Discussion, generally of an in-universe nature, regarding any aspect of the franchise (including movies, spin-offs, etc.) such as: techniques, character relationships, internal back-history, its universe, and more.
Does it bother you seeing villains be thwarted so easily after being a credible threat in the past, or are you able to disregard it as you do not acknowledge things outside of your own continuity?
I ask this after seeing the filler of where Pikkon takes down Super Perfect Cell with ease which is something that I hate as I feel it cheapens his impact, especially to viewers who are not aware of what is and is not canon (Such as my younger family members )
Fusion Reborn and GT were guilty of doing this too.
Nope, doesn't bother me. It's perfectly inline with the original manga - like Cyborg Freeza getting wrecked by Trunks.
The only problem I have is that Paikuhan then goes on to fight evenly with Goku despite that start. So I don't like the implication that Goku could have done the same at that point, when he really shouldn't be able to.
I'm re-watching Dragon Ball GT in full on my blog. Check it out if you're interested in my thoughts on the series as I watch through it!
Although completely filler, I feel what would have made this entire concept better was if Goku got beat down and lost to Pikkon. This could then be followed up on with some brief scenes of vigorous training, and eventually Goku re-matching and defeating Pikkon. Despite filler scenes ever having any impact on the main story, from an anime standpoint, some scenes such as training and improving within the 7 year gap between Cell and Buu would have provided some good insight on Goku reaching SSJ3 as well as his overall improvement. This would have also made the entire filler saga more logical and overall more entertaining to watch as it once again shows Goku redeeming himself after an initial loss.
As for villains becoming fodder, it's a pretty nice concept if portrayed properly. Future Trunks destroying Frieza effortlessly was a great intro to a much larger threat.
I also have no problem with old villains coming back stronger, as long as there is a good reason / story behind their strength increase.
I don't mind the use of villains as fodder. It's happened in the manga quite a few times, and is used quite effectively; (e.g Future Trunks killing Mecha Freeza)
Spoiler:
Akira Toriyama wrote:My policy is to try and forget things once they’re over. Since if I don’t discard the old and focus on what’s new, I’ll overload my brain capacity. I still haven’t lived down going, “Who the heck is Tao Pai-pai?” that one time I was talking with Ei’ichiro Oda-kun. But the fact that there are still people reading the series after all this time… All I can say is; “thank you.” Really, that’s all.
Akira Toriyama wrote:Drawing Dragon Ball again reminded me of two things--how much I love it, and how much I never want to do it again.
Kunzait_83 wrote:And if you're upset because all this new material completely invalidates the tabletop RPG rulebook-sized statistical system and flowchart for the characters' "canonical Power Levels" that you'd been working on painstakingly for the last bunch of years now... well I don't think there's a kind, non-blunt way of saying this, but that's 100% entirely your own misguided fault for buying so deeply into all this nonsensical garbage in the first place. And that you also have IMMENSELY skewed and comically backwards priorities in what you think is most important and needed to make a good Dragon Ball story.
Zephyr wrote:Goodness, they wrote idiotic drivel in a children's cartoon meant to advertise toys!? Again!? For the ninetieth episode in a row!? Somebody stop the presses! We have to voice our concern over these Super important issues!
Kamiccolo9 wrote:Fair enough, I concede. Sean Schemmel probably has some kind of hidden talent. Maybe he is an expert at Minesweeper. You're right; calling him "talentless" wasn't fair.
Michsi wrote: ↑Mon Jul 04, 2022 11:29 amIn Super Piccolo got yelled off the stage by Vegeta in the U6 Tournament arc and lost to Jiminy Cricket in the ToP , he deserved 15 new transformations with his theme song played by Metallica in the background.
First of all, I don't believe Pikkon defeated Super Perfect Cell. Logically, that should be the case, but there's no indication that Cell was in that state. Likewise, Frieza wasn't "Mecha" or "100%" Frieza. It's possible Cell could have powered up if he was directly confronted, but Pikkon caught him off-guard and acted quickly enough to contain him and KO Frieza. It doesn't really diminish Cell's strength; it just showed Pikkon doesn't play around and likes to finish his job quickly. He didn't need to kill Cell or go toe to toe with him to do that.
Secondly, Pikkon only fought evenly with Goku at the start. Then, it became pretty lopsided. If that was a fight to the death, Pikkon would have won. Goku used tournament rules to "defeat" him.
"Dragon Ball once became a thing of the past to me, but after that, I got angry about the live action movie, re-wrote an entire movie script, and now I'm complaining about the quality of the new TV anime. It seems Dragon Ball has grown on me so much that I can't leave it alone." - Akira Toriyama on Dragon Ball Super
No problem. They're past villains that have been taken care of, that they've already gotten past. Having them come back to be quickly defeated shows how strong the characters have gotten, or makes way for the next big threat.
The question is what you consider the act of villain-foddering. Is it purely a tool to introduce a new character? Can it develop a surviving villain (Piccolo, Vegeta), or act as epilogue to a finished villain whose time in the sun has clearly passed? Can it have a motive or purpose beyond a display of power? The execution is really as important as the act.
Say, the grandmaster of Dragon Ball Whorfing, Trunks killing Mecha Freeza. Mecha Freeza, in of himself, is already one of the greatest contrivances in the series proper, right up there with the Ultra Divine Water (those two actually have a lot in common, now that I think about it). Try as the story might, we have already put so much emotional heft into Freeza (or are have supposed to) that doing it all over again rings hollow- at least it always did for me, even "back in day". You know there is an ulterior motive here, that turns out to be Trunks. Is everything in this encounter about Trunks, though? Do we learn anything more about Freeza by how he reacts to a momentary Super Saiyan rematch? Well, not really; Freeza just does it a lot more colorfully than Piccolo and Vegeta did. Though in Piccolo's case, at least, the shock value of doing jack all to Raditz at point blank lead to greater things.
JulieYBM wrote:
Pannaliciour wrote:Reading all the comments and interviews, my conclusion is: nobody knows what the hell is going on.
While I understand the story purpose of a former threatening figure "doing the job" to build up other characters that are beyond them, I don't care for how it's been used in DB. One of the reasons I'm excited for Resurrection F is the return of Freeza as the main antagonist. Hopefully it will wash away the bad taste of him being jobbed out to Trunks in the Android Saga, Pikhaun in the Buu Saga, Gohan in Fusion Reborn, and Kid Goku in GT. That's too much, turning the series' defining villain into a joke.
)
