The differences between Toei Goku and Manga Goku

[Kokonoe]

Excellent read, Tavarano. Shows the "Superman Goku" started with the original anime.

Do not give Tavarano props. Tavarano is a troll and how good a read can it be when he drops context repeatedly and makes shit up? An excellent read would have to prove its point using evidence, and that post had none.

If you have issue with his statements then you should provide the proof instead of insulting him.

[ABED]

Excellent read, Tavarano. Shows the "Superman Goku" started with the original anime.

Do not give Tavarano props. Tavarano is a troll and how good a read can it be when he drops context repeatedly and makes shit up? An excellent read would have to prove its point using evidence, and that post had none.

If you have issue with his statements then you should provide the proof instead of insulting him.

I did provide proof. That one quote alone should tell you the kind of arguments you get from Tavarano. How did you go right past "Goku intentionally hit his wife" and not stop to consider that he/she is full of crap?

There's also this gem

He has a dream on the snakeway that saiyans attack ChiChi and Gohan, then says he has to hurry because everyone is counting on him, but in the manga instead there is this gag where Gohan is shown missing his dad, while Goku is shown to not give a crap about him in the same chapter.

That's not what that quote meant. Set aside the translation issues, not only is the meaning clearly that Goku couldn't dream that Piccolo would kidnap his son to train him, Tavarano's point is clearly proven false by Goku fighting Raditz to rescue his son. He does give a crap about Gohan.

And those are just two quotes I can point to in that asinine post. If this wasn't something I saw from Tavarano constantly, I might believe it was an earnest post made in good faith that I happen to disagree with, but it's not. Tavarano's time on this forum seems to exist solely to knock and misrepresent the series.

[Kokonoe]

Do not give Tavarano props. Tavarano is a troll and how good a read can it be when he drops context repeatedly and makes shit up? An excellent read would have to prove its point using evidence, and that post had none.

If you have issue with his statements then you should provide the proof instead of insulting him.

I did provide proof. That one quote alone should tell you the kind of arguments you get from Tavarano. How did you go right past "Goku intentionally hit his wife" and not stop to consider that he/she is full of crap?

There's also this gem

He has a dream on the snakeway that saiyans attack ChiChi and Gohan, then says he has to hurry because everyone is counting on him, but in the manga instead there is this gag where Gohan is shown missing his dad, while Goku is shown to not give a crap about him in the same chapter.

That's not what that quote meant. Set aside the translation issues, not only is the meaning clearly that Goku couldn't dream that Piccolo would kidnap his son to train him, Tavarano's point is clearly proven false by Goku fighting Raditz to rescue his son. He does give a crap about Gohan.

And those are just two quotes I can point to in that asinine post. If this wasn't something I saw from Tavarano constantly, I might believe it was an earnest post made in good faith that I happen to disagree with, but it's not. Tavarano's time on this forum seems to exist solely to knock and misrepresent the series.

So like, yeah, that wasn't a hit.

But maybe you should just take a step back and realize what a troll actually is? He put effort into his post, he misinterpreted an event. Really your hostility is unnecessary.

[ABED]

Deliberately misrepresenting events and outright lying is NOT putting effort into a post. If this was a one time thing, I might be inclined to agree with you, but it's not. It's a pattern with damn near every single one of Tavarano's posts. Every once in a while this forum gets people in here who want nothing more than to amuse themselves at the expense of the show by knocking it. That behavior bothers me a lot. This wasn't an honest or earnest misinterpretation like you seem to believe. I know what a troll is, and to say it's apt in this case would be an understatement.

Anyway, there are differences between the two versions of Goku but unless you know what you're looking for, I doubt anyone notices. Even ardent fans often don't notice.

[Cure Dragon 255]

OMG You are awesome ABED. I really hate the hate boner Tavarano has and its about time they were challenged.

[Tamagon]

Toei Goku is a misinterpretation but it's a pretty reasonable one to make and arguably an improvement. One of the most reoccuring things throughout OG Dragon Ball was that Goku had a pure heart and was the most ethical guy out of the heroes. It's not until sometime into the Saiyan arc where all that stuff gets dropped and Goku's flaws end up having a big impact on the story (letting Vegeta go, letting Freeza reach 100%). Toei Goku helps maintain a bit of consistency with OG DB and is easier to root for; flaws like being a horrible family man is definitely harder to overlook than "oh I let the alien reach maximum power" since the former hits closer to home for a lot of people.

I will agree that the bird scene in the Cooler movie is too much, though :V

[ABED]

For years I thought pure of heart meant pure good and the most morally upstanding, I don't think that's the case with Goku or what Toriyama was getting at. I think Goku is a good person with no malice for anyone, but I think Toriyama was saying Goku has no malice in his heart and is pure in his intentions about being the best fighter he can be. He's not doing it for fame, fortune, to hurt others, or any form of external validation. However, Goku does put fighting above almost everything which isn't a good thing. And for the record, Goku didn't start letting his enemies go with the Saiyan arc. He let Piccolo go after he won the 23rd TB. He's always been willing to show his enemies mercy. They often don't take it.

[90sDBZ]

Its been a few years since I posted this topic, but I've recently been thinking about the Kaioken x20 scene.

It was always a strong scene, but was made so much better in the anime with the extra bits added in. In the manga the appeal of the scene was mostly the high stakes, with Goku realising he had to risk it to win.

In the anime we get the whole sequence of him nearly drowning, then having that vision of his family and friends being killed by Frieza, before bursting back to the surface and making a heroic speech as he powers up.

It's because of this that this has always been one of my favourite scenes ever, maybe even more so than the SS1 transformation, and arguably Goku's defining moment. I don't know Toriyama personally, and I don't know if he'd agree with the changes to the scene, but I can say without a doubt that they were for the better.

[Dbzfan94]

If you have issue with his statements then you should provide the proof instead of insulting him.

I did provide proof. That one quote alone should tell you the kind of arguments you get from Tavarano. How did you go right past "Goku intentionally hit his wife" and not stop to consider that he/she is full of crap?

There's also this gem

He has a dream on the snakeway that saiyans attack ChiChi and Gohan, then says he has to hurry because everyone is counting on him, but in the manga instead there is this gag where Gohan is shown missing his dad, while Goku is shown to not give a crap about him in the same chapter.

That's not what that quote meant. Set aside the translation issues, not only is the meaning clearly that Goku couldn't dream that Piccolo would kidnap his son to train him, Tavarano's point is clearly proven false by Goku fighting Raditz to rescue his son. He does give a crap about Gohan.

And those are just two quotes I can point to in that asinine post. If this wasn't something I saw from Tavarano constantly, I might believe it was an earnest post made in good faith that I happen to disagree with, but it's not. Tavarano's time on this forum seems to exist solely to knock and misrepresent the series.

So like, yeah, that wasn't a hit.

But maybe you should just take a step back and realize what a troll actually is? He put effort into his post, he misinterpreted an event. Really your hostility is unnecessary.

Trolls can put a lot of effort into their “argument” and still be completely trolling. That’s kinda the point

[ABED]

I wonder how much of the change was intentional and how much was a misunderstanding on the part of the people adapting the series. Perhaps they missed what Toriyama was going for. It wouldn't be the first time an adaptation missed the point.

[WittyUsername]

I do think it’s kind of interesting that these discussions about Toei seemingly making Goku more “heroic” than his manga counterpart didn’t really seem to be especially common until around the time Super was a thing. I know Toriyama said that he felt Toei was depicting Goku as such, but for the most part, these discussions seemed to almost exclusively be in regards to how FUNimation portrayed the character.

When I first heard people talking about how Toei made Goku heroic, I was admittedly rather confused about what they meant, but upon looking over the manga again, and taking the post BoG content into account, I definitely can see where that argument is coming from. There’s really not much more to Goku in the manga beyond the fact that he loves fighting and has a childlike innocence to him. Toei certainly didn’t go as far into the direction of making Goku a superhero as FUNimatipn did, but they did place quite a bit of emphasis on the idea that Goku is this protector of Earth, particularly in the movies.

[Tamagon]

For years I thought pure of heart meant pure good and the most morally upstanding, I don't think that's the case with Goku or what Toriyama was getting at. I think Goku is a good person with no malice for anyone, but I think Toriyama was saying Goku has no malice in his heart and is pure in his intentions about being the best fighter he can be. He's not doing it for fame, fortune, to hurt others, or any form of external validation. However, Goku does put fighting above almost everything which isn't a good thing. And for the record, Goku didn't start letting his enemies go with the Saiyan arc. He let Piccolo go after he won the 23rd TB. He's always been willing to show his enemies mercy. They often don't take it.

Letting Piccolo go wasn't entirely out of selfishness. He also didn't want Kami to die and the Earth to lose out on being able to use the Dragon Balls. In fact, that's the first thing he mentions when he saves Piccolo. Contrast this with Vegeta where Goku admits that sparing him was entirely out of selfishness. And if Bulma and Kuririn are any indication, selfishness does boot you out of being pure of heart.

[ABED]

For years I thought pure of heart meant pure good and the most morally upstanding, I don't think that's the case with Goku or what Toriyama was getting at. I think Goku is a good person with no malice for anyone, but I think Toriyama was saying Goku has no malice in his heart and is pure in his intentions about being the best fighter he can be. He's not doing it for fame, fortune, to hurt others, or any form of external validation. However, Goku does put fighting above almost everything which isn't a good thing. And for the record, Goku didn't start letting his enemies go with the Saiyan arc. He let Piccolo go after he won the 23rd TB. He's always been willing to show his enemies mercy. They often don't take it.

Letting Piccolo go wasn't entirely out of selfishness. He also didn't want Kami to die and the Earth to lose out on being able to use the Dragon Balls. In fact, that's the first thing he mentions when he saves Piccolo. Contrast this with Vegeta where Goku admits that sparing him was entirely out of selfishness. And if Bulma and Kuririn are any indication, selfishness does boot you out of being pure of heart.

I didn't say he's solely driven to battle. There are cases when it's mixed and keeping Piccolo around to keep him on his toes is definitely one of (not the only) the reasons he let Piccolo live. Why does everyone seem to use that "it's the first thing someone mentioned" as if the first reason is inherently the most important?

And if Goku being battle hungry was impure why is he still able to ride Kinto Un?

[WittyUsername]

For years I thought pure of heart meant pure good and the most morally upstanding, I don't think that's the case with Goku or what Toriyama was getting at. I think Goku is a good person with no malice for anyone, but I think Toriyama was saying Goku has no malice in his heart and is pure in his intentions about being the best fighter he can be. He's not doing it for fame, fortune, to hurt others, or any form of external validation. However, Goku does put fighting above almost everything which isn't a good thing. And for the record, Goku didn't start letting his enemies go with the Saiyan arc. He let Piccolo go after he won the 23rd TB. He's always been willing to show his enemies mercy. They often don't take it.

Letting Piccolo go wasn't entirely out of selfishness. He also didn't want Kami to die and the Earth to lose out on being able to use the Dragon Balls. In fact, that's the first thing he mentions when he saves Piccolo. Contrast this with Vegeta where Goku admits that sparing him was entirely out of selfishness. And if Bulma and Kuririn are any indication, selfishness does boot you out of being pure of heart.

Gaffer Tape/MistareFusion has pointed this out before, but Goku being driven by selfishness didn’t become especially prominent until after he found out he was a Saiyan. That’s not to say he was some big hero before that point, but it wasn’t until after he learned about his Saiyan heritage that we suddenly got things like him letting Vegeta go so he could fight him again, and refusing to stop Dr. Gero solely so he could face some strong opponents.

Now that I think about it, the whole “pure of heart” concept was probably a major factor in Toei’s depiction of Goku. Generally, when a work of fiction establishes that someone has a pure heart, that’s supposed to suggest that the character in question is an inherently good and incorruptible person, but it doesn’t seem to have much meaning in Dragon Ball. By Dragon Ball’s definition, Zen-Oh would probably be considered pure of heart, despite the fact that he has no problem wiping entire universes from existence.

[ABED]

You are abusing the word "suddenly". It's not like letting an enemy go would've been out of character for him. As we talked about, he tried to let Black go. He only didn't when he was continually attacked. This isn't out of character nor a change in character. People make WAY more out of the Saiyan revelation than it deserves. It's a change in circumstances.

[WittyUsername]

I didn’t say it was out of character, but I can’t think of any instances prior to the end of the Saiyan arc where Goku chooses to spare someone not out of mercy or any other well meaning reason, but simply because he wanted to fight him in the future. Sure, he wanted to fight Piccolo again, but as Tamagon pointed out, he also didn’t want to kill Kami or get rid of the Dragon Balls.

[MyVisionity]

Generally, when a work of fiction establishes that someone has a pure heart, that’s supposed to suggest that the character in question is an inherently good and incorruptible person, but it doesn’t seem to have much meaning in Dragon Ball.

How does this not apply to Goku and Dragon Ball overall? I never saw a problem with who can and cannot ride the Kinto Un.

[WittyUsername]

Generally, when a work of fiction establishes that someone has a pure heart, that’s supposed to suggest that the character in question is an inherently good and incorruptible person, but it doesn’t seem to have much meaning in Dragon Ball.

How does this not apply to Goku and Dragon Ball overall? I never saw a problem with who can and cannot ride the Kinto Un.

Being a selfish person who puts the thrill of a fight over the safety of others isn’t something you’d usually associate with pure of heart characters in fiction. If Dragon Ball was a more traditional story, Goku’s reasons for sparing Vegeta would’ve been viewed as downright despicable.

[ABED]

I didn’t say it was out of character, but I can’t think of any instances prior to the end of the Saiyan arc where Goku chooses to spare someone not out of mercy or any other well meaning reason, but simply because he wanted to fight him in the future. Sure, he wanted to fight Piccolo again, but as Tamagon pointed out, he also didn’t want to kill Kami or get rid of the Dragon Balls.

Hence change of circumstance. When had he fought someone so overwhelmingly strong and been in a position to allow them to live? He defeated Piccolo Daimao by the skin of his teeth. He didn't let Vegeta go mid-battle. He let him go after Vegeta was defeated. He tried to let Freeza go after he had defeated him.

[Tamagon]

While it's true that in OG DB Goku was never really put in a situation like that (usually his defeats in life-or-death situations was due to cheap tricks), I don't think it really matters.

OG DB makes a big deal about Goku being of pure heart and his desire for battle felt reigned in by his other motivations. I've recently reread the Piccolo Daimao arc and his overriding concern is avenging his fallen friends. Even in the aftermath of the arc, it's Goku's drive to resurrect his friends that motivates him to try to pass Mr. Popo's test. He also asks why Kami didn't kill Piccolo instead, which doesn't jive entirely well with the guy whose main concern is to defeat the strong opponents.

Toriyama has openly admitted that he writes by the seat of his pants so it's far more likely to assume he decided to adjust Goku's character to better fit in as a Saiyan (and to have an easy justification to prolong the story). It's not a completely unnatural progression of the character but I can get why Toei didn't see eye to eye on him on that, is what I'm saying.