Why did so many DragonBall movies focus on alternate versions of the main story?

[Jord]

Just watched Path to Power....and it's another retelling of the beginning of Dragon Ball with some strange twists (That terminator dude in Muscle Tower is black now?) The original 3 DB movies did this as well. Is this just lazyness or is there a specific reason for this. Even with the roots of these movie stories laying in the original story they won't fit in the timeline anyhow so what's the point?

To me, it's way more exciting when you see the characters in whole new situations. Hell, one my favorite DB "movies" is the GT Special, a Hero's legacy, because it feels so fresh compared to the other "movies". I also really like both the Bardock and Trunks specials because instead of trying to rewrite a great story they add to the existing story. (Even though you could see Trunks special as a rewrite of the Android saga, only the very beginning is reminiscent of the original story)

[SHINOBI-03]

From my understanding back then Dragon Ball the series wasn't available on home releases because the VHS market wasn't that big yet and so, these movies were the alternative.

They can't release an entire arc to the market but they can give you a similar story as an alternative.

[Robo4900]

Just watched Path to Power....and it's another retelling of the beginning of Dragon Ball with some strange twists (That terminator dude in Muscle Tower is black now?) The original 3 DB movies did this as well. Is this just lazyness or is there a specific reason for this. Even with the roots of these movie stories laying in the original story they won't fit in the timeline anyhow so what's the point?

The specific instance you cite there was just the designers having a bit of fun and changing the looks of various charcters around. They were already doing something different with the movie in general, so why not have a bit of fun with the designs too?

As for the movies in general telling their own stories; what would be the point in retelling the stories you've already seen on TV, and/or have access to in the manga? You're making a movie and it's kind of its own standalone thing, so it seems about right that they'd want to try something new with it.
So, instead of getting a rehash of the stories we're already familiar with, we get new stories that stand on their own as unique movies in the franchise. Seems like a good approach to me.

[Jord]

Just watched Path to Power....and it's another retelling of the beginning of Dragon Ball with some strange twists (That terminator dude in Muscle Tower is black now?) The original 3 DB movies did this as well. Is this just lazyness or is there a specific reason for this. Even with the roots of these movie stories laying in the original story they won't fit in the timeline anyhow so what's the point?

The specific instance you cite there was just the designers having a bit of fun and changing the looks of various charcters around. They were already doing something different with the movie in general, so why not have a bit of fun with the designs too?

As for the movies in general telling their own stories; what would be the point in retelling the stories you've already seen on TV, and/or have access to in the manga? You're making a movie and it's kind of its own standalone thing, so it seems about right that they'd want to try something new with it.
So, instead of getting a rehash of the stories we're already familiar with, we get new stories that stand on their own as unique movies in the franchise. Seems like a good approach to me.

What I mean is that they relied too much on the original story by making an alternate version instead of just making a completely new story. That's exactly why I like a Hero's Legacy. Don't retell, make something completely new.

[BeerusTrinken]

Just watched Path to Power....and it's another retelling of the beginning of Dragon Ball with some strange twists (That terminator dude in Muscle Tower is black now?) The original 3 DB movies did this as well. Is this just lazyness or is there a specific reason for this. Even with the roots of these movie stories laying in the original story they won't fit in the timeline anyhow so what's the point?

Well, it's certainly not laziness, but it's also possible the creators' intentions didn't come across.

The orginal purpose of the first DB films seems to be to retell the main themes and high plot points of the series but in a different way with some new locations and adventures whilst revisiting certain key or popular scenes and characters. The first 3 films act as they're own trilogy, retelling the main story but with their own adventures. A common fan speculation is that this was meant to be the plan all along but by the time DBZ rolled around, the movies were so far behind the plot (they'd have to cover King Piccolo and the 23rd Budokai, along with Goku growing up) that they just scrapped the idea of continuity and just made side adventures, paying lip service to some things from the main plot.

To me, it's way more exciting when you see the characters in whole new situations. Hell, one my favorite DB "movies" is the GT Special, a Hero's legacy, because it feels so fresh compared to the other "movies". I also really like both the Bardock and Trunks specials because instead of trying to rewrite a great story they add to the existing story. (Even though you could see Trunks special as a rewrite of the Android saga, only the very beginning is reminiscent of the original story)

I completely get where you're coming from. Which is actually what makes me even more sad about what happened to the movies as they progressed, there were new situations, yes, but they rarely made sense or were in character and became way too formulaic for me. They also rarely had any actual... plot. After a while it was just "villain appears" + "action" + "???" + "villain defeated".

But yeah, there is definitely a reason the original Bardock and Trunks specials, as well as the GT secial, are considered so highly. They were able to expand on an original idea (though Trunks special as a loose, and personally better, adaptation of Toriyama's own manga chapter) and could play a bit more on the world.

I sympathise with the constraints that held the writers back, they didn't or rather couldn't go too far but it would've been cool for me if they had kept up their own parallel continuity running alongside the mains story.

[Jord]

They also rarely had any actual... plot. After a while it was just "villain appears" + "action" + "???" + "villain defeated".

Haha. That is so true. I actually watched the Z movies last year and with most movies (especially the Super Android movie) I actually really enjoyed the slice-of-life bits that happened before the villain appears. To me, they were the most enjoyable bits of most of the movies.

[TheGreatness25]

I always looked at the movies as a quick cash grab. None of them were ever really anything great. Just quick little stories that usually had a very lazy plot that mirrored the series at that time in some fashion.

I think that out of all of them, movie 2, Broli, and the Tapion movies were the only ones with a half decent original story. Then Battle of Gods came out and now, I'm not even really sure I can call what came before it "movies." Battle of Gods really took it to another level, making its predecessors look more like some direct-to-video series of special episodes more than anything.

[ABED]

I don't know what you guys are looking for in terms of a DB plot. Even the plots of the series are VERY simple and are usually centered around some big fight. I think a big issue is the short runtime means they plow through the story beats so it all feels perfunctory.

[MasenkoHA]

Just watched Path to Power....and it's another retelling of the beginning of Dragon Ball with some strange twists (That terminator dude in Muscle Tower is black now?) The original 3 DB movies did this as well. Is this just lazyness or is there a specific reason for this. Even with the roots of these movie stories laying in the original story they won't fit in the timeline anyhow so what's the point?

Path to Power also came out to celebrate the franchise’s 10 year anniversary so there’s the reason for that.

As for the other 3 the only thing I can think of is they all did come out well after the arc they were based on (movie 1 came out around Red Ribbon saga, movie 2 came out around the Baba arc and movie 3 came out in the middle of the Piccolo Daimou arc I believe) so they might have been released to get new viewers caught up on the gist since the series was airing weekly without any home releases at the time.

[sintzu]

I always looked at the movies as a quick cash grab. None of them were ever really anything great. Just quick little stories that usually had a very lazy plot that mirrored the series at that time in some fashion.

I've been re-watching Z's movies (just finished Lord Slug) and I can say I liked them a lot more based on memories from 10 years ago. They're not unwatchable but compared to the last 3 movies we got they seem like extended filler episodes rather than actual movies.

[Dbzfan94]

I recently rewatched all 17 of the original movies (not watching the modern ones) and even the ones I enjoyed the least were really good. Two in particular, Mystical Adventure and World's Strongest. I hadn't seen them in a long time and was really surprised in a good way.

[Jord]

I always looked at the movies as a quick cash grab. None of them were ever really anything great. Just quick little stories that usually had a very lazy plot that mirrored the series at that time in some fashion.

I've been re-watching Z's movies (just finished Lord Slug) and I can say I liked them a lot more based on memories from 10 years ago. They're not unwatchable but compared to the last 3 movies we got they seem like extended filler episodes rather than actual movies.

I agree. In the west, movie versions of cartoons at least had better animation/a bigger budget than the regular show like in Transformers the movie for example. In DBZ it looks the same as the show.

[sintzu]

In the west, movie versions of cartoons at least had better animation/a bigger budget than the regular show like in Transformers the movie for example. In DBZ it looks the same as the show.

That's probably because Toei was releasing 2 DB movies a year. Although they looked better overall, they probably could've done more had they just focused on one instead, both in terms of story and production value.

[ABED]

There is a noticeable quality difference between the movies and the TV series. It's not as pronounced as your example, but it's clear.

[VegettoEX]

As a reminder/refresher or new explanation for those who need it:

All of the movies from back during the original serialization were screened as part of double- and triple- (sometimes quadruple?!-) features with other Jump and Toei properties. Dragon Ball films would screen alongside those for Slam Dunk, Ninku, Marmalade Boy, Sally the Witch, Dr. Slump, etc.

These screenings were part of the seasonal Toei Anime Festivals, which were established by Toei in 1969 as a way to showcase their popular children's series as theatrical films during seasonal breaks in the school year. In Japan, almost all schools below the university level run a three-term school year (trimester system) with a vacation period of several weeks to a month at the end of each trimester: spring vacation, summer vacation, and winter vacation. The movies were screened together back-to-back in various cities across Japan, with a typical total running time of roughly three hours. Most festivals would last roughly one month, or as long as the seasonal vacation allowed. Tickets could be purchased at the theater, or discount tickets could be purchased in advance which covered the cost of admission, as well as a bonus item such as a promotional pamphlet describing the featured movies, and various other special presents, such as posters, paper hats, cards, and toys. Additional items, including the official theatrical pamphlet and a variety of other commemorative goods, were available for purchase at cinemas or by mail during this period.

They were a chance for existing fans to have fun with the characters they knew, as well as a chance for new fans to get absorbed into the world without really having to know what was going on in the "real" story in the comic book or TV series. This is different from Battle of Gods and Resurrection 'F' and Broly, which were intended to be larger-scale films distributed to a worldwide audience immediately following production.

Here's a snippet from an article in the August 1995 issue of Animerica. It's by Takashi Oshiguchi, who contributed the "From the Forest" column to the magazine each month, but also owned and operated the "Manga no Mori" store in Japan and also contributed to Animage:

Toei's features tend to be the side-stories of the Toei animated or live-action shows on TV that year. They're also stories that fit within a 30- to 40-minute frame, and--so as to not confuse the children--the plot does not conform with the continuity of the TV show. Japanese animated shows (and live-action shows) change annually, so the Anime Festival's titles change every year, as well. And thus, most of its features are self-contained stories. But then, there are shows such as DRAGON BALL, which have been going on for nearly ten years. With two theatrical releases a year, you can see how quickly (and how easily) carefully plotted TV continuity can be breached, and why the TV continuities are therefore avoided in Toei Anime Festival releases.

After all, in the main DRAGON BALL continuity, main character Goku grows up and raises a family; his children grow up, and they eventually become the main characters themselves. As they grow up, various new friends and villains show up. The theatrical feature is just a short film that comes out every half-year, so it can't cover the half-year of development in the official story. On the other hand, if a feature just tells its own story--for example, one with Goku still in his childhood--children might get confused.

Theatrical features must tell an original story that stands on its own at the theater, while still assuming that the children are familiar with the developments in the TV show. So usually the central characters in the feature are those who have been associated with the main character on TV by the time they show up in the theater, and they then get to face off villains original to the feature.

You might say it's unfair of the Toei Anime Festival to expect its attendees to follow the TV show in order to enjoy the features. But remember that the primary audience is, of course, children. The grand premise is that children should be able to fully enjoy and be excited about seeing DRAGON BALL at the theater, and I think this is what is expected by children who both watch the TV show and attend the Toei Anime Festivals, as well.

I'm not super-familiar with all of these, but these are the series that had films running alongside the first three DB movies:

• DB Movie 1: GeGeGe no Kitarō and Kinnikuman
• DB Movie 2: Saint Seiya, Hikari Sentai Maskman, and Chōjinki Metalder
• DB Movie 3: Tatakae!! Ramenman, Bikkuriman, and Kamen Rider Black

It would be interesting to have knowledgeable fans of those respective series give a little briefer on how those films and subsequent ones in the franchise (if there were any) shook out in the years to come, with regard to how many re-tellings there were vs. new stories, and when (or if) that change took place.

Obviously from that point forward I'm a little more personally knowledgeable about some of the other Jump property films, as are many other fans I would assume. The "one and done what if" shonen film formula became pretty standard for Shueisha/Toei properties.

(And yeah, the 10th anniversary film is kind of an outlier and doesn't really factor in to this discussion. As an anniversary film, it makes total sense.)

[KBABZ]

I feel like this outlook only really applies to the first three Dragon Ball movies, The Path to Power, and Evolution. That's like, 10% of the total amount of Dragon Ball movies?

(Even though you could see Trunks special as a rewrite of the Android saga, only the very beginning is reminiscent of the original story)

This take took me by surprise! I feel like that's underselling what that story is, which is Trunks' backstory from his original, unaltered timeline that defines who he is and fleshes out the Bad Future, which inherently makes it an incredibly unique Dragon Ball story.

[supersaiyandoctor]

Even the Z movies seemed like retelling's of certain arcs, just with more drastic changes. In some cases, they borrowed a lot from the series. Like Garlic Jr borrowing things from the Raditz arc (Piccolo and Goku teaming up, Gohan kidnapped and fighting back at the end), Tree of Might was the Saiyan Saga. As they progressed, there was a bit more of a change I suppose and they had more original elements.

Return of Cooler from memory only really borrowed the scene where Vegeta saves Goku. Coolers Revenge works as a good sequel to the Freeza saga if you assume Gohan's tail grew back but then Goku still struggles to turn SSJ. In my head that movie has always taken place in Future Trunk's timeline where Goku defeated Mecha Freeza.