What phrases/opinions/things bring out your irate fanboy?

[fadeddreams5]

I don't particularly care if "the next/another dimension" is a technically correct term. It's an asinine, insulting piece of censorship, and an utterly idiotic attempt at trying to hide the fact that people, you know, die.

There were so many alternatives they could have used. People have already mentioned "otherworld," "afterlife," etc. All of which sound less stupid than "Nappa attacked, and he sent Piccolo to the NEXT DIMENSION(tm)." They could have done what Saban did with Spider-Man, and used "destroyed" to an annoying extent, and that would have been more sensible.

There is no valid excuse for the Next Dimension bullshit. Whoever came up with it was either drunk, or just joking around, and some executive took him seriously for some reason, probably because he was also drunk.

"Goku's trapped in another dimension." You cannot seriously defend this crap.

At least they weren't sent to the shadow realm.

[MarCas92]

At least they weren't sent to the shadow realm.

As silly as that censorship was, I have to admit it was REALLY clever. If it was in the original, I bet no one would've minded. Apart from Jounouchi's duel against Marik, no one really dies at the end of a Shadow game (or death game in Japan). I think in the context of the show Shadow Game makes more sense, both as a name and concept.

[Zephyr]

People giving Out-Of-Universe answers to In-Universe questions seems to be a big one for me as of late.

[Polyphase Avatron]

People giving Out-Of-Universe answers to In-Universe questions seems to be a big one for me as of late.

Sometimes those are the only possible answers.

[Zephyr]

People giving Out-Of-Universe answers to In-Universe questions seems to be a big one for me as of late.

Sometimes those are the only possible answers.

I don't think that makes them appropriate answers, though. If you only give an Out-Of-Universe answer to an In-Universe question, it doesn't really seem to me like you're actually answering the In-Universe question, but rather dodging it and trying to weasel around it.

I think the more appropriate course of action for someone who sees an In-Universe question and does not have an In-Universe answer, is to either reply with "I/we don't know", or to not even reply at all.

If the person is asking the question "is there an official In-Universe explanation for X?" or "what is the official In-Universe explanation for X?", and X is likely little more than the writers overlooking something, making a mistake, etc., then the appropriate response, to me at least, would be more along the lines of "there isn't one".

If the person is asking more abstractly "why did X happen?", then they do not appear to be asking for what the official explanation is, but rather, for any possible explanation. And in these cases, which to my memory are the majority of the cases, it is thus inappropriate to give answers like "there isn't one" or "well the writers...."

[MCDaveG]

I feel you guys, I am also closing the internet window when I see firey red debates about: ''How is it possible that Goku or Bardock breathes in friggin' space?!''
And here goes some other fan, who is die-hard fan of Discovery Science or whom didn't sleep during the science classes at school and ignites a debate about
how the atmosphere is layered and if a human (oh, sorry, Saiyan! who probably has different bio-traits) with un-human training like Goku can breathe in stratosphere,
which ignites a debate in what part and altitude in atmosphere they actually are and... It's a god damn ANIMATED SHOW FOR KIDS!

And kids don't fucking care, it's two characters who are going to blow their brains out hovering above the planet! How cool is that?!

Have you ever saw someone on Star Wars forum bitching over how lightsaber is a scientifically bullshit and quits being a fan of the movies?

[T Pac]

People giving Out-Of-Universe answers to In-Universe questions seems to be a big one for me as of late.

Yeah, I think it can be to keep that distinction between out-of-universe and in-universe when discussing something.

Take Mr. Satan as an example in the opposite direction -- I've often read people saying that he was an awful character during the Cell arc but became a great character in the Boo arc. In-universe, that might be accurate, but I think he was always a great character, even when he was totally oblivious of the truth when he was first introduced because it introduced a really interesting dynamic between the 'Z-World' and the rest of the world.

[ABED]

People giving Out-Of-Universe answers to In-Universe questions seems to be a big one for me as of late.

Yeah, I think it can be to keep that distinction between out-of-universe and in-universe when discussing something.

Take Mr. Satan as an example in the opposite direction -- I've often read people saying that he was an awful character during the Cell arc but became a great character in the Boo arc. In-universe, that might be accurate, but I think he was always a great character, even when he was totally oblivious of the truth when he was first introduced because it introduced a really interesting dynamic between the 'Z-World' and the rest of the world.

Out of universe that can still be true. Often times characters can be irritating when introduced but become more likable or interesting later on. Andy Bernard in The Office is a great example

[dbzfan7]

As of late, power level enthusiasts. Liking to pretend everything is thought out when really beyond them saying who's stronger is about the best they're gonna get. Occasionally we'll get a few other more specific lines, but if you think it'll gel with the fan made consensus, prepare to be disappointed. Then there's twisting statements and interpretations, or refusing to acknowledge another interpretation. A fun little puzzle game I think one person once called it, turned into an obnoxious debate.

[Soppa Saia People]

"does CPR on this". Here's one that really annoys me and one I saw a couple months back, on Did you know voice actoring, (I even got in the conversation and I get so annoy that I had to block the user and the post) was this " one didn't Goku get a real voice actor. Fuck you Japan." Besides this not making any sense (what the hell is a real voice actor ?) this guy was both rude and dismissive. Not to mention why the fuck did he get so mad so made over a voice actor and just one series ?

[dae428]

Stupid debates where people just say certain things as facts while not having proper evidence or knowledge to back up what they say. It's also irritating when said people straight up refuse to acknowledge those who refute their statements and just go about mindlessly saying the person is wrong because "insert personal head canon here".

Also 'canon' debates in general. They've become kind of annoying...

[ABED]

I think people just don't want to admit that they are watching a series made for kids in elementary and middle school.

Kids in a different country, context is important.

[rereboy]

I think people just don't want to admit that they are watching a series made for kids in elementary and middle school.

Kids in a different country, context is important.

That is more an excuse than anything else. Entertaiment for kids in another country might be more relaxed in term of sexual, violence and death references for example, but it will still be for kids.

[ABED]

I think people just don't want to admit that they are watching a series made for kids in elementary and middle school.

<br abp="691">Kids in a different country, context is important.

<br abp="692"><br abp="693">That is more an excuse than anything else. Entertaiment for kids in another country might be more relaxed in term of sexual, violence and death references for example, but it will still be for kids.

But when he's writing it, his context is the norms for Japanese kids. I agree that it's not as adult as something like Justified, but I would say that for Americans, the target demo would be more late teens than early teens. Whether American standards are more prudish is not the issue.

[rereboy]

But when he's writing it, his context is the norms for Japanese kids. I agree that it's not as adult as something like Justified, but I would say that for Americans, the target demo would be more late teens than early teens. Whether American standards are more prudish is not the issue.

Actually, that's exactly the issue. In the USA, Viz's DB manga has a rating of T (for teens) while Viz's DBZ has a rating of A (all ages) simply because DB has more clear sexual references.

[ABED]

But when he's writing it, his context is the norms for Japanese kids. I agree that it's not as adult as something like Justified, but I would say that for Americans, the target demo would be more late teens than early teens. Whether American standards are more prudish is not the issue.

Actually, that's exactly the issue. In the USA, Viz's DB manga has a rating of T (for teens) while Viz's DBZ has a rating of A (all ages) simply because DB has more clear sexual references.

It's not the issue because I'm not saying whether those standards are right or wrong, but the same content in two different countries is going to be rated differently based on the cultural norms, including their views on sex and violence. In America, we tend to shelter kids from perceived sexual content and violence much more than Japanese kids. So while in Japan, DB is targeted at young teens, the uncut version of DB would be seen as more appropriate for older teens. I'm not arguing the normative, I'm discussing the positive, to put it in economic terms.

In order to meet the standards "appropriate" for American kids, DBZ and DB had to be edited. Gone are scenes of Kuririn being impaled and dialog indicating General Blue's homosexuality. Had they aired an uncut version without those changes, the show would've had to air at a different time.

[rereboy]

It's not the issue because I'm not saying whether those standards are right or wrong, but the same content in two different countries is going to be rated differently based on the cultural norms, including their views on sex and violence. In America, we tend to shelter kids from perceived sexual content and violence much more than Japanese kids. So while in Japan, DB is targeted at young teens, the uncut version of DB would be seen as more appropriate for older teens.

In America, the same exact manga, was divided into two portions.

The second half, that actually contains more violence and action, was deemed for all ages, aka the rating that is given to series aimed at kids and thus perfectly suitable for kids in America according to the editor and regulators.

However, the first half, which actually has less violence than the second part, and doesn't have any themes that are more mature but does have more clear sexual references, was deemed for teens, as in not suitable for kids, just teens and up. Which means that the only cause for such a difference is the added sexual references.

In conclusion, without those sexual references, Dragon Ball would have been considered for all ages in its entirety and suitable for kids in America according to the editor and regulators. Therefore, it's merely the sexual references that make the difference in rating compared to Japan where it's considered suitable for kids. That means that american standards being more prudish is exactly the issue here because it's the sole difference in rating in the series and the sole reason why the manga isn't considered suitable for kids in its entirety in america. There isn't any other cultural norm preventing Dragon Ball from having an all ages rating for the entirety of the manga in america.

Don't know how to explain it better than that.

[ABED]

However, the first half, which actually has less violence than the second part, and doesn't have any themes that are more mature but does have more clear sexual references, was deemed for teens, as in not suitable for kids, just teens and up. Which means that the only cause for such a difference is the added sexual references.

America has weird standards - Sex is a no no, violence is okey dokey. And the manga in America had a fair bit of editing. I don't know what the standards are in print vs. television.

There isn't any other cultural norm preventing Dragon Ball from having an all ages rating for the entirety of the manga in america.

Never said there was, but it's there, hence the ratings.

[rereboy]

Never said there was, but it's there, hence the ratings.

The sole difference is, like I said from the start, a lesser tolerance for things like sexual references. I fail to see your point in disagreeing with me by saying that it wasn't the issue when you actually aren't disagreeing with it after all.

[ABED]

The sole difference is, like I said from the start, a lesser tolerance for things like sexual references. I fail to see your point in disagreeing with me by saying that it wasn't the issue when you actually aren't disagreeing with it after all.

And violent content. You were the one that disagreed with my statement first, though I'm not sure why if you think we aren't disagreeing. For the record, i don't think we are, there's just confusion. When I wrote "Whether American standards are more prudish is not the issue" what I was saying was the point i was trying to get across was that the standards are different so that's why the show has different demos in the two different countries. Writing for young teens in Japan is different from writing for the same age group in the US. If you have the same content, it's going to come with either a different rating or it will require changes.

You wrote "but it will still be for kids". Yes, but not the same age unless you make significant changes for the reasons you and I have both mentioned.