Parts of Toriyama's scripts for the movies (and even MORE of his notes for Super) just say "they fight", and those get expanded into potentially multiple episodes-long encounters. It's entirely possible this went the same way. We can't prove anything when we don't have the facts of what that content is, and that still doesn't mean it was wrong to cut it. A storyboard can contain tons of content not present in the script, and given the fast and loose way Toriyama writes these days, it is a huge mistake to assume it's all from him, and an even bigger mistake to assume it needs to be animated when we don't even know what it is.PFM18 wrote: No, it was explicitly Toriyama's script turned into a storyboard. The storyboard of Toriyama's script was 3 hours long. So yeah, it was Toei's "fleshed out" only in the sense that they storyboarded it, but that's not really what "fleshed out" normally refers to.
Have you not heard of a thing called "bloat"? This is the entire reason Z used to be such a pain to watch. It still is the reason One Piece is a pain to watch. Bolstering a story with unnecessary asides and additions while keeping things in the same place narratively can cheapen what is seen and bore the audience in some cases. Hell, Super's version of Battle of Gods did exactly that (RoF was more of a general trainwreck, but it also was this). Besides the fact that there isn't necessarily another """half""" to Toriyama's script, the movie already inflated it's second half with constant action to the point of tiring out the viewers. The last thing we need in the series is more filler, and I guarantee that if there's not a ton to add from the film itself, Toei would either add more fighting without any real purpose, or meaningless asides that add as little as Chi-Chi and Yajirobe trying to fly to Namek. That's basically all they ever added before.PFM18 wrote: I don't see how expansion of an already good story can be a bad thing. The additions story wise don't have to be "amazingly poignant" in order to make a retelling worth it, only reason not to is impatience, really. The continuity with the anime, the pacing, and the incorporation of the other half of Toriyama's script makes a retelling more than worthwhile in and of itself, regardless of whether or not what was left out is some groundbreaking information.
The biggest problems related to thematic storytelling, character interactions and tonal consistency. Toriyama was rarely ever good at those and I don't think Toei's staff have ever been. Unless you get an actually good writer to remake the whole thing themselves beforehand (something alien to this series, really), I have zero belief that the story's gonna get any better. Quality over quantity.PFM18 wrote: The biggest problems were the pacing and the tension which both could easily be fixed in a retelling, and to some extent are intertwined with each other.
The things you previously suggested also don't help either the pacing or the tension.
It cannot "only benefit" from being made longer and slower. Nine times out of ten Dragon Ball has always been completely ruined by the anime forcing unnecessary bullshit into it's adaptations to the point of boring the viewer to death.PFM18 wrote: What I have been saying is that irrespective of how significant these Toriyama writing elements are, a retelling would be worth it. The story can only benefit from being expanded upon, and there's a plethora of scenes that are in desperate need of more time given how clearly rushed they were.
You don't know that. You may feel like it was cut, but that does not actually mean it was cut, and it doesn't mean there's anything there that would actually make a meaningful addition to the story. Again, Bardock already sucked in Minus, seeing them try to force this not-Bardock into the original Bardock's scenes would only make the original versions of those scenes worse, which it did in the case of the rebellion we did see.PFM18 wrote:Bardock's rebellion for example, was obviously cut considering he randomly has damage on himself and his little "struggle" was extremely brief and insignificant.
"More" is not inherently better.
