Which did it better, GT or Super?

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

Moderators: Kanzenshuu Staff, General Help

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Cetra » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:40 pm

Lord Frieza wrote:I generally prefer Super over GT, to the point that when I was having a clear out I dumped my Green Bricks in the throw out pile.
Instead of gifting it or selling it?
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

User avatar
Lord Frieza
I Live Here
Posts: 3698
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 2:36 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Lord Frieza » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:45 pm

Cetra wrote:
Lord Frieza wrote:I generally prefer Super over GT, to the point that when I was having a clear out I dumped my Green Bricks in the throw out pile.
Instead of gifting it or selling it?
I know a group that takes all kinds of stuff in bulk. You just have th scan the bare code and they give you an estimated price that can change baised the items conditions. I sat and scanned through my DVD pile and got a pretty good deal for all the crap I'd accumulated over the years.

I needed space for my Super DVDs anway.

User avatar
SingleFringe&Sparks
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:55 pm
Location: Mt. Paozu/East District

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by SingleFringe&Sparks » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:58 pm

Jord wrote:Except...GT DID kill of characters and didn't resurrect them and big ones too namely Majin Boo and Piccolo. I thought both were very well done. I commend GT for doing that. I actually think permadeath would be an interesting thing to add to a new series. Z had a bloated cast to begin with and I appreciate how they had some characters retire from fighting later on like Yamcha for example. However, now (meaning the end of Super we have a HUGE cast of fighters and they will only grow in numbers.
Super didn't seem like it wanted to let anyone die at all. Even for the sake of an arc. A character dying in Super is no different from them being off-screen for a while which is horrible. Piccolo being wished back off screen in ROF arc, and 17 just popping up out of no where ever he lead everyone to think he vanished in-universe to dying to the audience. Nope he's back. Just under some rocks. No characters were harmed in the making of this tournament. Its exactly how the reset ending of Super came off as well. In Z characters died for a sacrifice or strategic move which GT did as well. Or it could be the fact that its seen as extremely easy for characters to just come back now, while in Z, characters dying required some time in otherworld, a consideration of their privileges in it, and a scramble to get people back. Super has none of this. Thats not to say GT did, though as GT had some pretty sloppy character usage, but the reasoning for Piccolo's sacrifice was used to end his character growth (considering he does next to nothing in Super entirely). Maybe the issue is that there isn't a story to connect death to anymore either. Death is a convenience because its the one plot device that the series doesn't use. Cheerleading and Friendship took over which GT thankfully never did (no where to the degree Super did it).
Zephyr wrote:The fandom's collective fetishizing of "moments" is also ridiculous to me. No, not everyone needs a fucking "shine" moment. If that's all you want, then all you want is fanservice, rather than an actual coherent story. And of course those aren't mutually exclusive; you could have a coherent story with "shine" moments! But if a story is perfectly coherent (and I'm really not seeing any compelling arguments that this one is anything but, despite constantly recurring, really poorly reasoned, attempts to argue otherwise), and you're bemoaning the lack of "shine" moments as a reason for the story's poor quality, then you're letting your thirst for "shine" moments obfuscate your ability to detect basic storytelling when it's right in front of you.

User avatar
Avenant
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 10:55 am
Location: The Room of Spirit and Time
Contact:

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Avenant » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:08 pm

Timetraveller wrote: Storytelling's something that most people would agree DBS executed poorly. For most of the tournament, Jiren stands still with his arms folded not doing or saying anything (although this probably had to do with Toriyama not making it clear what Jiren's character was supposed to be). It's not until there are 3 minutes left in the tournament that we finally learn something about him through a rushed generic "I lost my parents and friends" flashback. By comparison, Baby's motivations make sense and can be sympathized with (I won't spoil what it is just in case you haven't watched GT at all or recently). He's not just evil for the sake of being evil like most other villains and the saiyans aren't the usual good guys. Frieza's arc was incredible? Ya mean the Resurrection of F arc with all the animation issues and the weak plot? Toyotaro didn't even feel the need to cover it in the manga and I don't think anyone faulted him for it. And Zamasu's motivations were genuinely refreshing but his story arc was also a little rushed. The god vs mortals trope is a really common one that's been done much better. Another criticism is that Dragonball Super had 2 tournament arcs, which is Toei's method of introducing many fighters and showing many fights without needing to tell an actual story. It's almost non-stop action for 40 episodes with very little plot progression and a lot of fan service. I wouldn't have minded it if the tournaments led to a bigger story like in the Buu saga. That would've made the arc a little less unpredictable. I wish we had more villains/antagonists like Zamasu instead of them bringing back Frieza every other arc or silent strong characters like Hit or Jiren.

Omega Shenron was a great villain imo. With the shadow dragons, Toei finally introduced consequences to abusing the Dragonballs. The execution of the other shadow dragons could've been better but a few of the dragons like Nuova and Omega Shenron were done really well. With Nuova, it was refreshing to see a villain with a strong sense of honor and integrity (this clearly had something to do with him tying in with the 4-star ball). He's also the first villain to go gold.
I have noticed that many people seem to believe the story in Super was executed poorly, but I wholeheartedly disagree. Everyone has their reasons, but from my perspective it was engaging and exciting every week and I enjoyed the ride. Baby's plot in GT was a golden nugget among a pile of coal for me, but GT as a whole was such an exhausting slog that I abhorred having to force myself through all 64 episodes. The highs of GT weren't worth the lows. As for Frieza's Super arc, I was not referring to Resurrection F as that was filler that shouldn't have been adapted from the movie, which did it much better. I was referring to his arc in the ToP. I agree that Zamasu was rushed, but Toyotaro's rendition was beautifully executed and more than made up for any slights the Anime had. The criticism Super has received is relative and in some instances deserved, but for me the negative aspects are greatly outshone by the highs of the series. Enough so that I am planning on rewatching it entirely in the English dub. I personally don't believe that Super is over and have a feeling it will return by next year after a brief hiatus for the movie. As for Omega Shenron, it pains me, but I felt that the dragons saga of GT was an incredible concept with a disastrous execution. GT's complete misunderstanding of Toriyama's characters is the biggest reason it fails overall. Super is more than enough to wipe away the stain of GT, at least for me.
"Tell me, is it slavery if you get what you want?"

User avatar
Avenant
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2017 10:55 am
Location: The Room of Spirit and Time
Contact:

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Avenant » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:17 pm

Cetra wrote:
Avenant wrote:Super blows GT out of the water in leaps and bounds. The storytelling in Super is overall so much better than GT, and you can take that to the bank.

Jiren is such a different foe for DragonBall and it's quite refreshing in my opinion. He's not an evil villain yet he's the most powerful opponent that had to be defeated. That's very fresh and I can't wait to see how they top it moving forward. Also, Zamasu's motivations were genuinely refreshing as they offered a much more tragic and realistic villain, so to speak. I truly hope we didn't see the last of him, though that may be wishful thinking. Plus, Frieza's arc was incredible! And despite fan worries, he stayed very consistent with his character. I can't wait to see what they do with him as well!

Overall, I've been consistently happy with Super and can't wait for the movie and whatever else comes next!
I read of people calling things in Dragon Ball "fresh" and "refreshing" so often that they have not just become inflationary in their meaning but I really hate the word "fresh" now. I would really like to know why apparently everything in Dragon Ball is fresh. For Jiren I at least can somewhat see that but the word(s) keep(s) getting so overused.
The concept of WHAT Jiren is, is more important here than WHO Jiren is. I agree that his backstory was unoriginal, but the concept of his character and plot placement is brand new to the franchise. As for the use of "fresh," while I cannot speak for others, the wording is appropriate in the context of the new elements Super introduced into the franchise. Wording aside, I hardly alluded to everything in Super being "fresh." There are plenty of tried-and-true concepts abound in Super, but to deny the new elements it introduced would take a conscious effort to willingly disparage the series.
"Tell me, is it slavery if you get what you want?"

User avatar
Saturnine
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:45 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Saturnine » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:19 pm

Cetra wrote: Because this is such an incredibly deal breaker, right. I have seen people all over the forum and the rest of the internet having such a lack of understanding when it comes to basic logic that such inconsistencies is the last thing they should care about. And if that is some criteria for you to hate on a show then you are really looking for it.
And I don't think you should presume to dictate what people are or are not allowed to like or dislike about a show :wink:

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Cetra » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:22 pm

Saturnine wrote:
Cetra wrote: Because this is such an incredibly deal breaker, right. I have seen people all over the forum and the rest of the internet having such a lack of understanding when it comes to basic logic that such inconsistencies is the last thing they should care about. And if that is some criteria for you to hate on a show then you are really looking for it.
And I don't think you should presume to dictate what people are or are not allowed to like or dislike about a show :wink:
And that coming from the guy who comes up with under the radar attacks just so he barely breaks the rules and still can say that his conversation partners are inferior to him just that under his posts a highly paraphrased "GT suxx you just are easier to impress than me (!) because you cannot look at it as much as I can and cannot analyze it as much as I can" is hidden. Apparently your analysing skills are not all that great as you still have to rely on misinterpreting and thus come to the conclusion "this guy dictates this and that" when that is not even the message. Good job.

Do me a favor. If you want to be like other guys, walk away. Nothing you do or say is new to me. As will your following potential posts not be anything new to me.
Last edited by Cetra on Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

User avatar
Saturnine
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:45 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Saturnine » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:25 pm

Cetra wrote:
Saturnine wrote:
Cetra wrote: Because this is such an incredibly deal breaker, right. I have seen people all over the forum and the rest of the internet having such a lack of understanding when it comes to basic logic that such inconsistencies is the last thing they should care about. And if that is some criteria for you to hate on a show then you are really looking for it.
And I don't think you should presume to dictate what people are or are not allowed to like or dislike about a show :wink:
And that coming from the guy who comes up with under the radar attacks just so he barely breaks the rules and still can say that his conversation partners are inferior to him just that under his posts a highly paraphrased "GT suxx you just are easier to impress than me (!) because you cannot look at it as much as I can and cannot analyze it as much as I can" is hidden.

Do me a favor. If you want to be like other guys, walk away. Nothing you do or say is new to me. As will your following potential posts not be anything new to me.
You're the one who sent me a PM but then deleted it because you didn't like what I had to say about GT. And yet you didn't bother to reply to the longest post I made in this thread explaining precisely while I think the ending itself was bad. How about you direct your zeal towards finding counter points to that instead of fostering an atmosphere of ill will in this thread?

Also, you really did lose all the remaining vestiges of your credibility when you passed judgment on what is allowed to be disliked about GT and what should "not be a deal breaker". That attitude is plain obnoxious.

Well then, for your information, any person with half decent attention to detail is going to be bothered by stuff like using a halo to denote whether someone's in heaven or in hell, or having all the pettiest of villains keep their bodies after death (and presumably free rein to roam hell). Or Cooler and Bojack casually appearing among those released from hell, even though they literally didn't happen in the timeline of the series. These and other seemingly small things were really, really vexing. Maybe not for you, but you have no right to tell others they shouldn't be bothered by this. Because it is goddamn bothersome and ruins the spirit of the show big time.

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Cetra » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:42 pm

Saturnine wrote: You're the one who sent me a PM but then deleted it because you didn't like what I had to say about GT.
The Private Message was not about "me not liking what you said about GT". It was about your behaviour which obviously comes out in terms of GT as well or saying to people something like (in another thread) "if you do think this is obnoxious then I'd like to show you what's really obnoxious". How is that in any way personable? And exactly, I deleted it. Because I know these things lead to nothing.
Saturnine wrote: And yet you didn't bother to reply to the longest post I made in this thread explaining precisely while I think the ending itself was bad. How about you direct your zeal towards finding counter points to that instead of fostering an atmosphere of ill will in this thread?
Oh you very very well know why. You have already proven to be an absolutely inappropriate conversation partner. Telling someone he is easier to be impressed or doubt his/her analytical skills (which is bold as hell by the way) shows me that no matter what I have to say you will not accept it anyway.
Saturnine wrote: Also, you really did lose all the remaining vestiges of your credibility when you passed judgment on what is allowed to be disliked about GT and what should "not be a deal breaker". That attitude is plain obnoxious.
It is just good that you are so good at analyzing someone's post. And yet fail to see what that person actually said/what their point was. The problem is not that one is not allowed to dislike anything about GT. The point is that those people use it as some definite standard to show people "see? see? its bad!!!!!!" in a show where they only ever care about this when they actually want to care about it. So it is about a) hypocrisy, b) telling people they should not expect others to evaluate something under the same standards and c) the fact that they still want to treat fictional consistency like real life consistency.
Saturnine wrote: Well then, for your information, any person with half decent attention to detail is going to be bothered by stuff like using a halo to denote whether someone's in heaven or in hell, or having all the pettiest of villains keep their bodies after death (and presumably free rein to roam hell). Or Cooler and Bojack casually appearing among those released from hell, even though they literally didn't happen in the timeline of the series. These and other seemingly small things were really, really vexing. Maybe not for you, but you have no right to tell others they shouldn't be bothered by this. Because it is goddamn bothersome and ruins the spirit of the show big time.
And surely I lost my credibility. I cannot even take you seriously with this new attempt of "I have more attention of detail" and the claim that it is definitely bothersome for the spirit of the show like it is some fact. As said, trying to come up with half-veiled insults of how the analytical skills and attention of detail of your conversation partner are inferior to yours are not the kind of posts that convince someone that this is an actual decent person to get along with. And it is even less convincing when this person did not even understand the point of certain paragraphs one (in this case me) has written. And stop trying to play the "you have no right to ..." card because you are the one trying to tell anyone how wrong they are all the time. Otherwise you would not bother trying to "explain" them how they are wrong about liking xyz and how they are "easily impressed" and "cannot look at it et cetera". This "I am not accepting what someone says and then when he says something I say 'you don't just accept my opinion (even though I actually am doing the same thing)!" card is old.

Anyway, I have had such discussions 15 years ago. Now I use the report button so we will not let it escalate any more. This gets tiresome and quite frankly I have no interest in reading more posts of two certain types that I do not want to mention here what I call them because it would be condescending - but those would be the only responses that would come because they are the posts that someone gets like 90% of the time. I have no problem with my posts being deleted as well.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

User avatar
Saturnine
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:45 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Saturnine » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:57 pm

Because yeah, if people who have no idea how Toriyama's universe is supposed to work and what's supposed to happen when something else happens, how can you say that a show written by such people carries the spirit of the original? It's not my impression alone that GT carries more the spirit of Toei's own endless spins on the franchise (Toei's original filler stories and theatricals) than it does of the core of the series, because Toei did indeed try to cram as many references to their original characters as they possibly could, at every turn. One couldn't help but feel that they were so caught up in these things that they forgot that bad guys weren't supposed to keep their bodies after death and that dead dudes who do, have halos. These are just things that were always there and you don't simply forget about them and remove them. It's terrible for suspension of disbelief.

And you really shouldn't be bothered this much by me focusing on just this aspect of GT (or its bizarre powerscaling) for justifying it being in my opinion bad. I rewatched it quite recently and I have plenty of other problems with it, and the further the show goes, the more appear, culminating in the utterly illogical ending. The search for the black star dragonballs arc was boring, unengaging and had very poor humor, but that's still in my book more tolerable than stories entirely built upon misunderstanding the way Toriyama's world is supposed to work. You have people in Super complaining about shit like Potara not being permanent for mortals, even though this is perfectly reconcilable with previously established lore on the grounds that none of U7's Kaioshins had ever had any experience using the Potaras on humans, so they simply couldn't know it. People complained about this because they simply didn't like the idea of Vegetto not being permanent, and "retcon asspull" was just a pretext to hate on this decision. Still, even if you don't like this development, this is in no way comparable to say, fucking Dr. Gero casually walking around in hell with a fully functional body and building another Android 17. Super did make some questionable storytelling decisions, but never ONCE did they break the precepts of the world established earlier in the same manner as GT did, consistently.
Last edited by Saturnine on Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Cetra » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:58 pm

Finally something normal.
Saturnine wrote:Because yeah, if people who have no idea how Toriyama's universe is supposed to work and what's supposed to happen when something else happens, how can you say that a show written by such people carries the spirit of the original?.
Because "spirit of the original" does not equate to "follow the law of the universe under all circumstances". A show as Dragon Ball, or a manga, for what its worth, is a composition of many elements that one can perceive. Dragon Ball is a show that at least by most people would be at least agreed upon as as goofy but charming show that is about adventures. And that is just one side of course. But is this not something one can appreciate? I can see a lot of that in Dragon Ball GT. Also I can see something that Dragon Ball GT did which was also never a problem for Dragon Ball: It progressed. And that is what Dragon Ball GT does: It goes on. It shows a new, chronological chapter of the show, bringing back old characters, introducing new characters and is also not afraid like the old show to risk something (not that it did not recycle things, it did). It is so much like the original that I am more than satisfied. When I was a teenager and saw GT for the first time I was so disappointed by it because I still had Z in mind and then I got this and was like "okay ... uh ... well" but years after I watched it again. I was older, I knew Dragon Ball even more and understood even more what made it special for me and I could see that also in GT. It never meant I had no problems with GT. To this day I have a big problem with how their eyes are drawn and that they faces are way too round for me but those are not things I would hang GT for. This is not what its about.
Saturnine wrote:It's not my impression alone that GT carries more the spirit of Toei's own endless spins on the franchise (Toei's original filler stories and theatricals) than it does of the core of the series, because Toei did indeed try to cram as many references to their original characters as they possibly could, at every turn. One couldn't help but feel that they were so caught up in these things that they forgot that bad guys weren't supposed to keep their bodies after death and that dead dudes who do, have halos. These are just things that were always there and you don't simply forget about them and remove them. It's terrible for suspension of disbelief.
And what is the problem with that? Dragon Ball, the moment it became an anime as well had a lot of influence from those who worked on the anime. Should they always stick to the status quo or limit their imagination because they have to under all circumstances watch out for any and all possible errors? This is what makes work even more troublesome. And I have yet to see one part of the entire franchise that radiates that this actually happened. The show overall (not just GT) is made as if it respects the original vision of Akira Toriyama and just as him it always seemed relatively chilled and not really bothered by what could be such an "issue". Not that Toei does not try to be consistent at all but Dragon Ball is such a nonchalant show, if these things happen, they happen. And that is how the manga also handles its consistency errors.
Saturnine wrote: And you really shouldn't be bothered this much by me focusing on just this aspect of GT (or its bizarre powerscaling) for justifying it being in my opinion bad. I rewatched it quite recently and I have plenty of other problems with it, and the further the show goes, the more appear, culminating in the utterly illogical ending.
I will probably never find it again but the ending of GT is supposedly a (loose) interpretation of a Japanese fairytale that was posted here on kanzenshuu like 2 or 3 years ago and somebody showed that they forum one time because the similiarities were quite surprising. If you ask me now to find this thread - I would never find it again in this forum. Anyway, you say the ending is illogical. I say from the mere perspective of what Dragon Ball is it is not illogical. It took something pre-established, made a conclusive arc and then as the actual ending it did something we know so well of Dragon Ball: It does somethin unexpected. There is also an interview on kanzenshuu about how the ending was planned and it was quite insightful and for me personally added something more beautiful because I did not just get my own emotional expression because of the ending but because I could read that the staff actually but some thought behind it and that was very respectful and great to see, I'd say. I could go on about how the series finale, so the very last episode I mean, was truly "different" because it for once was not just all that lighthearted (which also happened sometimes; as the mood was sometimes also suddenly broken extremely in the entire franchise) and ended in a way in which one could definitely say that even if it was not to their liking it felt like the ending of a show other than the open ended vol. 42 - which a lot of people have no problem with but humans mostly have this desire to experience closure to the point that for some people it can get so neurotical that they get crazy when they do not experience it.
Saturnine wrote: Still, even if you don't like this development, this is in no way comparable to say, fucking Dr. Gero casually walking around in hell with a fully functional body and building another Android 17. Super did make some questionable storytelling decisions, but never ONCE did they break the precepts of the world established earlier in the same manner as GT did, consistently.
Skipped the rest because I have no problem with the Vegetto thing, etc. Anyway, the Dr. Gero thing did not really do anything that we were shown to be an actual problem from GT itself. The whole afterlife situation was already muddy in the anime before with them running around until e.g. Freeza and Cell get behind the bars through Paikuhan. We did not see Dr. Gero actively doing anything so this is kind of a "ahuh, that must have been a really good 4 month diet for Freeza, however the hell he did that" situation. He just did. Also when it comes to Super it actually still has problems like Afterlife problems that were not cut from the anime.
Last edited by Cetra on Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

User avatar
Saturnine
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:45 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Saturnine » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:05 pm

sunsetshimmer wrote:
Saturnine wrote:
sunsetshimmer wrote:DBS:
Vegeta dancing and cooking + holding a pacifier in mouth.
I'll take that over Vegeta dickriding Goku like he did in GT anyday :P
Just because he wasn't getting angry at Goku's superiority doesn't man he was dickriding.
GT, unlike DBS, followed what Buu saga did to him. In Super, he often behaves like his Cell saga self, always in armor and crying that someone surpassed him.
"Listen to what Kakarot says"
"I had to learn the hard way myself"
"I'll follow your lead, Kakarot"

While I do know these are dub lines, honestly, if someone told me that Vegeta would ever utter such lines with Goku in mind, I'd laugh at them. How people consider this sort of attitude preferable character development for Vegeta, I'll never understand. All I see is the fall of a once proud prince, succumbing to the life of mediocrity he once reviled; even trying to escape by using Babidi's help. But yeah, "let the 2nd best know his place" and join Goku's praise singing GT choir, why not :lol:

User avatar
PsionicWarrior
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1553
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 2:33 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by PsionicWarrior » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:12 pm

We are doing this again? TL;DR Super has many issues but has been enjoyable to watch while GT has many issues and has not been enjoyable to watch lol

User avatar
SingleFringe&Sparks
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:55 pm
Location: Mt. Paozu/East District

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by SingleFringe&Sparks » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:26 pm

Saturnine wrote: Still, even if you don't like this development, this is in no way comparable to say, fucking Dr. Gero casually walking around in hell with a fully functional body and building another Android 17. Super did make some questionable storytelling decisions, but never ONCE did they break the precepts of the world established earlier in the same manner as GT did, consistently.
That is a point there, that the Super 17 arc was conceptually broken from its inception as presented. The fact that 20 was still an android in hell and not Dr. Gero seemed to be logic breaking but then again Freeza was a mecha in hell, so its something the writers generally not consider in both cases. What Toryiama does that people call asspulls by comparison are at worst just convenient loopholes he gives but technically not plotholes. He just fills in the blanks convenience and always has since the start of the franchise. People were complaining that Elder kai lied to them, but there was nothing that suggested he knew that specific detail difference on mortals. GT on the other hand didn't really follow conveniences. I still say the Baby arc was their cleanest of the 3, but after it the arcs started to get shoddy with its basis. Rebuilding a copy 17 despite him not being a machine was ridiculous as a plot point. It would have been less contrived to just cover the original 17 morph into Super 17 as a power up or something with the combined technology of Myuu and Gero. I don't know how they came up with needing 2 No.17s, unless they were thinking because of Cell that 17 is the same thing... They didn't even consider just redoing what they did for Rildo or Android 13 to make what they wanted much simpler.

Super on the other hand barely had any though into anything it did because Toriyama was much stricter with what he wanted Toei to follow, but Toei never built off of what he said in the same vain. Just corrected themselves on the spot, hence Jiren. Where as Toyotaro I assume has more time and connection to write within Toriyama's ideas and him having a better understanding of the gist of them and Z. Thats what GT lacked after the Baby arc. Someone that actually knew the world.

Even still preferring GT narrative-wise over Super, at the least of it Super definitely underpreforms to the storytelling both GT and Z had, but GT's foundations for some things was pretty absurd, which is only ignored because of the story and scenes within them. Where as with Super, the only benefit of doubt you can give it is doing the opposite. It underpreforms but most of the retcons at least make plausible sense. Its why if the manga just reinterpreted these scenarios to fit more in line with Z's atmosphere or plot building, it would make the concept more enjoyable. In other words both series needed a script doctor, but GT didn't get that.
Last edited by SingleFringe&Sparks on Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Zephyr wrote:The fandom's collective fetishizing of "moments" is also ridiculous to me. No, not everyone needs a fucking "shine" moment. If that's all you want, then all you want is fanservice, rather than an actual coherent story. And of course those aren't mutually exclusive; you could have a coherent story with "shine" moments! But if a story is perfectly coherent (and I'm really not seeing any compelling arguments that this one is anything but, despite constantly recurring, really poorly reasoned, attempts to argue otherwise), and you're bemoaning the lack of "shine" moments as a reason for the story's poor quality, then you're letting your thirst for "shine" moments obfuscate your ability to detect basic storytelling when it's right in front of you.

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Cetra » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:31 pm

I don't know what you mean with the 17 thing. The Hellfighter 17 was a machine mutant. Two super geniuses form a copy of 17, just that this one is a machine mutant. Sounds as farfetch'd as everything else.

Also GT had a reliable person for a script for a long time with Matsui-san. Apparently at some point she could no longer be there.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

User avatar
sunsetshimmer
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 4:34 pm
Location: Poland/Equestria

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by sunsetshimmer » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:39 pm

Saturnine wrote: "Listen to what Kakarot says"
"I had to learn the hard way myself"
"I'll follow your lead, Kakarot"

While I do know these are dub lines, honestly, if someone told me that Vegeta would ever utter such lines with Goku in mind, I'd laugh at them. How people consider this sort of attitude preferable character development for Vegeta, I'll never understand. All I see is the fall of a once proud prince, succumbing to the life of mediocrity he once reviled; even trying to escape by using Babidi's help. But yeah, "let the 2nd best know his place" and join Goku's praise singing GT choir, why not :lol:
As you already said. Those are dub lines. Which means they do not count at all. Polish version stated that Goku achieved SSJ4 on Namek. Yes. On Namek.
Isn't dancing, cooking and begging for life a sign of being prideless tho? There is a difference between putting your pride aside (fusing with Goku multiple times) and having no pride at all.
Rarity is the best pony
Pan-chan is the best saiya-jin

User avatar
Saturnine
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:45 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Saturnine » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:48 pm

sunsetshimmer wrote:
Saturnine wrote: "Listen to what Kakarot says"
"I had to learn the hard way myself"
"I'll follow your lead, Kakarot"

While I do know these are dub lines, honestly, if someone told me that Vegeta would ever utter such lines with Goku in mind, I'd laugh at them. How people consider this sort of attitude preferable character development for Vegeta, I'll never understand. All I see is the fall of a once proud prince, succumbing to the life of mediocrity he once reviled; even trying to escape by using Babidi's help. But yeah, "let the 2nd best know his place" and join Goku's praise singing GT choir, why not :lol:
As you already said. Those are dub lines. Which means they do not count at all. Polish version stated that Goku achieved SSJ4 on Namek. Yes. On Namek.
Isn't dancing, cooking and begging for life a sign of being prideless tho? There is a difference between putting your pride aside (fusing with Goku multiple times) and having no pride at all.
Indeed, Vegeta humiliated himself against Beerus. But the outrageousness and unexpectedness of that was the entire point of the scene and was played precisely so we know what a big deal Beerus is. Vegeta was convinced he had to act like that, lest they all die. In GT he was under no such pressure and just happily blew Goku's horn all day. I do believe the circumstances were quite different in these two cases :P

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Cetra » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:54 pm

Saturnine wrote:Vegeta was convinced he had to act like that, lest they all die. In GT he was under no such pressure and just happily blew Goku's horn all day.
Apart from the blowing the horn thing sounding incredibly wrong (like innuendo-esque) I would like to know if you remember how pissed Vegeta was when Gero and Mu/Myuu were talking about Goku. Vegeta respects Goku a lot, he has grown and knows when one can count on Goku. But that does not mean he has not shown to still try and go further. The whole training room scene in GT even was about how he held his speech in vol. 42. Simply because, even with accepting Goku for what he is and why he is number 1, Vegeta still is Vegeta and aims higher. One can show both, old characteristics and old ones. He is a proud father, he is a fighter, he can be grumpy, he respects Goku but still aims for higher levels, he is a caring father and husband - still so proud that in the original he is ashamed of showing his lovey-dovey side in front of Chichi so he is all "if you are here, then say something!"(yes, the I shaved my mustache, idiot-line was not the original one) There was a lot of character added to Vegeta. And the point of how much Vegeta respects Goku in the end of GT ... When he thinks Goku is dead and charges at Xing Long, yelling "Kakarotto!" this leaves an impression - even more when Mr. Sabat lengthens it a bit with "THIS IS FOR KAKAROTT!"
Last edited by Cetra on Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

User avatar
Saturnine
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:45 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Saturnine » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:56 pm

Cetra wrote:
Saturnine wrote:It's not my impression alone that GT carries more the spirit of Toei's own endless spins on the franchise (Toei's original filler stories and theatricals) than it does of the core of the series, because Toei did indeed try to cram as many references to their original characters as they possibly could, at every turn. One couldn't help but feel that they were so caught up in these things that they forgot that bad guys weren't supposed to keep their bodies after death and that dead dudes who do, have halos. These are just things that were always there and you don't simply forget about them and remove them. It's terrible for suspension of disbelief.
And what is the problem with that? Dragon Ball, the moment it became an anime as well had a lot of influence from those who worked on the anime. Should they always stick to the status quo or limit their imagination because they have to under all circumstances watch out for any and all possible errors?
The only problem is that pushing for Cooler and Bojack to be among the villains escaped from hell is not an exercise in imagination, but in derivation. It's also something that likely had to be actively pushed for by the writers, probably to entrench the theatricals more in the continuity and therefore help their marketing efforts, to the detriment of the story. What detriment you ask? Well several folks are definitely going to be bothered by cramming theatrical villains into a show that advertises itself as the continuation of the events from the canon timeline...

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Cetra » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:02 pm

Saturnine wrote: The only problem is that pushing for Cooler and Bojack to be among the villains escaped from hell is not an exercise in imagination, but in derivation. It's also something that likely had to be actively pushed for by the writers, probably to entrench the theatricals more in the continuity and therefore help their marketing efforts, to the detriment of the story. What detriment you ask? Well several folks are definitely going to be bothered by cramming theatrical villains into a show that advertises itself as the continuation of the events from the canon timeline...
Bojack was never in GT. He was in Janemba's movie. And the reason why Cooler was included is the same reason why Garlic Jr. is in the anime: Because Toei takes these things less serious. Just as they add characters like Gregory. Or why the have a giant timeline from 2016 or 17 where both Super and GT is displayed. I guarantee you the smaller kids care a lot lot less about such things because they do a lot less mental gymnastics when it comes to such things. They se "oh! another cool thing I like! awesome!" And that is what I think should always be prioritized, then the rest. If not even the show from the very beginning cared and I actually care more (which I normally do) then this might be overthinking things. And Toei still does not care about inconsistencies. Yamamuro-san himself laughed about an attempt of a fan at Entrevista back in 2015 who tried playing the canonicity card and handwaved him away with "it has characteristics of a spin-off and of a sequel; and it is made by Toei Animation" without really giving the guy the answer he wanted. They are an old, colossal business. Responding to such fan things will cause a major uproar if they respond to that unprepared. And I guarantee you, GT was supposed to be the continuation. That's it. Whether movie stuff was included or not was really not the point at this time. This is not the holy church with its bible.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

Post Reply