Does Dragon Ball work best when it’s lighthearted or dark?

[Michsi]

A good balance between both is what I'd say.

People need to remember that DB's popularity spiked once it started to take itself more seriously as as action story and became a little darker, and then reached the peak of that popularity during one of it's most serious arcs: the Freeza arc!

And people need to remember that it doesn't happen in a vacuum. Just taking itself serious, which is still a pretty silly statement considering are characters like the Ginyu Force, wasn't what made it start to take off. Part of the appeal of the series is its whimsical nature, even in the more serious/earnest.

Contrast works great when it's done well. One of my favorite arcs is the Piccolo Daimao arc, but I don't want every arc to feel like that. It works so well because of what came before and what came after.

I did start the statement with "balance" didn't I?

Taking itself more seriously is an appropriate statement since we never again see stuff like Goku getting to the moon via the power pole or breaking the edges of the panel in an extreme case of breaking the fourth wall. Meaning it changes from a gag-story to a more adventure/action type story. Sure, the Ginyu Force are hilarious, but they also beat Gohan and Krillin within an inch of their life. And can you think of one more thing that was meant to be funny in that whole arc?

The comment was more directed at those who take the whimsical, lighthearted side of the argument to the extreme, as if the Pilaf Arc set the tone for the whole story. Likewise, I also don't agree with the side that claims DB is all about non-stop, balls to the wall, action-packed fight-fest filled only the most baddest of badasses and is totally super serious.

As I said, balance.

[ABED]

Why are so many people's impression of light and whimsical relegated to the Pilaf arc? The 21st Tenkaichi Budokai is also light and whimsical. Yes, there's more action but it's a very lighthearted story.

As I said, balance.

Balance is very vague, and sometimes the story works better when it leans towards one more than the other.

[Michsi]

Why are so many people's impression of light and whimsical relegated to the Pilaf arc? The 21st Tenkaichi Budokai is also light and whimsical. Yes, there's more action but it's a very lighthearted story.

Because that's the arc that resembles Dr. Slump the most in terms of style. There is barely any difference between Pilaf arc and 21 TB for the most part, so I didn't think it was worth mentioning; Pilaf arc is just easier to mention as an example. And while a tournament arc did help DB become more popular, it still didn't propel DB to the heights it reached after the Piccolo arc etc.

As I said, balance.

Balance is very vague, and sometimes the story works better when it leans towards one more than the other.

Maybe. I am going to be one of the people that's going to say it leans in favor of action. Humor adds a interesting flavor to the story, but what drew me to DB was dragons, cool character designs and fighting/action. I'd dare say it's the same for most.
Action doesn't necessarily mean "dark", but it a more serious tone and tension can give a story an edge that appeals to more people.

[Soppa Saia People]

It can be light hearted, but it needs to know when to be serious.

[Lord Beerus]

I think a mixture of both work the best. The Majin Boo arc and Battle Of Gods is the best example of this. Both narratives were so dense, wacky, goofy and zany, kind of like a Looney Toons cartoon, but at the same time masterfully blended action and a sense of drama to it. It's the prime reason BOG is in my opinion the best Dragon Ball movie ever and why I love the Majin Boo arc so much.

[8000 Saiyan]

It depends on the execution.

[Kokonoe]

I enjoy it when things are serious under, well, serious circumstances. What I dislike is overly silliness in moments that should be, in fact, serious (aka Battle of the Gods).

Dragon Ball works great because it has several aspects of life thrown into it instead of just one thing. I think on the serious front it has the right kind of balance and never goes too far in the bad direction. The issue only really is when it goes too far into jokey territory, but once again I really only felt that with Battle of the Gods and Super.

[ABED]

And while a tournament arc did help DB become more popular, it still didn't propel DB to the heights it reached after the Piccolo arc etc.

That audience built over time.

Maybe. I am going to be one of the people that's going to say it leans in favor of action. Humor adds a interesting flavor to the story, but what drew me to DB was dragons, cool character designs and fighting/action. I'd dare say it's the same for most.
Action doesn't necessarily mean "dark", but it a more serious tone and tension can give a story an edge that appeals to more people.

And yet people love the Marvel films because they are funnier. The point I'm making about tone is that there is no such thing as a balance. It's all about execution and that depends on things like what the story is. Battle of Gods being heavily weighted towards humor fit due to the story not being about revenge, whereas it felt more appropriate for a darker story in the Piccolo arc.

[hunduel]

As others said, the mixture of both is what makes Dragon Ball unique and truly enjoyable. The best arcs all had their "funny" and "emotional" moments, and some of them even within the same episode or even during the same minutes or two.

EDIT: I also like the "dark and edgy" tone of the series but ONLY for the Mirai timeline (like the History of Trunks movie, and Black Goku saga). When it is done with the OG groupie it feels somewhat out of place.

[ABED]

I enjoy it when things are serious under, well, serious circumstances. What I dislike is overly silliness in moments that should be, in fact, serious (aka Battle of the Gods).

Dragon Ball works great because it has several aspects of life thrown into it instead of just one thing. I think on the serious front it has the right kind of balance and never goes too far in the bad direction. The issue only really is when it goes too far into jokey territory, but once again I really only felt that with Battle of the Gods and Super.

What moments are you talking about in BOG?

[Kokonoe]

I enjoy it when things are serious under, well, serious circumstances. What I dislike is overly silliness in moments that should be, in fact, serious (aka Battle of the Gods).

Dragon Ball works great because it has several aspects of life thrown into it instead of just one thing. I think on the serious front it has the right kind of balance and never goes too far in the bad direction. The issue only really is when it goes too far into jokey territory, but once again I really only felt that with Battle of the Gods and Super.

What moments are you talking about in BOG?

Particularly Vegeta's scene. Really wasn't a fan of the dancing bit.

[Michsi]

And while a tournament arc did help DB become more popular, it still didn't propel DB to the heights it reached after the Piccolo arc etc.

That audience built over time.

I don't understand, you believe DB drew in more fans because of its ongoing-ness? That it would've become the hit it is today if it stuck with it's Dr. Slump-esque style. That it wasn't the action and the cool fight scenes and moments like Piccolo dying for Gohan or Goku becoming a SSJ that made fans flock to it in droves? Then why didn't Dr. Slump come anywhere near DB's popularity?

And yet people love the Marvel films because they are funnier. The point I'm making about tone is that there is no such thing as a balance. It's all about execution and that depends on things like what the story is. Battle of Gods being heavily weighted towards humor fit due to the story not being about revenge, whereas it felt more appropriate for a darker story in the Piccolo arc.

That execution is the secret to success is a given, I myself have already mentioned this on this board alone more times than I can count. Writing and story creation aren't exact science and there is no formula to get the humor-action ratio right. But the Marvel movies are primary action movies, and while comedy is now an important element thanks to Joss Whedon's involvement, they're not marketed as comedies nor do they aim to be light-hearted or whimsical. They very much take themselves seriously when they need to, they just know how to mix these elements and make it fun.

[ABED]

I don't understand, you believe DB drew in more fans because of its ongoing-ness? That it would've become the hit it is today if it stuck with it's Dr. Slump-esque style. That it wasn't the action and the cool fight scenes and moments like Piccolo dying for Gohan or Goku becoming a SSJ that made fans flock to it in droves? Then why didn't Dr. Slump come anywhere near DB's popularity?

No, it's that the audience didn't just jump in because of the cool action. Good action is easy to find. It's simplistic to claim the audience is primarily there for the action. It's the mix of the action, characters, and humor. Take out the humor and the quirkiness of the world and it's fairly generic. And the popularity didn't start with DBZ.

That execution is the secret to success is a given, I myself have already mentioned this on this board alone more times than I can count. Writing and story creation aren't exact science and there is no formula to get the humor-action ratio right. But the Marvel movies are primary action movies, and while comedy is now an important element thanks to Joss Whedon's involvement, they're not marketed as comedies nor do they aim to be light-hearted or whimsical. They very much take themselves seriously when they need to, they just know how to mix these elements and make it fun.

There was plenty of humor before Joss's involvement. They are action-comedies movies, but now the comedy gets a lot of focus in the marketing. Some are more earnest, some lean towards comedy. I disagree that they don't aim to be light-hearted.

[Captain Strawberry]

I'm a big fan of Gintama so both. However, the series doesn't go over the edges of darkness, I remember Goten losing his mother and friends during the Boo arc but it didn't really amount to the darkness in making the show look dark but I did like Gotenks goofiness.

Toriyama is a gag artist so Dragon ball works well as both.

[ABED]

The Cell arc is not amongst my favorite arcs and it's one of the more earnest arcs in the show.
The Great Saiyaman episodes are pure comedy and I don't enjoy it.
There's no magic formula to it. It all depends on execution.

[Michsi]

No, it's that the audience didn't just jump in because of the cool action. Good action is easy to find. It's simplistic to claim the audience is primarily there for the action. It's the mix of the action, characters, and humor. Take out the humor and the quirkiness of the world and it's fairly generic. And the popularity didn't start with DBZ.

And my belief is that a good portion of the audience jumped in because of the action. Sure it had it's fair share of popularity before the Piccolo arc, Toriyama was already a well-known manga artist in Japan by the time he started working on DB, but I don't think it's a coincidence that DB's popularity shot up drastically once the action side got kicked up a notch or two. The reason the anime was re-branded as DBZ was precisely because of that shift in tone, and we know which one of the two is more popular. Yes, there is an inherent quirkiness to DB that adds to it's charm and as I said, both elements helped shape the franchise into what it is, I just think the action portion is what got it it's worldwide level fame.

There was plenty of humor before Joss's involvement. They are action-comedies movies, but now the comedy gets a lot of focus in the marketing. Some are more earnest, some lean towards comedy. I disagree that they don't aim to be light-hearted.

There are nuances to the term "light-hearted" too. I mean, Iron Man 3 had humor but it also dealt with PTSD. It takes itself very seriously when it has to. It aims to be fun first and foremost, and not thought provoking, but it's main element is still action.

[Doctor.]

It works when it's well-written which is not very often nowadays.

My favorite arcs count as 'dark' ones if that means anything.

[Ripper 30]

I think a good Balance between the two will be the Best. I think this is why Boo Arc was so enjoyable because it kept a nice balance between dark and comedic tone Like The fate of the universe was Finally dependent on two kids was unique in a way and how he fights with Super Boo inventing new techniques and piccolo Being worried all along and a candy eating Demon is a threat. Even Freeza Arc had some humour with the inclusion of Ginyu Tokusentai. so, I think a good Balance between the two will work. But i guess fans will lean more on the darker side of the show because that is the trend nowdays.

[ekrolo2]

It works when it's well-written which is not very often nowadays.

My favorite arcs count as 'dark' ones if that means anything.

It means you realize that DBs true appeal is its dark, gritty, realism

[Doctor.]

It works when it's well-written which is not very often nowadays.

My favorite arcs count as 'dark' ones if that means anything.

It means you realize that DBs true appeal is its dark, gritty, realism

Well, I do have to say that DB fucks up more often when it attempts dark arcs. Usually bullshit in the gag-centric arcs can be excused.