Frieza's design change in Broly

[dragon boss z]

I'm not talking about the different colors they went with, as that was a design choice to make it look more like the original manga colors. I'm not talking about hos his chest design is different as it isn't' white and it doesn't have the shoulder pads, as that may have been the initial part of his transformation into his second form and the reason his armor broke off. I'm talking about how in the beginning of the movie Frieza did not have lines on his arms or legs. They were just solid red. However, in the next scene we see him in before he blows up planet Vegeta, he does of the lines on his arms and legs, just like how he did in every other instance we see him.

Here are some pictures to see what I'm talking about




So my question is, what is the reason for this? I have a few theories.

1. In the trailer you can see Frieza did not have the lines on his arms or his armor when blowing up planet Vegeta,

but they added both in the actual movie.

So they may have fixed his design to match how it's supposed to look in dragon ball minus and the original manga, and they just didn't feel like, or forgot to make the changes to his arms and legs in his initial scene.
2. Frieza was not done growing in the first scene, and after the 5 year time skip he grew lines on his arms and legs.
3. Frieza just decided to modify his form, as he should be able to do.

So what are your ideas?

[Koitsukai]

To me it felt like he was just a kid. It was 30 years before the Namek arc, so it makes sense.

[Grimlock]

I'm just glad that none of that "he's a kid" bullshit is in the movie, allowing the destruction of the planet to be what it has to be: a more serious thing.

[dragon boss z]

To me it felt like he was just a kid. It was 30 years before the Namek arc, so it makes sense.

Considering he was being handed the keys to the kingdom, I assume he would have to at least be close to full grown though. I could see him being a sub adult or something though, and then he got the lines when he fully matured. Similar to how male lions can be pretty much full grown without having their full mane yet.

[dragon boss z]

I'm just glad that none of that "he's a kid" bullshit is not in the movie, allowing the destruction of the planet to be what it has to be: a more serious thing.

What "he's a kid bullshit" are you referring to?

[Grimlock]

There were some promotional nonsense saying that Freeza is supposed to be a kid by the AGE 730s. Thank Dende the movie doesn't acknowledge that.

[dragon boss z]

There were some promotional nonsense saying that Freeza is supposed to be a kid by the AGE 730s. Thank Dende the movie doesn't acknowledge that.

Yeah, I'm not sure how seriously that should be taken. In the movie Frieza talks exactly like an adult, is about the same size as normal, and was just given control of the empire. Maybe it's a translation thing, where it is really supposed to be calling him young, or an older teenager, which I guess can be considered a child.

[dragon boss z]

Anybody else have any opinions?

[Xeogran]

I'm not talking about hos his chest design is different as it isn't' white and it doesn't have the shoulder pads, as that may have been the initial part of his transformation into his second form and the reason his armor broke off.

Do you think so? Games that portray Frieza without the armor also keep the white parts. I don't know why they decided to change it in the movie, but I hope his design under the armor wasn't just retconned and changed for another. I just prefer the explanation that he was indeed younger in the movie, so the features we know of, didn't grow yet.

[dragon boss z]

I'm not talking about hos his chest design is different as it isn't' white and it doesn't have the shoulder pads, as that may have been the initial part of his transformation into his second form and the reason his armor broke off.

Do you think so? Games that portray Frieza without the armor also keep the white parts. I don't know why they decided to change it in the movie, but I hope his design under the armor wasn't just retconned and changed for another. I just prefer the explanation that he was indeed younger in the movie, so the features we know of, didn't grow yet.

Spoiler:

That may be the case, but if you look at Frieza with his armor on you don't see the white parts on his shoulder even though you probably should if they are there.

Spoiler:

Though Frieza could have adapted his form, or it could be bio armor like it's called in Xenoverse.

[Polyphase Avatron]

I think he was a teenager (or the equivalent for his species) at the youngest.

[sunsetshimmer]

Speaking of colors alone, while it's totally fine to be faithful to manga and i don't expect them to give Piccolo only 4 fingers, why make Frieza look like in manga yet give Bulma blue hair? I mean if we go with manga colors, then all characters should look like in manga, not just Frieza?

[Galan007]

There were some promotional nonsense saying that Freeza is supposed to be a kid by the AGE 730s. Thank Dende the movie doesn't acknowledge that.

Is the context in reference to Freeza being a "child" where age is concerned, or is it in reference to him being the "child" of King Cold?

[dragon boss z]

Speaking of colors alone, while it's totally fine to be faithful to manga and i don't expect them to give Piccolo only 4 fingers, why make Frieza look like in manga yet give Bulma blue hair? I mean if we go with manga colors, then all characters should look like in manga, not just Frieza?

Because Toriyama colors her and Trunks with blue hair now, so they just go with Toriyama colors. That's why future Trunks had blue hare in Super, but for some reason they ignored that when Toriyama designed kid Trunks with blue hair for the BoG movie.

[Grimlock]

Is the context in reference to Freeza being a "child" where age is concerned, or is it in reference to him being the "child" of King Cold?

I didn't understand your question but assuming you are referring to "where lies the problem in Freeza being a kid" then the answer is the former.

[Galan007]

I didn't understand your question but assuming you are referring to "where lies the problem in Freeza being a kid" then the answer is the former.

Herms said the quote refers to Freeza as a "child", so I was just curious what the context is?

Is it just in reference to Freeza's age(ie. he is supposed to be very young), or is it in reference to him being the "child"(ie. son) of King Cold?