Would you say Toei misunderstood Dragon Ball?

[WittyUsername]

I assume that most people here have heard this before. There has been this argument in recent years that Toei never fully understood the spirit of the series, particularly when it came to how Goku was portrayed. While certainly not as bad as FUNimation in this regard, people have argued that Toei made Goku out to be more of a standard hero character, which is a sentiment that Toriyama himself expressed in the past.

The question is, would you say these arguments are valid? Did Toei truly not understand the core of what Dragon Ball is supposed to be about? Did they not understand who Son Goku is?

[Matches Malone]

I never understood this, as Goku was portrayed as somewhat heroic in the manga as well. What exactly do fans mean by Toei making him more heroic than Toriyama ? Are there specific scenes in the manga that were changes in the anime to make Goku look better ?

[Zestanor]

Hm, I don’t think Dragon Ball is a nuanced enough thing to be capable of misunderstanding. It could be purposely altered, like the English dub, but at it’s core it is a (nicely arranged) collection of shounen tropes. The anime follows the manga panel for panel. I’ve heard the argument that Toei loves Goku at the expense of the rest of Dragon Ball, but not that they misinterpreted him. All this “Goku is not a hero” stuff... well, yeah he obviously is. He’s not Superman, but he’s a hero. Goku isn’t a complex character, and Dragon Ball does not really have subtle themes. I say the anime is a very faithful adaptation. Even GT, as a “filler arc.”

[KBABZ]

I kinda feel that. Goku is often put into more outwardly heroic situations in filler episodes like Goku Goes to Demon Land. However the fact that the story has to be done in 22 minutes certainly exacerbates this compared to, say, Muscle Tower, where Goku does the same thing but over the course of 10 episodes, so there's more focus on having fun fighting people than the actual mission at hand. I think the main thing Toei possibly didn't emphasize enough is that Goku is often an unintentional hero by circumstance than by choice, and when Toei doesn't have to show this (like Goku being disappointed that his original self died before he could fight the Androids), they generally don't adhere to it as much.

I also think there's a slight but definite difference in the tone, especially when it comes to the marketing. I ADORE all of the Red Ribbon Army insert songs and associated tracks like Dragon Ball Legend, The Blue Travelers, With A Burning Heart Defeat The Red Ribbon Army, and The Son Goku Song, but they skew a bit closer to being more overtly appealing to children than the manga itself does.

[kei17]

Yes, I think that kind of arguments are valid, especially when it comes the character of Son Goku. Toei has been mishandling Goku's lack in common sense since he became an adult. It worked when he was still a kid, but they always tend to overlook his cleverness in fights and emphasize the thoughtless side of his nature, which painfully sticks out especially after becoming an adult. Also, they like to make him act like a simple battle-maniac. It's shown in a quantitative way by DBanimators on Twitter.

Also, in DBZ movies, Goku is overly portrayed as a dedicated, narrow-minded hero. He often says "I'll never forgive you!" to the villains and aggressively kill them in the end, but in the original manga, he is always a very generous and merciful person who lets bad guys get away. My guess is that he is depicted this way because the movies were produced in Toei's classical Jidaigeki style. Jidaigeki movies and TV dramas often focus on poetic justice, revenge, and the manneristic showdown in which the protagonist kills the villain after yelling a signature phrase like "I won't let you get away with this!" with the theme music playing in the background. This format was succeeded by into Tokusatsu shows and magical girl anime like Sailor Moon. Toriyama doesn't like this sort of mannerism, and he tends to outfox readers' expectations. However, Toei employed their traditional style in DBZ movies in order to shape stand-alone stories into short movies. As a result, Goku's character became very different than that in the original manga.

I think their biggest misunderstanding was exposed in the final episode of GT. They didn't understand that the Dragon Ball series was about Goku and his friends connected by curious coincidences of the magical Dragon Balls. They cleared away both Goku and the Dragon Balls and treated them like it was all just a daydream.

[KBABZ]

Yes, I think that kind of arguments are valid, especially when it comes the character of Son Goku. Toei has been mishandling Goku's lack in common sense since he became an adult. It worked when he was still a kid, but they always tend to overlook his cleverness in fights and emphasize the thoughtless side of his nature, which painfully sticks out especially after becoming an adult. Also, they like to make him act like a simple battle-maniac. It's shown in a quantitative way by DBanimators on Twitter.

Also, in DBZ movies, Goku is overly portrayed as a dedicated, narrow-minded hero. He often says "I'll never forgive you!" to the villains and aggressively kill them in the end, but in the original manga, he is always a very generous and merciful person who lets bad guys get away. My guess is that he is depicted this way because the movies were produced in Toei's classical Jidaigeki style. Jidaigeki movies and TV dramas often focus on poetic justice, revenge, and the manneristic showdown in which the protagonist kills the villain after yelling a signature phrase like "I won't let you get away with this!" with the theme music playing in the background. This format was succeeded by into Tokusatsu shows and magical girl anime like Sailor Moon. Toriyama doesn't like this sort of mannerism, and he tends to outfox readers' expectations. However, Toei employed their traditional style in DBZ movies in order to shape stand-alone stories into short movies. As a result, Goku's character became very different than that in the original manga.

I haven't watched the movies (yet), but I feel like they're more geared to be anime popcorn flicks, with the implications that the villain is so powerful and irideemable that sparing them is pointless (maybe like Daimao?). Which kinda flies in the face of Vegeta and Frieza's ruthlessness and still being spared, but hey, you have to write them out to maintain the illusion of continuity SOMEHOW, right?

[FoolsGil]

When it comes to Goku as a character, I like that Toei and Funi misunderstood Goku as a character, and I'm tired of pretending I didn't. Goku's an a-hole now. Super makes me prefer Vegeta. I hated Vegeta - For years. But I didn't hate Goku for years. Still don't, but I very much dislike him now.

[Grimlock]

About the "hero" thing specifically, well, if Toei got it wrong before, they "got it right" here (?).

That's not to say Toei didn't misunderstand. In Dragon Ball Super we see a Goku who should have never acted the way he did, like a boy despite being 43 years old. Then again, we also have Xeno Goku's portrayal, which proves Toei knows how he should be... That's a tough situation, I'll give them that much.

[SpiritBombTriumphant]

I think they do, at least on the topic of Goku. There is an interview with Toriyama where he talks about the "evilness of Goku" and how he commonly did what his readers begged him not to do (ex. killing off Vegeta on Namek). Toriyama mentioned that Toei made Goku more heroic than he is in the manga, which is something that bothered him.

Right. There’s how, basically, Son Goku from Dragon Ball doesn’t fight for the sake of others, but because he wants to fight against strong guys. So once Dragon Ball got animated, at any rate, I’ve always been dissatisfied with the “righteous hero”-type portrayal they gave him. I guess I couldn’t quite get them to grasp the elements of “poison” that slip in and out of sight among the shadows.

Source: https://www.kanzenshuu.com/translations ... interview/

Besides this, they also misunderstood its popularity. They wouldn't have given it the shaft with Super (until the ToP, at least) and they most likely would have been more quick to get it licensed to Funimation than they did (episode 66 or so). Toei simply never understood DB until recently with the ToP and Broly, in my opinion. They never bothered to get Goku portrayed properly, they didn't care to keep the master audio of the series, they didn't bother to keep the film properly stored, they gave the show half-assed animation, etc.

[TheGodfather93]

I think they do, at least on the topic of Goku. There is an interview with Toriyama where he talks about the "evilness of Goku" and how he commonly did what his readers begged him not to do (ex. killing off Vegeta on Namek). Toriyama mentioned that Toei made Goku more heroic than he is in the manga, which is something that bothered him.

Right. There’s how, basically, Son Goku from Dragon Ball doesn’t fight for the sake of others, but because he wants to fight against strong guys. So once Dragon Ball got animated, at any rate, I’ve always been dissatisfied with the “righteous hero”-type portrayal they gave him. I guess I couldn’t quite get them to grasp the elements of “poison” that slip in and out of sight among the shadows.

Source: https://www.kanzenshuu.com/translations ... interview/

Besides this, they also misunderstood its popularity. They wouldn't have given it the shaft with Super (until the ToP, at least) and they most likely would have been more quick to get it licensed to Funimation than they did (episode 66 or so). Toei simply never understood DB until recently with the ToP and Broly, in my opinion. They never bothered to get Goku portrayed properly, they didn't care to keep the master audio of the series, they didn't bother to keep the film properly stored, they gave the show half-assed animation, etc.

That Toriyama quote says it all, really.

Goku isn't a hero because he wants to be; he's a selfish, reckless battle junkie who only ends up saving people as a by-product of fighting genocidal villains.

The most egregious example of this "poison" in Goku's personality is at the start of the Android arc, after Trunks had warned them about the androids. Bulma suggested they use the Dragon Balls to find Dr Gero's location and stop him before he can finish building the androids but Goku, along with Vegeta, Piccolo and Tien, shot her down. These morons wanted to test their strength against the androids, despite the immense threat they posted to the world, and despite knowing full well that, in another timeline, the androids killed them and their friends, and turned the Earth into a living hell. Some hero, huh?

Super has a hell of a lot of flaws, but it portrayed Goku a lot more accurately than the anime and pre-BoG movies.

[KBABZ]

Goku isn't a hero because he wants to be; he's a selfish, reckless battle junkie who only ends up saving people as a by-product of fighting genocidal villains.

I feel like that's flanderizing Goku's character a bit. Goku loves fighting as his life-long passion for sure, but he isn't above seeing reason in certain situations, like realizing he needs to fuse with Vegeta to defeat Buu. IMO Goku's behaviour is one of those "secret" wuxia facets that Kunzait mentions: he's a hero who doesn't fly about the world looking for evil to vanquish, he goes about his own life and will do the right thing if it's asked of him, be it through somebody else or through pure circumstance. If Goku was really as selfish as you say, there's no way he would have given the time of day to Bora's death. He has a strong sense of justice if you provoke it by being an asshole, as shown through Tao, Tien, Daimao and Frieza.

IMO the end of Super is probably the best summation of Goku's character in modern Dragon Ball media. He knew Broly posed an enormous risk, but he could also see that he was provoked into his rage, so Goku held no grudge against him. Goku wanted to help him out at the end both as a good thing and to provide him with an exciting new opponent and ally for the future.

The most egregious example of this "poison" in Goku's personality is at the start of the Android arc, after Trunks had warned them about the androids. Bulma suggested they use the Dragon Balls to find Dr Gero's location and stop him before he can finish building the androids but Goku, along with Vegeta, Piccolo and Tien, shot her down. These morons wanted to test their strength against the androids, despite the immense threat they posted to the world, and despite knowing full well that, in another timeline, the androids killed them and their friends, and turned the Earth into a living hell. Some hero, huh?

That's true, but there's two factors to their argument that a lot of people forget. First, their original timeline selves did not know the Androids were coming and didn't train for their arrival; while daft, there's a solid logic behind the idea that if they trained for their arrival three years in advance, they could handle them. Second, the fact that the Androids who eventually DID arrive for them were much stronger than anticipated completely blindsided everybody, including Trunks who has direct experience with the originals in his time.

[MyVisionity]

He has a strong sense of justice if you provoke it by being an asshole, as shown through Tao, Tien, Daimao and Frieza.

That's not really heroism though. Those fights were largely personal. When it wasn't about his love for battle, it was about avenging his friends. That's somewhat righteous, but only in a small or simple way.

[SupremeKai25]

I think they do, at least on the topic of Goku. There is an interview with Toriyama where he talks about the "evilness of Goku" and how he commonly did what his readers begged him not to do (ex. killing off Vegeta on Namek). Toriyama mentioned that Toei made Goku more heroic than he is in the manga, which is something that bothered him.

Right. There’s how, basically, Son Goku from Dragon Ball doesn’t fight for the sake of others, but because he wants to fight against strong guys. So once Dragon Ball got animated, at any rate, I’ve always been dissatisfied with the “righteous hero”-type portrayal they gave him. I guess I couldn’t quite get them to grasp the elements of “poison” that slip in and out of sight among the shadows.

Source: https://www.kanzenshuu.com/translations ... interview/

Besides this, they also misunderstood its popularity. They wouldn't have given it the shaft with Super (until the ToP, at least) and they most likely would have been more quick to get it licensed to Funimation than they did (episode 66 or so). Toei simply never understood DB until recently with the ToP and Broly, in my opinion. They never bothered to get Goku portrayed properly, they didn't care to keep the master audio of the series, they didn't bother to keep the film properly stored, they gave the show half-assed animation, etc.

That Toriyama quote says it all, really.

Goku isn't a hero because he wants to be; he's a selfish, reckless battle junkie who only ends up saving people as a by-product of fighting genocidal villains.

The most egregious example of this "poison" in Goku's personality is at the start of the Android arc, after Trunks had warned them about the androids. Bulma suggested they use the Dragon Balls to find Dr Gero's location and stop him before he can finish building the androids but Goku, along with Vegeta, Piccolo and Tien, shot her down. These morons wanted to test their strength against the androids, despite the immense threat they posted to the world, and despite knowing full well that, in another timeline, the androids killed them and their friends, and turned the Earth into a living hell. Some hero, huh?

Super has a hell of a lot of flaws, but it portrayed Goku a lot more accurately than the anime and pre-BoG movies.

It really didn't... once again Goku started trouble because he wouldn't leave Zamasu alone and didn't act politely. Bulma even tells him "So all of this started because you wanted a fight?! You idiot!". Then he forgets the Zeno button and Mafuba seal and pretty much dooms the entire multiverse.

[KBABZ]

He has a strong sense of justice if you provoke it by being an asshole, as shown through Tao, Tien, Daimao and Frieza.

That's not really heroism though. Those fights were largely personal. When it wasn't about his love for battle, it was about avenging his friends. That's somewhat righteous, but only in a small or simple way.

I didn't say they were outright heroic. Baba predicts, in the manga, that Goku will save the world. As we see, while Goku technically accomplishes this, he does it mainly to avenge Krillin and Roshi's deaths, and he gets credited for saving the world mostly through circumstance, almost like how Mr. Satan will much later on. I feel like Toriyama played Goku's heroic victory of saving the world for laughs considering Goku was 100% unaware that Daimao even took over the world to begin with and had his own goals as always.

Toei of course spin that into stuff like the "With A Burning Heart! Defeat The Red Ribbon Army!!" montage as Goku approaches RRA HQ, that makes it out that Goku is attacking their headquarters out of revenge, when in actuality all he really wants is their Dragon Ball. I'd imagine that montage is something Toriyama would have took issue with.

[TheGodfather93]

Goku isn't a hero because he wants to be; he's a selfish, reckless battle junkie who only ends up saving people as a by-product of fighting genocidal villains.

I feel like that's flanderizing Goku's character a bit. Goku loves fighting as his life-long passion for sure, but he isn't above seeing reason in certain situations, like realizing he needs to fuse with Vegeta to defeat Buu. IMO Goku's behaviour is one of those "secret" wuxia facets that Kunzait mentions: he's a hero who doesn't fly about the world looking for evil to vanquish, he goes about his own life and will do the right thing if it's asked of him, be it through somebody else or through pure circumstance. If Goku was really as selfish as you say, there's no way he would have given the time of day to Bora's death. He has a strong sense of justice if you provoke it by being an asshole, as shown through Tao, Tien, Daimao and Frieza.

IMO the end of Super is probably the best summation of Goku's character in modern Dragon Ball media. He knew Broly posed an enormous risk, but he could also see that he was provoked into his rage, so Goku held no grudge against him. Goku wanted to help him out at the end both as a good thing and to provide him with an exciting new opponent and ally for the future.

Kid Goku was a completely different character than adult Goku. Kid Goku had a very strong sense of personal justice, and had no qualms about killing the people who wronged him or his friends. Hell, even Goku at the start of the Z portion of the manga was a different person to the Goku that fought Vegeta. It was only after the Vegeta fight that his Saiyan nature began to overpower whatever sense of rationality he had, and every arc thereafter had Goku doing something reckless just to sate his battle lust.

He let Vegeta live because he wanted to fight him again, despite Vegeta saying he'd come back to Earth to destroy it; he refused to kill Space Hitler, despite the very real threat that Space Hitler could come to Earth for revenge and blow it up from space; he let a mad scientist spend three years building a pair of immensely powerful killer robots; and he withheld SSJ3 against Majin Vegeta and was a large reason why Buu was revived.

The most egregious example of this "poison" in Goku's personality is at the start of the Android arc, after Trunks had warned them about the androids. Bulma suggested they use the Dragon Balls to find Dr Gero's location and stop him before he can finish building the androids but Goku, along with Vegeta, Piccolo and Tien, shot her down. These morons wanted to test their strength against the androids, despite the immense threat they posted to the world, and despite knowing full well that, in another timeline, the androids killed them and their friends, and turned the Earth into a living hell. Some hero, huh?

That's true, but there's two factors to their argument that a lot of people forget. First, their original timeline selves did not know the Androids were coming and didn't train for their arrival; while daft, there's a solid logic behind the idea that if they trained for their arrival three years in advance, they could handle them. Second, the fact that the Androids who eventually DID arrive for them were much stronger than anticipated completely blindsided everybody, including Trunks who has direct experience with the originals in his time.

There's no solid logic there; its just selfishness of the highest degree. A real hero would've taken action and stopped the problem before it ever became a problem. They would've gone to Baba or used the Dragon Balls to find the location of Dr Gero's lab, then they would've stopped him before the androids could be built. They didn't have to kill him or anything either, they could've just arrested/detained him and destroyed all his research/equipment.

After dealing with Dr Gero in a reasonable, logical and heroic manner, there was nothing stopping them from increasing their training regardless, in preparation for any future threats that might appear.

I can't help but wonder how Trunks would've reacted if he overheard Goku and pals treat the android threat that ruined his life so lightly, and callously shoot down Bulma's suggestion.

[LoganForkHands73]

I think Toei's main 'misunderstanding' was an inevitable byproduct of adapting from a concise manga to a bloated long-form anime, which was that they accidentally made everything feel too epic. Every single action is given far more build-up and perhaps undue weight because they needed to fill for time. The Super Saiyan transformation is obviously a big deal, but the anime arguably blowing it out of proportion in the early Z arcs came back to bite Toei in the ass when Toriyama started to demonstrate that it was nowhere near as special or unique as they had previously portrayed, first with Future Trunks and later with the Saiyan kids. Toriyama doing that in the manga was still a bit blase but it felt less egregious because of the manga's brisker pace and his quirky, pantsing writing style giving it some precedence. It was ultimately a smart move of Toriyama's to almost immediately introduce Trunks as a Super Saiyan after the Namek Saga to acclimatise readers to the idea that others could reach that level, whereas the anime included a bunch of filler (which was necessary for the poor animators to give them a chance to catch up, but still). I get the feeling that people who were only exposed to the anime were much more ticked off by the apparent nerfing of the Super Saiyan legend that had been beaten in so much in the early Z arcs.

The power of the fighters is made much more visible as even small ki blasts from weaker fighters create huge nuclear mushroom clouds and simple ki charging shakes the entire planet. Although the manga had also gone of the rails with power scaling, the anime gave that an added visual flair which of course made battles more visually appealing, but the power on display became harder to gauge or relate to. Toriyama added lots of explosions as well, but he kept things comparatively simple and easy to follow. As PlagueOfGripes said, the power levels were insignificant because we were constantly seeing the same visually earthshattering feats, just with different arbitrary numbers attached to them. In a static manga, there's less of that sense like "HOLY FUCK, DID GOTEN JUST DESTROY AN ENTIRE COUNTRY?"

As for Goku's character, I agree that he definitely portrayed as more ideally heroic in the anime in part thanks to how he's always saving the day singlehanded in the movies, but it's again down to the anime's more melodramatic tone.

There's also Toei's greater dedication to worldbuilding which wasn't necessarily a bad thing, but it went against Toriyama's general writing style. Toei had Toriyama create an entire universe atlas, new races such as the Tuffles, expand the Saiyans' history, etc.

[Melee_Sovereign]

he refused to kill Space Hitler, despite the very real threat that Space Hitler could come to Earth for revenge and blow it up from space; he let a mad scientist spend three years building a pair of immensely powerful killer robots; and he withheld SSJ3 against Majin Vegeta and was a large reason why Buu was revived.

He didn't refuse to kill Frieza. He full-on attempted to kill him with the Angry Kamehameha. Frieza simply survived.

As for Dr. Gero, he hadn't done anything wrong yet in the main timeline, so it would be immoral to kill him. Trunks altered history by simply showing up. For all anyone knew, that could have caused Gero to not build the Androids at all. The so called "immensely powerful killer robots" simply ended up being delinquents who do nothing but steal cars and clothes. 17 and 18 never actually killed anyone (except Gero himself).

[TheGodfather93]

he refused to kill Space Hitler, despite the very real threat that Space Hitler could come to Earth for revenge and blow it up from space; he let a mad scientist spend three years building a pair of immensely powerful killer robots; and he withheld SSJ3 against Majin Vegeta and was a large reason why Buu was revived.

He didn't refuse to kill Frieza. He full-on attempted to kill him with the Angry Kamehameha. Frieza simply survived.

As for Dr. Gero, he hadn't done anything wrong yet in the main timeline, so it would be immoral to kill him. Trunks altered history by simply showing up. For all anyone knew, that could have caused Gero to not build the Androids at all. The so called "immensely powerful killer robots" simply ended up being delinquents who do nothing but steal cars and clothes. 17 and 18 never actually killed anyone (except Gero himself).

Goku's first intention was to let Frieza live. He only tried to kill him because Frieza decided to be a dumbass and not take the chance he was given to run away. In any case, it's another example of Goku's reckless idiocy and lack of common sense. It'd be as if an Allied soldier stumbled across Hitler at the height of the Nazi regime, beat the crap out of him, then let him go free in the hope that he'd learned his lesson. It's naivety at its absolute worst.

Your second point also makes no sense. Dr Gero was one of the key figures in the Red Ribbon Army, which is a big enough crime to warrant a long jail sentence at the very least. He's also been building androids meant to be used for nefarious purposes since Goku was a kid. Even if he wasn't building 17 and 18 by the time of Trunks' warning, Goku and his merry band of morons could've at least done some reconnaissance through either Baba or the Dragon Balls to find out exactly what he's up to. That aside, as I already stated, they didn't have to kill Gero if they felt it was immoral. They could've just detained him and destroyed his lab so there was zero chance of him building anything like the androids ever again. ANY form of proactive action would've been better than the selfish approach they actually took.

The 17 and 18 of the main timeline may not have done killed anyone other than Gero, but there was no way any of them could've known that. What they did know, however, was that in another timeline those very same androids they were content to let get built had killed them and their loved ones, and subjected the Earth to almost two decades of literal hell.

[LoganForkHands73]

Your second point also makes no sense. Dr Gero was one of the key figures in the Red Ribbon Army, which is a big enough crime to warrant a long jail sentence at the very least. He's also been building androids meant to be used for nefarious purposes since Goku was a kid. Even if he wasn't building 17 and 18 by the time of Trunks' warning, Goku and his merry band of morons could've at least done some reconnaissance through either Baba or the Dragon Balls to find out exactly what he's up to. That aside, as I already stated, they didn't have to kill Gero if they felt it was immoral. They could've just detained him and destroyed his lab so there was zero chance of him building anything like the androids ever again. ANY form of proactive action would've been better than the selfish approach they actually took.

The 17 and 18 of the main timeline may not have done killed anyone other than Gero, but there was no way any of them could've known that. What they did know, however, was that in another timeline those very same androids they were content to let get built had killed them and their loved ones, and subjected the Earth to almost two decades of literal hell.

Well with this one, you have to give the benefit of the doubt that the protagonists aren't necessarily being dumb, they're just operating on a completely different wavelength. Any other heroic characters who are actually concerned with saving the world would take these pragmatic steps, but these aren't any other heroes. The point is that they don't want to do any of that preemptive stuff even if it does have bad consequences and it wouldn't be in-character for them to even try. It's Toriyama presenting a generic "time traveller sends warning to the past" scenario, yet the characters come to their own conclusion of how to solve it through training to get stronger and crossing the Gero bridge when they come to it, the fate of the world be damned. That shows real character and makes the story more interesting.

There's plenty of other examples of PIS in the Androids Saga, but I don't consider that to be one of them. Arrogant, maybe, but I'd only class it as stupid if their primary goals were to save the world. They could have cheated with surveillance, but they prefer to treat it all as another tournament with rules that they have to play by.

[Melee_Sovereign]

Goku's first intention was to let Frieza live.

Who cares what his first intention was? He ended up changing his mind. Frieza survived regardless, but that wasn't Goku's fault.

In any case, it's another example of Goku's reckless idiocy and lack of common sense. It'd be as if an Allied soldier stumbled across Hitler at the height of the Nazi regime, beat the crap out of him, then let him go free in the hope that he'd learned his lesson. It's naivety at its absolute worst.

It's a common trope in hero-esque stories. Batman and Superman let their villains live all the time, and they're considered intelligent.

Your second point also makes no sense. Dr Gero was one of the key figures in the Red Ribbon Army, which is a big enough crime to warrant a long jail sentence at the very least.

He was the lead scientist of RR. That's all. The details beyond that, and his personality were unknown. Being a lead scientist doesn't necessarily indicate that you're making any of the big decisions for the direction of the military organization.

Dr. Flappe was also a scientist for the RR, and he wasn't really a bad person. He just happened to be involved with bad people.

They had no idea who Gero was, or what the details of his involvement with RR were. There was little to go by of how bad of a person he was.

They could've just detained him and destroyed his lab so there was zero chance of him building anything like the androids ever again.

Detain him? They're not law enforcement. They can't just randomly kidnap some old guy because of some time traveler's allegations.

Destroy his lab? Again, they've never met him. They know little about him. What gives them the right to destroy the property of someone they know little about?

The 17 and 18 of the main timeline may not have done killed anyone other than Gero, but there was no way any of them could've known that.

My point exactly. They couldn't have known the rather benign nature of present 17 and 18. So kill 17 and 18 because of what they might do? That's morally just to you?

Not to mention these two were kidnapped by Gero, and turned into cyborgs against their will. If Goku and co. would have preemptively destroyed Gero's lab, they would have destroyed two, rather innocent victims of kidnapping.

What they did know, however, was that in another timeline those very same androids they were content to let get built had killed them and their loved ones, and subjected the Earth to almost two decades of literal hell.

And guess what? That's another timeline. The plot showed very clearly how two different timelines can converge. Present 17 and 18 aren't guilty of what their future counterparts did.