

[kn83]

1. Roshi was not an antagonist in any real sense of the term.

This is ridiculous.

antagonist
anˈtaɡ(ə)nɪst/Submit
noun
1.
a person who actively opposes or is hostile to someone or something; an adversary.

Roshi opposed Goku and Kuririn winning the tournament because he feared that they would gain an ego and lose motivation. He's clearly an antagonist in every sense of the term.

2. Claiming Jiren a villain because of his actions in ep.130 is extremely retarded

Do you think Pain is not a villain?

3. I never said Black and Zamasu weren't evil (learn how to read), I just said they weren't "evil for evil's sake" like the majority of the franchise's antagonist.

You're gonna get yourself banned at this rate.

And yes, they were. They started off with... "good" intentions and gradually got consumed by their own ego and narcissism. Zamasu enjoyed killing mortals and was in denial about his motivations, to the point that no amount of reason could get through to him. At the end of the arc, he was about as "evil for the sake of evil" as Cell was, for thinking he's perfect so everyone else is automatically beneath him.

4. How is it "flash over substance" when you had the whole episode laying out the motivations? You're not make any fucking sense.

I'm just gonna quote myself because apparently you didn't get it.

I'm saying it was melodramatic, poorly executed, not fit for Dragon Ball and dissonant with what the previous episodes had established. It was flash over substance, cheap melodrama masquerading as 'deep' to suck in the fans of lesser Shounen, as I've said before.

It was flash over substance specifically because the whole episode tried to shove this superficial, generic dialogue and this conflict with no identity down your throat. It's flash over substance because you could literally replace Goku and Jiren with a protagonist and antagonist from any other garbage Shounen and the dialogue would fit just as well. It was flash over substance because the drama contradicts themes established in previous episodes and is nothing like the way Dragon Ball is written all for the sake of having some cool action scenes and a spectacle.

1. Pain is arguably not a villain for the same reason as Jiren neither. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_i-Re0V3Mg
https://aminoapps.com/c/anime/page/blog ... 3gr4vEM8g4

2. Black and Zamasu's motivations remained the same throughout the entire arc, to rid reality of all mortals and make it only for the gods. While Cell was simply an open psychopath that enjoyed killing with no rationalization of any kind. Clearly different character types.

3. What exactly does does Goku vs Jiren contradict about Dragonball in general, let alone the rest of the ToP? Not a damn thing apparently. You didn't give any logically example of what it allegedly contradicts. Its like you're just whining just to whine lmao, like 70% of people that whine about Super (then defend Z for doing the exact same thing lol). Show me an example from another Shonen series why Goku vs Jiren is seemingly generic. You can't

[Cure Dragon 255]

1. Piccolo jr. only started having redeemable qualities after he took Gohan, which was long after he stopped being the Big Bad.

...which is why I said that he has redeemable qualities before the tournament if you want to count anime filler, where we get to see his childhood. I'm starting to think that maybe you're the one with some difficulty in reading.

I also don't see a problem with characters like Piccolo and Vegeta developing into good guys after their arcs. If they developed during the arc they were villains, would that somehow make them better characters? No, their development would probably be rushed and terrible (*cough* Jiren *cough*).

The present Androids wanting to kill Goku for fun is extremely psychopathic, the only reason they weren't interested in killing civilians was because they thought that was boring, not because of any moral standards. And Fat Buu was a psycho manchild that killed for fun too, nothing sympathetic about that either.

The present androids had far more nuanced motivations than you're giving them credit for. Android 17 had an interest in inherently 'human' things, something that is picked up again in Super to further his arc. Android 18 didn't really seem interested in anything and just went with the flow. And Android 16 was 100% a good guy haunted by his programming. Claiming they were evil for evil's sake is objectively wrong.

2. The tournament give everyone a chance to live, are you too slow to see that? How can you blame Goku for something that was gonna happen anyway under a worse scenario. Zeno warned Goku not to hold back against Bergamo during the match or else the deal was off, so Bergamo's offer was doomed from the start.

Except I didn't say Goku had to lose. I literally said that Goku winning and feeling no remorse is an interesting concept. My problem is that they backtracked and dropped it after going through the whole Zen Exhibition putting the blame on Goku from all sides.

Whoa, whoa wait, his childhood...where we see burn stuff to the ground...makes him more developed and sympathetic? WHAT? I thought you meant that scene where he saved people. This makes no sense. Otherwise I agree entirely.

[Doctor.]

1. Pain is arguably not a villain for the same reason as Jiren neither.

I'm not gonna watch a 10 minute Geekdom video. Make your own points or don't reply back.

villain
ˈvɪlən/Submit
noun
1.
(in a film, novel, or play) a character whose evil actions or motives are important to the plot.

Trying to kill Goku's friends is an objectively evil action that motivated Goku to defeat Jiren. Villain doesn't mean a character has to be evil, it just means they have to commit evil actions. Whether or not Jiren/Pain/whoever are misguided or misunderstood is irrelevant.

2. Black and Zamasu's motivations remained the same throughout the entire arc, to rid reality of all mortals and make it only for the gods. While Cell was simply an open psychopath that enjoyed killing with no rationalization of any kind. Clearly different character types.

I didn't claim they were the same archetype. I'm saying they were both fueled by the same motivation: pure narcissism, rationalized as a desire to make the universe a better place (which is why he claims he wants to make it a place for the Gods but ends up killing everyone of them regardless; it was a place just for him because he's the only one he deems worthy). And again, I didn't claim Black and Zamasu's motivations weren't the same throughout the arc. I'm claiming Zamasu became more and more extreme (there is a stark difference between present Zamasu at his introduction, Black/future Zamasu and, later, Merged Zamasu). While he may have started as a morally ambiguous character, his superficial motivations, his narcissism and his black-and-white perspective of the universe led him to become the very same kind of character you apparently so vehemently despise.

I like Zamasu, I like his development as a character and I like his arc. But let's not pretend he's something that he's not. His motivations aren't nuanced, his development isn't subtle and his archetype has been done a hell of a lot better elsewhere.

3. What exactly does does Goku vs Jiren contradict about Dragonball in general, let alone the rest of the ToP? Not a damn thing apparently. You didn't give any logically example of what it allegedly contradicts. Its like you're just whining just to whine lmao, like 70% of people that whine about Super (then defend Z for doing the exact same thing lol). Show me an example from another Shonen series why Goku vs Jiren is seemingly generic. You can't

What it contradicts about the ToP was already posted above:
[spoiler][/spoiler]

How it takes a dump on everything Dragon Ball has ever stood for, I'll just quote myself from another thread because I'm frankly tired of repeating myself at this point:

At this point, I'm not sure if you people are purposefully misreading what we're saying for the sake of starting an argument. That's not the point we're making. That's not the point anyone was making. We're talking about the way it was presented, in an over-the-top, melodramatic, kitsch way that has no place in Dragon Ball and is better suited to a series like Fairy Tail where these kinds of cheesy speeches give you nonsensical and arbitrary power-ups for the sake of the spectacle. Goku caring about his friends doesn't need to be verbalized and shoved down your throat because it was always very clear subtext.

And I can predict the response to be the "B-But Super Saiyan! Super Saiyan 2!" false equivalency and I, once again, respond that the difference is in subtlety and nuance

The Super Saiyan comparison is so ridiculous that I don't even know if some people are just desperate to defend Super that they'll throw the original series under the bus or if they legitimately can't remember what it was that made the original series so great to begin with.

Super Saiyan had been foreshadowed for half the arc by the point Goku transformed. Kuririn's death functioned as a trigger for a transformation, and the possibility of it happening had already been established way beforehand. Super Saiyan tells us two things: that the power-up wasn't arbitrary - it didn't happen just because Goku needed to win reaaaally badly; and that the transformation had negative consequences. Goku almost loses himself in rage and becomes an entirely different person. It wasn't an absurd, arbitrary power-up motivated by hope and trust and friendship that allowed Goku to turn the tables and win; it was a dangerous transformation that almost led to his death (and some will say "So did Ultra Instinct!" but I'm talking specifically about the power-up Goku received mid-fight after Kuririn motivated him, not the transformation itself). Going even further, compare the presentation of the two scenes. Kuririn's death was an emotional moment and you didn't get some melodramatic flashbacks reminiscing about their lives; you didn't have Gohan and Bulma narrating afterwards about how they're depositing all their hopes on Goku and how he's such a great guy and everyone loves him and trusts him and he didn't do nothing wrong ever in his life! The scene had an ominous tone, there was no dialogue outside of Goku's threats to Freeza, the atmosphere and music did the talking and the rest of the fight was permeated by a moral ambivalence in Goku's character. I guess some people don't get this, because they grew up with the Funimation dub which portrayed the scene as a more heroic turning point in the battle, rather than the dreadful and ominous turning point in Goku's character that it was.

In comparison, the power-up that Goku got whilst in Ultra Instinct was completely arbitrary. You will never see a power boost mid-transformation in the original series. Power boosts coming from emotion, in the original series, manifest themselves through a new transformation (literally only twice, and they had both been foreshadowed beforehand and their execution was phenomenal). Emotions don't manifest themselves in a power boost in the same form because that would be arbitrary and dumb. Comparing Super Saiyan to what happened here is a complete false equivalency. An apt comparison is the anime's version of the Kaioken x20 Kamehameha, which was likewise filled with a lot of flashbacks and a heroic speech fueled by emotions such as friendship, hope and trust. Guess what happened? It did jackshit to Freeza. It didn't allow him to turn the tables just for "MUH HYPE" or the spectacle. Freeza just flicked it away, as he rightfully should have. This is what I mean when people seemingly can't tell the difference in execution between the two series. Just because some things might be similar in Z and Super does not mean they were executed in the same fashion.

The difference between the two is that the Boo arc was a lot more subtle in its execution. It was still the end of the series, a final battle against an unbeatable opponent, yet when Goku turned the tables, Toriyama didn't have a character vocalize that Goku only got this far because of his friends and that he's only beating Boo because he has everyone's help, nor was it all accompanied by a nostalgic flashback of the series' events. You didn't need to because it was clear subtext. The theme was understated for a reason, because the audience can figure it out on their own. The closest thing we got to something being pointed out directly to the audience was Vegeta's respect speech, but even that was something inherently specific to his character arc and original; it was something unmistakably Dragon Ball and you can't confuse it for anything else. I know it sounds ridiculous, but subtlety and nuance is what sets Dragon Ball apart from its lesser successors.

The need for Toei to, like any other Shounen, verbalize something that was always very clear subtext in every fight Goku has ever gone through is asinine and, like Cipher said, shows the level of disconnect between Toriyama's and Toei's way of approaching storytelling and, in my opinion, really shows the demographic they're aiming towards. I don't think anyone here has a problem with Goku's characterization or the themes in this episode specifically, taken in isolation. The problem lies with the execution, that always has been the complaint.

Whoa, whoa wait, his childhood...where we see burn stuff to the ground...makes him more developed and sympathetic? WHAT? I thought you meant that scene where he saved people. This makes no sense. Otherwise I agree entirely.

Yes, that was what I was thinking about, thank you. I didn't remember when it specifically happened since it's been a while since I last sat through the anime's filler. Still, a lost orphan child with powers he didn't know he possessed (until a certain point) is still somewhat sympathetic and you could even make the argument that that's why he became so attached to Gohan in the first place.

[kn83]

1. Pain is arguably not a villain for the same reason as Jiren neither.

I'm not gonna watch a 10 minute Geekdom video. Make your own points or don't reply back.

villain
ˈvɪlən/Submit
noun
1.
(in a film, novel, or play) a character whose evil actions or motives are important to the plot.

Trying to kill Goku's friends is an objectively evil action that motivated Goku to defeat Jiren. Villain doesn't mean a character has to be evil, it just means they have to commit evil actions. Whether or not Jiren/Pain/whoever are misguided or misunderstood is irrelevant.

This is a retarded argument, because according to you anyone who isn't a complete purity-sue is a villain, including Goku himself.

I didn't claim they were the same archetype. I'm saying they were both fueled by the same motivation: pure narcissism, rationalized as a desire to make the universe a better place (which is why he claims he wants to make it a place for the Gods but ends up killing everyone of them regardless; it was a place just for him because he's the only one he deems worthy). And again, I didn't claim Black and Zamasu's motivations weren't the same throughout the arc. I'm claiming Zamasu became more and more extreme (there is a stark difference between present Zamasu at his introduction, Black/future Zamasu and, later, Merged Zamasu). While he may have started as a morally ambiguous character, his superficial motivations, his narcissism and his black-and-white perspective of the universe led him to become the very same kind of character you apparently so vehemently despise.

Narcissism is a personality trait, not a motivation. So to claim that Zamasu was motivated by narcissism already makes no logical sense. A motivation is a goal, an aim. And his aim was never actually contradicted, since "death to all mortals" was on his mind from day one and did exactly did.

What it contradicts about the ToP was already posted above:
[spoiler][/spoiler]

How it takes a dump on everything Dragon Ball has ever stood for, I'll just quote myself from another thread because I'm frankly tired of repeating myself at this point:

At this point, I'm not sure if you people are purposefully misreading what we're saying for the sake of starting an argument. That's not the point we're making. That's not the point anyone was making. We're talking about the way it was presented, in an over-the-top, melodramatic, kitsch way that has no place in Dragon Ball and is better suited to a series like Fairy Tail where these kinds of cheesy speeches give you nonsensical and arbitrary power-ups for the sake of the spectacle. Goku caring about his friends doesn't need to be verbalized and shoved down your throat because it was always very clear subtext.

And I can predict the response to be the "B-But Super Saiyan! Super Saiyan 2!" false equivalency and I, once again, respond that the difference is in subtlety and nuance

What subtlety and nuance lmao? Take off those nostalgia glasses because Dragonball was never subtle by any real standard. Goku made a similar speech about hurting his friends (particularly Krillin) after turning SSJ against Freeza like he did against with Jiren. Gohan did too with Cell after turning SSJ2. Yet you hypocritical nostalgia-tards refuse to see that lmao.

The Super Saiyan comparison is so ridiculous that I don't even know if some people are just desperate to defend Super that they'll throw the original series under the bus or if they legitimately can't remember what it was that made the original series so great to begin with.

Super Saiyan had been foreshadowed for half the arc by the point Goku transformed. Kuririn's death functioned as a trigger for a transformation, and the possibility of it happening had already been established way beforehand. Super Saiyan tells us two things: that the power-up wasn't arbitrary - it didn't happen just because Goku needed to win reaaaally badly; and that the transformation had negative consequences. Goku almost loses himself in rage and becomes an entirely different person. It wasn't an absurd, arbitrary power-up motivated by hope and trust and friendship that allowed Goku to turn the tables and win; it was a dangerous transformation that almost led to his death (and some will say "So did Ultra Instinct!" but I'm talking specifically about the power-up Goku received mid-fight after Kuririn motivated him, not the transformation itself). Going even further, compare the presentation of the two scenes. Kuririn's death was an emotional moment and you didn't get some melodramatic flashbacks reminiscing about their lives; you didn't have Gohan and Bulma narrating afterwards about how they're depositing all their hopes on Goku and how he's such a great guy and everyone loves him and trusts him and he didn't do nothing wrong ever in his life! The scene had an ominous tone, there was no dialogue outside of Goku's threats to Freeza, the atmosphere and music did the talking and the rest of the fight was permeated by a moral ambivalence in Goku's character. I guess some people don't get this, because they grew up with the Funimation dub which portrayed the scene as a more heroic turning point in the battle, rather than the dreadful and ominous turning point in Goku's character that it was.

In comparison, the power-up that Goku got whilst in Ultra Instinct was completely arbitrary. You will never see a power boost mid-transformation in the original series. Power boosts coming from emotion, in the original series, manifest themselves through a new transformation (literally only twice, and they had both been foreshadowed beforehand and their execution was phenomenal). Emotions don't manifest themselves in a power boost in the same form because that would be arbitrary and dumb. Comparing Super Saiyan to what happened here is a complete false equivalency. An apt comparison is the anime's version of the Kaioken x20 Kamehameha, which was likewise filled with a lot of flashbacks and a heroic speech fueled by emotions such as friendship, hope and trust. Guess what happened? It did jackshit to Freeza. It didn't allow him to turn the tables just for "MUH HYPE" or the spectacle. Freeza just flicked it away, as he rightfully should have. This is what I mean when people seemingly can't tell the difference in execution between the two series. Just because some things might be similar in Z and Super does not mean they were executed in the same fashion.

This is just false all around.

1. Why do so many idiots assume Goku got some kind of friendship boost when fighting Jiren? The franchise itself already established that when saiyans get mad for any reason, they tend to get power boost. It was Goku's anger at Jiren trying to kill his friends (he even says it himself) that give him the boost, not friendship itself lmao. Yet many are too autistic to see that.

2. The concept of UI was introduced as early as Revival of F by Whis. Its not something that came out of nowhere as you seem to claim.

3. We have seen power boost mid-battle in Z several times in Z and even the original, like in the middle of Kid Goku vs King Piccolo and after 100% Freeza beats up SSJ Goku.

The difference between the two is that the Boo arc was a lot more subtle in its execution. It was still the end of the series, a final battle against an unbeatable opponent, yet when Goku turned the tables, Toriyama didn't have a character vocalize that Goku only got this far because of his friends and that he's only beating Boo because he has everyone's help, nor was it all accompanied by a nostalgic flashback of the series' events. You didn't need to because it was clear subtext. The theme was understated for a reason, because the audience can figure it out on their own. The closest thing we got to something being pointed out directly to the audience was Vegeta's respect speech, but even that was something inherently specific to his character arc and original; it was something unmistakably Dragon Ball and you can't confuse it for anything else. I know it sounds ridiculous, but subtlety and nuance is what sets Dragon Ball apart from its lesser successors.

The need for Toei to, like any other Shounen, verbalize something that was always very clear subtext in every fight Goku has ever gone through is asinine and, like Cipher said, shows the level of disconnect between Toriyama's and Toei's way of approaching storytelling and, in my opinion, really shows the demographic they're aiming towards. I don't think anyone here has a problem with Goku's characterization or the themes in this episode specifically, taken in isolation. The problem lies with the execution, that always has been the complaint.

[/quote]

There was nothing subtle and nuance about the Buu saga, that's just you talking out of your ass. Goku and others making speeches and flashbacks about how far they gone is the norm throughout Dragonball, especially in Z due to the filler content. Majin Vegeta's rant about is hatred for Goku during their fight is just one of many obvious examples.

At this point you have proven through your whiny post that you are just another nostalgia blind fan with double standards

[Doctor.]

This is a retarded argument, because according to you anyone who isn't a complete purity-sue is a villain, including Goku himself.

No? Goku is the protagonist. A villain is a character that opposes the protagonist and motivates him to fight back due to his evil actions. Are you even sure of what you're saying? I'm gonna take what you say with a grain of salt considering you didn't even know what an antagonist was a while back.

Narcissism is a personality trait, not a motivation. So to claim that Zamasu was motivated by narcissism already makes no logical sense. A motivation is a goal, an aim.

motivation
məʊtɪˈveɪʃ(ə)n/Submit
noun
1.
a reason or reasons for acting or behaving in a particular way.

And his aim was never actually contradicted, since "death to all mortals" was on his mind from day one and did exactly did.

I didn't say it was contradicted. Not exactly sure how you're coming to these conclusions from what I'm saying.

What subtlety and nuance lmao? Take off those nostalgia glasses because Dragonball was never subtle by any real standard. Goku made a similar speech about hurting his friends (particularly Krillin) after turning SSJ against Freeza like he did against with Jiren. Gohan did too with Cell after turning SSJ2. Yet you hypocritical nostalgia-tards refuse to see that lmao.

I keep telling you that I have no nostalgia towards the series since I watched it for the first time just a few years ago and have reread/rewatched it multiple times since but I guess that facts don't matter as long as you can throw a temper tantrum?

I will reiterate: no, Dragon Ball isn't really subtle or nuanced. I'm saying that it's subtle in comparison to Super and other modern Shounen. Goku made a speech about being a Super Saiyan which fit the circumstances of the situation and was part of his character arc. The argument can be made as to whether or not it's an out-of-character speech for Goku to make (as GafferTape made in his DB Dissection series), but that's really irrelevant to the point. In comparison to the conflict being presented in DBS #130, it's far more original and has its own identity. Gohan never made any over-the-top melodramatic speeches so I'm not exactly sure what you're on about.

Since you don't really seem to get what I mean about the conflict in #130 lacking an identity, here, I'll replace the names of the DB characters with characters from other Shounen and you can judge for yourself how unoriginal and generic this dialogue is:

[spoiler]Usopp: It's not over yet, is it? No matter what, no matter the peril, you've always sprung back! You'll definitely be able to defeat Lucci! I believe in you! So get up, Luffy!
Lucci: Impossible! You shouldn't have any more stamina!
Luffy: Lucci, it ain't over yet!
Lucci: How? How can you stand after being beaten so many times, Monkey D. Luffy?!
Luffy: Robin and Sogeking, and everyone else are trustin' me. I swear on that faith I can never back down now!

Sakura: Naruto isn't fighting only for himself. It's because he's bearing our hopes too.
Kakashi: Sakura's right. Naruto has people who help raise each other up. Not only do we all treasure each other greatly, but our existence also gives Naruto strength. I'm sure he doesn't believe, even for a moment, that he came this far by himself.
Gaara: It's all because of Naruto that we're here right now. When we first met, some of us fought or were enemies, but here we all are, trusting Naruto.
[...]
Sasuke: Who cares about friendship? Who cares about trust? To accept that would be to deny everything that I've ever been. I won't believe in such power. Such a thing is easily erased![/spoiler]

1. Why do so many idiots assume Goku got some kind of friendship boost when fighting Jiren? The franchise itself already established that when saiyans get mad for any reason, they tend to get power boost. It was Goku's anger at Jiren trying to kill his friends (he even says it himself) take give him the boost, not friendship itself lmao. Yet many are too autistic to see that.

For the record, I want you to know that I'm reporting all of your posts. I don't have time to deal with children.

As for what you're saying, I advise you to read my post again because you clearly ignored what I was saying. Rage boosts in the original series manifest themselves through new transformations (and that only happened twice), not through arbitrary power boosts mid-transformation. The only exception is Gohan, a half-breed; and this trait, prior to Super, was entirely exclusive to him. Any other time a Saiyan was overwhelmed by emotion in the original series and tried attacking the villain, they got their asses kicked: Goku vs Tao after Bora's death, Goku vs Freeza with the KKx20 Kamehameha in the anime, Trunks vs #17 after Vegeta's arm is broken, Vegeta vs Cell after Trunks dies, Vegeta vs Fat Boo during his sacrifice.

Oh, and yes, Goku did get a 'friendship boost'. Jiren knocked him down halfway through the episode, then he got up after Kuririn motivated him (with Khai saying he was faster and stronger now,) and then later U7 started a big speech about how Goku is stronger now because everyone believes in him, which led to Goku almost winning the battle before Jiren attacked his friends. That's the definition of a friendship power-up.

2. The concept of UI was introduced as early as Revival of F by Whis. Its not something that came out of nowhere as you seem to claim.

Literally did not claim this once in my entire life.

[...] but I'm talking specifically about the power-up Goku received mid-fight after Kuririn motivated him, not the transformation itself

3. We have seen power boost mid-battle in Z several times in Z and even the original, like in the middle of Kid Goku vs King Piccolo and after 100% Freeza beats up SSJ Goku.

I don't remember any power boost in the middle of Goku vs Piccolo Daimao. Please feel free to post a page and prove me wrong, however.

As for Freeza, you're clearly gasping at straws. Comparing a character using his full power to characters getting stronger arbitrarily from nowhere after their full power has been reached is ridiculous.

Goku and others making speeches and flashbacks about how far they gone is the norm throughout Dragonball, especially in Z due to the filler content. Majin Vegeta's rant about is hatred for Goku during their fight is just one of many obvious examples.

You keep saying I'm "talking out of my ass" and not providing examples (which I am) while you're making generalized statements without backing them up and completely missing the point of the examples you provide by making a false equivalency with the way Super is written. The point is that Majin Vegeta's conflict is unique to Dragon Ball and has its own identity. It's not something that you can pluck out of the scene and apply it to literally every other Shounen ever. That's what I mean when I say it's far more nuanced and subtle than #130. Vocalizing the fact that Goku cares about his friends is completely dissonant with the way the original series was written, which is why you are very hard-pressed right now to find an example of an actual friendship speech/power-up in the original series.

[kn83]

For the record, I want you to know that I'm reporting all of your posts. I don't have time to deal with children.

As for what you're saying, I advise you to read my post again because you clearly ignored what I was saying. Rage boosts in the original series manifest themselves through new transformations (and that only happened twice), not through arbitrary power boosts mid-transformation. The only exception is Gohan, a half-breed; and this trait, prior to Super, was entirely exclusive to him. Any other time a Saiyan was overwhelmed by emotion in the original series and tried attacking the villain, they got their asses kicked: Goku vs Tao after Bora's death, Goku vs Freeza with the KKx20 Kamehameha in the anime, Trunks vs #17 after Vegeta's arm is broken, Vegeta vs Cell after Trunks dies, Vegeta vs Fat Boo during his sacrifice.

None of those cases involved any rage boost in the first place. False analogy. Goky wasn't even enraged when he used KKx20 on Freeza, neither was Majin Vegeta against Fat Buu to start with. You are forgetting the rage boost SSJ Goku got against 100% Freeza which turned the tide of the fight and rage boost kid Goku got which allowed him to beat King Piccolo.

Oh, and yes, Goku did get a 'friendship boost'. Jiren knocked him down halfway through the episode, then he got up after Kuririn motivated him (with Khai saying he was faster and stronger now,) and then later U7 started a big speech about how Goku is stronger now because everyone believes in him, which led to Goku almost winning the battle before Jiren attacked his friends. That's the definition of a friendship power-up.

Goku said it himself that if you hurt my friends that makes him mad. It was only in the moment when Jiren tries killing Goku's group with the blast is when he gets the power boost. So no, it was clearly not a friendship boost. It was an anger boost, consistent with the rest of the franchise. The whole U7 team believed in each other yet nobody ever got a power boost because of that. Its clear you just being whiny at this point.

Literally did not claim this once in my entire life.

Earlier you whined about Goku getting UI being completely arbitary, even though it wasn't.

I don't remember any power boost in the middle of Goku vs Piccolo Daimao. Please feel free to post a page and prove me wrong, however.

As for Freeza, you're clearly gasping at straws. Comparing a character using his full power to characters getting stronger arbitrarily from nowhere after their full power has been reached is ridiculous.

Kid Goku was at a disadvantage against full powered King Piccolo. Then while he is on the ground, kid Goku starts to think about Krillin's death, gets mad then pulls out the super monkey fist that kills King Piccolo.

After Freeza goes 100%, he starts winning against SSJ Goku and puts him in the dirt. Later, after SSJ Goku gets up, makes a speech about him killing Krillin, gets angry, powers up and starts winning against Freeza

You keep saying I'm "talking out of my ass" and not providing examples (which I am) while you're making generalized statements without backing them up and completely missing the point of the examples you provide by making a false equivalency with the way Super is written. The point is that Majin Vegeta's conflict is unique to Dragon Ball and has its own identity. It's not something that you can pluck out of the scene and apply it to literally every other Shounen ever. That's what I mean when I say it's far more nuanced and subtle than #130. Vocalizing the fact that Goku cares about his friends is completely dissonant with the way the original series was written, which is why you are very hard-pressed right now to find an example of an actual friendship speech/power-up in the original series.

What the hell is so nuance about Majin Vegeta's conflict when he is literally telling you everything he's thinking and feeling in the middle of it, especially in the anime version with the filler flashbacks. Goku vocalized his hatred of Freeza for killing Krillin, so I don't see how its objectively different.

How cowardly of you to report someone just because you can't refute them pathetic.

[Doctor.]

None of those cases involved any rage boost in the first place. False analogy. Goky wasn't even enraged when he used KKx20 on Freeza, neither was Majin Vegeta against Fat Buu to start with. You are forgetting the rage boost SSJ Goku got against 100% Freeza which turned the tide of the fight and rage boost kid Goku got which allowed him to beat King Piccolo.

The entire point is that those moments didn't involve rage boosts BECAUSE the original series isn't stupid enough to give characters rage boosts.

Goku didn't get a rage boost against Freeza, he was winning already before he got mad at Freeza's words.

Goku said it himself that if you hurt my friends that makes him mad. It was only in the moment when Jiren tries killing Goku's group with the blast is when he gets the power boost. So no, it was clearly not a friendship boost. It was an anger boost, consistent with the rest of the franchise. The whole U7 team believed in each other yet nobody ever got a power boost because of that. Its clear you just being whiny at this point.

And you're just purposefully ignoring what happened in the episode. Halfway point, Jiren blasts Goku, Goku's on the ground, Kuririn motivates Goku to get up, Goku gets up with Jiren dumbfounded at how he can still stand, Goku attacks Jiren, Khai says Goku is faster and stronger now, Piccolo proceeds to explain that it's because he's fighting on behalf of everyone and everyone believes in him. Cue friendship speech.

It was a friendship boost and I don't understand why you're trying so hard to refute it.

Earlier you whined about Goku getting UI being completely arbitary, even though it wasn't.

No, what I claimed was that the power boost he got due to emotion WHILST in UI was completely arbitrary. Please do read what I'm saying more carefully.

Kid Goku was at a disadvantage against full powered King Piccolo. Then while he is on the ground, kid Goku starts to think about Krillin's death, gets mad then pulls out the super monkey fist that kills King Piccolo.

After Freeza goes 100%, he starts winning against SSJ Goku and puts him in the dirt. Later, after SSJ Goku gets up, makes a speech about him killing Krillin, gets angry, powers up and starts winning against Freeza

That's anime filler.

And Freeza wasn't winning. Goku was getting most of the shots in. At most you could say they were even. And it wasn't a speech. Freeza says he killed Kuririn and Goku gets mad, that's it, he made no speech. Right after that, it cuts to Kaio talking to the Grand Elder, so you can't even claim that Goku's rage correlates to his apparent better performance later in the fight. Oh, and the very NEXT hit we see from either Goku or Freeza after Goku's "speech" is Freeza elbowing Goku in the face, so it's very clear Goku didn't get any kind of "boost".

You seem very desperate to throw the original series under the bus to defend the abhorrent writing in Super. I'm not exactly sure how you're even here if you hate the original series this much.

What the hell is so nuance about Majin Vegeta's conflict when he is literally telling you everything he's thinking and feeling in the middle of it, especially in the anime version with the filler flashbacks. Goku vocalized his hatred of Freeza for killing Krillin, so I don't see how its objectively different.

How cowardly of you to report someone just because you can't refute them pathetic.

Can you please read what I'm saying?

The point is that Majin Vegeta's conflict is unique to Dragon Ball and has its own identity. It's not something that you can pluck out of the scene and apply it to literally every other Shounen ever. That's what I mean when I say it's far more nuanced and subtle than #130. Vocalizing the fact that Goku cares about his friends is completely dissonant with the way the original series was written, which is why you are very hard-pressed right now to find an example of an actual friendship speech/power-up in the original series.

I don't have much of a problem with Goku's rage scene in #130. I have a problem with the friendship speeches that preceded it (which were entirely different, much more melodramatic and kitsch than Goku simply saying he won't forgive Jiren for what he did), the fact that he got a rage boost from Jiren attacking his friends and the fact that him being overwhelmed by emotion contradicts the concept of UI established just in the episode prior.

I'm not being cowardly. I'm still addressing your "points." I'm just reporting you for breaking the rules.

[Exline]

I'm not being cowardly. I'm still addressing your "points." I'm just reporting you for breaking the rules.

I feel you're wasting your time on somebody who has to resort to insults to try and get their point across.

Your argument seems pretty valid, however, I didn't feel any of that was occuring in Episode 130. Maybe I've forgotten due to how poor the writing seemed in that Episode overall. In 129 it was clear because it was what triggered Goku to turn UI again. It felt so cliche and Dragon Ball usually refrains from that. If anything it parodies moments like that.

It's weird how 129 has mediocre animation but good storytelling, but 130 has great animation, but very poor writing overall.