"Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Discussion specifically regarding the "Dragon Ball Super" TV series premiering July 2015 in Japan, including individual threads for each episode.

Moderators: General Help, Kanzenshuu Staff

User avatar
Neo-Makaiōshin
I Live Here
Posts: 2332
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 8:31 pm
Location: Argentina
Contact:

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Neo-Makaiōshin » Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:08 pm

TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:01 pmI really really really don’t get this purist viewpoint. Toriyama is involved and has final say-so over the product. Nothing goes out without him looking at it.

If Toriyama approves it then, he is 100000000% responsible for it. It’s his to own if he approves it enough to put his stamp of approval and his name on it. If anything it would be more his fault than anyone else’s for not caring enough about the story/franchise to course correct if he felt there was a problem. Him not changing it and having final approval means it’s totally up to him. If he told they to stop right now because he doesn’t like the quality of the product, they would have to.
What is not in the text (manga) is not in the text, is that simple.
Dragon Ball was always a kid series and fans should stop being in denial.

User avatar
FortuneSSJ
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 5812
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by FortuneSSJ » Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:19 pm

Luso Saiyan wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:35 am
FortuneSSJ wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:22 pm -About chapter 77 drafts-

Something I always liked about Toyotaro is that unlike Toriyama he doesn't forget that characters exist and he's well aware of the anime-only stuff. In the drafts we see the Freeza's soldiers that killed Bardock's partners in the TV Special and wouldn't be surprised if Bardock's partners show up too. If it was Toriyama?! Not a chance he would bother with that. He couldn't even keep the iconic Bardock design...
Why would Toriyama bother with Bardock's team that was designed and developed for the TV special?
He should since the final drafts were all done by him. There's no reason to change Bardock's partners for new ones. Talkingabout this guy who looks more like an earthling than a saiyan.

Luso Saiyan wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:35 amAnd how is giving Bardock a new armor a sign of not bothering with something? If anything, it's the other way around. He bothered himself enough to give him a newly designed armor.
If ain't broke, don't fix it. Consistency is appreciated. Bardock's older design is even used in the original manga. Toriyama could still tell DB Minus story without change his design 20+ years later. His older design is also used in Episode of Bardock manga by Naho Ooishi which was approved by Toriyama and his partners aren't forgotten either.
Luso Saiyan wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:35 am And by the looks of it, Toyotaro kept the new armor design.
Can't tell for sure based on drafts, but since Toriyama is still supervising it would be weird for Toyotaro to use the older design. Although he still uses it for some projects.

That's why in the manga kid Trunks also has blue hair (which logically changes base Gotenks hair color too by the way...) and C18/Marron have silver hair. He's following the new colors by Toriyama. No idea how green Pilaf still didn't become a thing in the manga though. In the end all these designs changes are unecessary because we stop having consistency and they don't change anything about the plot. They have been done on a whim by someone who doesn't care enough. And that's the same lack of care that will keep give us new retcons.
A world without Dragon Ball is just meh.

pepd
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2020 6:52 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by pepd » Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:18 pm

FortuneSSJ wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:19 pm
Luso Saiyan wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:35 am Why would Toriyama bother with Bardock's team that was designed and developed for the TV special?
He should since the final drafts were all done by him. There's no reason to change Bardock's partners for new ones. Talkingabout this guy who looks more like an earthling than a saiyan.
Toriyama made that design (or design modification, really) and many other designs for non-canon product, not for his story/DB.
Luso Saiyan wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:35 amAnd how is giving Bardock a new armor a sign of not bothering with something? If anything, it's the other way around. He bothered himself enough to give him a newly designed armor.
If ain't broke, don't fix it. Consistency is appreciated. Bardock's older design even appears in the original manga. Toriyama could still tell DB Minus story without change his design 20+ years later.
It wasn't broken, but it wasn't something he made for his story. He did incorporated Burdack's existence and appearance, but it was still a borrowing from an external product. In Minus he bothered to make a design and story for his story.

User avatar
TheMikado
I Live Here
Posts: 4982
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:28 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by TheMikado » Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:21 pm

Neo-Makaiōshin wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:08 pm
TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:01 pmI really really really don’t get this purist viewpoint. Toriyama is involved and has final say-so over the product. Nothing goes out without him looking at it.

If Toriyama approves it then, he is 100000000% responsible for it. It’s his to own if he approves it enough to put his stamp of approval and his name on it. If anything it would be more his fault than anyone else’s for not caring enough about the story/franchise to course correct if he felt there was a problem. Him not changing it and having final approval means it’s totally up to him. If he told they to stop right now because he doesn’t like the quality of the product, they would have to.
What is not in the text (manga) is not in the text, is that simple.
Just so we are all on the same page.. we are talking about just a manga right and not like the Bible or something?

The story is whatever the creator says it is and this is what the creator says it is. It’s really that simple.

User avatar
Grimlock
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 8242
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Cybertron.

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Grimlock » Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:44 pm

TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:01 pmI really really really don’t get this purist viewpoint. Toriyama is involved and has final say-so over the product. Nothing goes out without him looking at it.
There's nothing "purist" here, though. I'm not talking about approval, I'm talking about who had the idea to use Bardock for this saga. Sure, if Toriyama had said "no", then Toyotaro wouldn't be using Bardock, but that's not the point, the point is that the idea to use Bardock most certainly came from Toyotaro.

If it wasn't for Toyotaro, we wouldn't have seen Vegetto and Super Saiyan God Vegeta in Future Trunks saga. So Bardock being his idea too is a completely fair assumption to make.
Goodbye friend. You are weak, so you must be destroyed!

~ War of the Dinobots ~

User avatar
Neo-Makaiōshin
I Live Here
Posts: 2332
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 8:31 pm
Location: Argentina
Contact:

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Neo-Makaiōshin » Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:54 pm

TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:21 pmJust so we are all on the same page.. we are talking about just a manga right and not like the Bible or something?

The story is whatever the creator says it is and this is what the creator says it is. It’s really that simple.
Yes we're still talking about manga, if something hasn't appear in the text (manga in this case) you can't consider it part of the text, that's basic literature critique. For example: Toriyama can say that Gero modeled Android 16 on his deceased son image but if that data was not explicitely present in the manga then you can't make that reading as part of the story in the manga.
Dragon Ball was always a kid series and fans should stop being in denial.

User avatar
TheMikado
I Live Here
Posts: 4982
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:28 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by TheMikado » Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:19 pm

Neo-Makaiōshin wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:54 pm
TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:21 pmJust so we are all on the same page.. we are talking about just a manga right and not like the Bible or something?

The story is whatever the creator says it is and this is what the creator says it is. It’s really that simple.
Yes we're still talking about manga, if something hasn't appear in the text (manga in this case) you can't consider it part of the text, that's basic literature critique. For example: Toriyama can say that Gero modeled Android 16 on his deceased son image but if that data was not explicitely present in the manga then you can't make that reading as part of the story in the manga.
That’s not basic literature critique, it sounds like you’re attempting to apply “Death of the Author” and separate the works from the creator. You can do this, but that not necessarily good practice for any serious analysis and is predominately a thought exercise rather than a serious method of critique.

User avatar
TheMikado
I Live Here
Posts: 4982
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:28 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by TheMikado » Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:26 pm

Grimlock wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:44 pm
TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:01 pmI really really really don’t get this purist viewpoint. Toriyama is involved and has final say-so over the product. Nothing goes out without him looking at it.
There's nothing "purist" here, though. I'm not talking about approval, I'm talking about who had the idea to use Bardock for this saga. Sure, if Toriyama had said "no", then Toyotaro wouldn't be using Bardock, but that's not the point, the point is that the idea to use Bardock most certainly came from Toyotaro.

If it wasn't for Toyotaro, we wouldn't have seen Vegetto and Super Saiyan God Vegeta in Future Trunks saga. So Bardock being his idea too is a completely fair assumption to make.
I mean I don’t think it’s inherently logical to assume that was Toyotaro’s idea. It feels more like something Toriyama has consistently been pulling in recent years where everyone and everything is connected back to a singular story like Beerus, Frieza, and the Saiyans.

In my opinion it’s more consistent with modern Toriyama where for some reason he links everything back together to his original story.

User avatar
Neo-Makaiōshin
I Live Here
Posts: 2332
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 8:31 pm
Location: Argentina
Contact:

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Neo-Makaiōshin » Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:32 pm

TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:19 pmThat’s not basic literature critique, it sounds like you’re attempting to apply “Death of the Author” and separate the works from the creator. You can do this, but that not necessarily good practice for any serious analysis and is predominately a thought exercise rather than a serious method of critique.
This is not "Death of the Author", if the author didn't write something in their work then you can't say that thing exist in the work itself. If Toriyama never drew Barduck's teamates in the manga you can't say they exist, and are same teamates as the TV special, in the manga. What's so hard about that?
Dragon Ball was always a kid series and fans should stop being in denial.

User avatar
OLKv3
I'm, pretty, cozy, here...
Posts: 1820
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 12:39 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by OLKv3 » Fri Oct 15, 2021 2:38 am

Grimlock wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 4:15 pm
TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:57 amHow is this not up to Toriyama?
Because if Toriyama wanted to use Bardock, he would have done already. Instead, even though he liked the TV Special, all he did was dedicate two mere panels for him and that's it. Ever since that, Bardock's appearances is all thanks to other entities (possibly even in Dragon Ball Online). There is that Dragon Ball Minus crap, but eh... Given the circumstances, I'm still surprised that he even remembered to use the character.

Anyway, pretty sure Bardock's involvement here is thanks to Toyotaro. But I'll be once again surprised if an interview pops up saying otherwise.
"He'd never use Bardock. The times he did use Bardock don't count!"

User avatar
Luso Saiyan
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1478
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 10:33 am
Location: Portugal

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Luso Saiyan » Fri Oct 15, 2021 5:16 am

FortuneSSJ wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:19 pmHe should since the final drafts were all done by him.
So? Those characters were done for the TV special. He redesigned them to make them more closer to how he envisioned Saiyans to look like. There's no artistic obligation to make them part of his story.
FortuneSSJ wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:19 pmThere's no reason to change Bardock's partners for new ones. Talkingabout this guy who looks more like an earthling than a saiyan.
You misunderstand. As far as Toriyama is concerned, he never established that Bardock had any partners for him to be changing anything. He redesigned characters that were created for a TV special, which is not his story. Dragon Ball Minus is the first time he explored who Bardock worked with (even if it was just for on that single instance).
FortuneSSJ wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:19 pmIf ain't broke, don't fix it.
It's not a fix. It's not something broken either. It's designing the character the way he wants to in a time that he never explored before.
FortuneSSJ wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:19 pmConsistency is appreciated. Bardock's older design is even used in the original manga.
Yes, for his last moments. Something that wasn't changed since Minus is set months apart from that moment.
FortuneSSJ wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:19 pmToriyama could still tell DB Minus story without change his design 20+ years later.
Or he could design Bardock with a set of armor that he wants to since it doesn't contradict anything one way or the other, which is what happened. Why should Toriyama restrain himself artistically for no logical reason whatsoever?
Grimlock wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:44 pmThere's nothing "purist" here, though. I'm not talking about approval, I'm talking about who had the idea to use Bardock for this saga. Sure, if Toriyama had said "no", then Toyotaro wouldn't be using Bardock, but that's not the point, the point is that the idea to use Bardock most certainly came from Toyotaro.
I agree. No arguments there.

Charlie's Shadow
Newbie
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2021 12:52 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Charlie's Shadow » Fri Oct 15, 2021 11:05 am

TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:19 pm
Neo-Makaiōshin wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:54 pm
TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:21 pmJust so we are all on the same page.. we are talking about just a manga right and not like the Bible or something?

The story is whatever the creator says it is and this is what the creator says it is. It’s really that simple.
Yes we're still talking about manga, if something hasn't appear in the text (manga in this case) you can't consider it part of the text, that's basic literature critique. For example: Toriyama can say that Gero modeled Android 16 on his deceased son image but if that data was not explicitely present in the manga then you can't make that reading as part of the story in the manga.
That’s not basic literature critique, it sounds like you’re attempting to apply “Death of the Author” and separate the works from the creator. You can do this, but that not necessarily good practice for any serious analysis and is predominately a thought exercise rather than a serious method of critique.
What's this? Someone mentioning "Death of the Author" without acting as if it was a law of nature, and instead acknowledging that it's use is optional and that there are other theories about literature critique? Now this is new, and very refreshing.

Thank your for doing that. It pisses me off when someone writes some illogical forced interpretation of someone else's work, and just says "but death of the author bruh".

User avatar
UpFromTheSkies
I Live Here
Posts: 2212
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 8:05 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by UpFromTheSkies » Fri Oct 15, 2021 11:32 am

Whenever you get upset about Dragon Ball, just take a deep breath and remind yourself it's a kids comic. Try to enjoy it and not take it so seriously. 😊

User avatar
Grimlock
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 8242
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Cybertron.

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Grimlock » Fri Oct 15, 2021 1:31 pm

TheMikado wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:26 pmI mean I don’t think it’s inherently logical to assume that was Toyotaro’s idea. It feels more like something Toriyama has consistently been pulling in recent years where everyone and everything is connected back to a singular story like Beerus, Frieza, and the Saiyans.

In my opinion it’s more consistent with modern Toriyama where for some reason he links everything back together to his original story.
Maybe. But then again, we do know that it was Toyotaro's idea to use Saiyans in this saga too.

However, I do have to correct myself, I said "there's nothing purist here", but what the person you're talking to is saying is an obvious and clear example of a purist viewpoint, where if something isn't in the manga then it simply "doesn't exist". I thought we were beyond that at this point and age, especially when we have countless of examples showing the exact opposite of that (and no rules has ever been established about this).
OLKv3 wrote: Fri Oct 15, 2021 2:38 am"He'd never use Bardock. The times he did use Bardock don't count!"
"I mean, I did understand what you said. I know you didn't say "it doesn't count", you just said you were surprised. I know we don't have confirmation that Bardock's appearance in Dragon Ball Online was an idea by Toriyama. I know that Bardock OVA is Heroes/Ooishi Naho's idea. I know Bardock's appearance in Dragon Ball Heroes stories is Dimps' idea. And I know Bardock's appearance in Movie 1 is probably the director's idea.

I know all that, but I'll still submit this very insightful and awesome post that adds to what you're saying because... because uh... Be'cuz!1!11!1!1".
Goodbye friend. You are weak, so you must be destroyed!

~ War of the Dinobots ~

User avatar
Jack Bz
Regular
Posts: 534
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 10:44 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Jack Bz » Fri Oct 15, 2021 2:00 pm

After the recent interview where Toyotaro said he feels like he isn't in the position to do anything crazy with the lore (new namekian origins, a new set of dragon balls), something as big as expanding on Bardock's backstory seems like something Toriyama would want to add after getting a story about someone who wants revenge against the saiyans.

Toyotaro may have come up with Granolah and the idea of someone wanting revenge against the saiyans as a story, but the Heetas didn't even exist as characters before he gave the idea to Toriyama who drastically fleshed it out.

But it's ultimately unknowable whose idea was what unless we get more interviews.

User avatar
Shintoki
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 7:32 am

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Shintoki » Fri Oct 15, 2021 8:46 pm

Luso Saiyan wrote: Thu Oct 14, 2021 11:35 am
FortuneSSJ wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:22 pm -About chapter 77 drafts-

Something I always liked about Toyotaro is that unlike Toriyama he doesn't forget that characters exist and he's well aware of the anime-only stuff. In the drafts we see the Freeza's soldiers that killed Bardock's partners in the TV Special and wouldn't be surprised if Bardock's partners show up too. If it was Toriyama?! Not a chance he would bother with that. He couldn't even keep the iconic Bardock design...
Why would Toriyama bother with Bardock's team that was designed and developed for the TV special? And how is giving Bardock a new armor a sign of not bothering with something? If anything, it's the other way around. He bothered himself enough to give him a newly designed armor.

And by the looks of it, Toyotaro kept the new armor design.
you guys acting as if toriyama sensei forgetting characters is a surprise, lmao. ahem, launch, ahem :P

it's old news by now that bardock origin story will be similar but different, now whether you agree with the armor/bandana change breaking continuity with the original manga or not, that's a whole different topic that's better off being in its own thread. :thumbup:
PurestEvil wrote: Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:21 pm You could also, y'know, become a real buddhist
DragonBallFoodie wrote: Sun Oct 10, 2021 7:18 am Isn't this technically worshipping the Monkey King?

User avatar
DiscountDabi
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 497
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 2:10 pm
Contact:

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by DiscountDabi » Sat Oct 16, 2021 12:09 am

UpFromTheSkies wrote: Fri Oct 15, 2021 11:32 am Whenever you get upset about Dragon Ball, just take a deep breath and remind yourself it's a kids comic. Try to enjoy it and not take it so seriously. 😊
Dragon Ball Fans Take Dragon Ball More Seriously than everyone involved in Dragon Ball Combined

User avatar
Trouser
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 9:02 am
Location: Capsule Corp.

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by Trouser » Sat Oct 16, 2021 5:03 am

Jack Bz wrote: Fri Oct 15, 2021 2:00 pm But it's ultimately unknowable whose idea was what unless we get more interviews.
It's probably better for them to share as less information as they can. Let's say that Toyotarou does everything and Toriyama is just mentioned to calm Canon Defenders and the truth goes out... People would shit on DBS even more.
It's not like that, probably. But with Toriyama's name on it, they can sell the biggest crap because "hur dur it's Toriyama!1!1!" and we know how non-Toriyama's stories are "welcomed" among the (majority of) fandom.

The less we know, the better for them.
"If it means having to live under your control, I'd rather be dead!" - Trunks
English is not my first language, if I've made a mistake, please, feel free to correct me. It will help, thanks.

User avatar
TheMikado
I Live Here
Posts: 4982
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:28 pm

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by TheMikado » Sat Oct 16, 2021 9:01 am

I know I kinda kicked off the argument of Toyotarou vs Toriyama, but my criticism was actually bigger than that so I’ll just say it flat out:

My opinion is that Toriyama has hit a creative slump with his Dragonball series. If he had more stories to tell he would write them himself. It’s unfair to just attribute any poor piece of story writing to everyone else and still hold Toriyama above criticism.

Tying everyone and everything in the DB universe to a single 50 year-ish span of time is really terrible world-building. Especially when in-universe there are discussions of events literally millions of years in the past. Even the time travel shenanigans only extended within that 50 year block.

Dragonball stories have been running for 37 years now and we are still getting Goku origin stories. In my opinion what made Dragonball special was the story of Goku within the wider DB universe. You were adventuring and discovering something new with stories that were independent of the main character. Goku just happened to come along at the right time/place.

That whole concept has been lost. Everything that happens now is because of Goku, exists because of Goku, and must be saved by Goku. Instead of Goku’s story being part of the much larger Dragonball universe, Goku’s story IS the Dragonball universe. And my honest, raw opinion is that I flat out don’t like that direction and it retroactively cheapens the adventure, meaning, and significance of the original series. And back to my main point, trying to place the blame of all of that on anyone but Toriyama isn’t fair.
Last edited by TheMikado on Sat Oct 16, 2021 10:21 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
emperior
I Live Here
Posts: 4322
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2015 1:52 pm
Location: Dragon World
Contact:

Re: "Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

Post by emperior » Sat Oct 16, 2021 10:17 am

Toriyama had the idea of having the dragon balls. Hence, there had to be a Namekian on Cereal. And he designed Monaito himself, so it surely was an addition he all he came up with.

Without Monaito, we get no Bardock. Easy as that, in my opinion. Therefore, it’s highly probable that it was Toriyama’s idea to include Bardock. He probably saw the occasion, with the involvement of Saiyans, to expand on his Bardock characterisation.

Just because Toyotaro is a fan of Bardock, it doesn’t necessarily mean that he pushed for him to be involved once again.
悟 “Vincit qui se vincit”

What I consider canonical

Post Reply