Unpopular DB opinions

[damn]

He sure as hell didn't try to save 17 or 16...he's not the beacon of humanity

As for the Kuririn risking the fate of the world because 18 kissed him...okay, that can't be denied, yeah. But is that really any worse than Vegeta or any of the other characters (mainly the Saiyans) risking the world just because they want a good fight/want someone else to take care of it/want to look cool/etc.? At least Kuririn's reason is a very human and understandable one, IMO.

And when the hell was I ever defending Vegeta? FFS Him letting Cell transform to his best form cuz of his pride was the stupidest shit ever and it's the laziest writing AT has done(besides Vegeta should have never turned good IMO)...though at least it's more believable with Vegeta cuz he's an asshole and I never really liked him(well I liked him when he was a villain...but when he turned good he was still an asshole so that kind of didn't work so well)

[damn]

Krillin in Dragon Ball went to train with Roshi because he basically wanted to impress girls and he was actually was kind of a bastard to Goku at first and then gradually grew to become his friend. I have no idea what you are talking about.

That can't be possibly compared to risking the world for a robot ffs ...impressing girls is not a problem...risking the whole world for one is a fucking problem(especially when you can revive her with the dragon balls)
Now that you bring that up I hate how Krillin's becomes more pansy as the series goes on when he was pretty cunning in the early parts of Dragon Ball...and I always liked that
In DBZ he feels too nice...a lot more submissive somehow...bleh

[Gyt Kaliba]

And when the hell was I ever defending Vegeta? FFS Him letting Cell transform to his best form cuz of his pride was the stupidest shit ever and it's the laziest writing AT has done(besides Vegeta should have never turned good IMO)...though at least it's more believable with Vegeta cuz he's an asshole and I never really liked him(well I liked him when he was a villain...but when he turned good he was still an asshole so that kind of didn't work so well)

Calm down, I wasn't saying you were defending Vegeta (though I guess it could have come across that way, in which case, my bad ^_^; ) - that was more of a remark towards the fandom in general. Time and again I've seen people complain about Kuririn's decision towards 18, while not saying a thing against Vegeta's stupid decisions. I can only assume a lot of this is because Kuririn's stupid decision is more of a character-driven emotional thing, whereas Vegeta's gets us more punchy-punchy, and as that seems to be the #1 thing most people care about... *shrugs*

Kuririn's decision is still believable enough, IMO, though. We know how much he wants to settle down and have a family eventually, and while 18's kiss bringing that back to the forefront is a bit much...eh, I'd fault that more on Toriyama being a poor writer of romance than being a fault of the character.

[damn]

And when the hell was I ever defending Vegeta? FFS Him letting Cell transform to his best form cuz of his pride was the stupidest shit ever and it's the laziest writing AT has done(besides Vegeta should have never turned good IMO)...though at least it's more believable with Vegeta cuz he's an asshole and I never really liked him(well I liked him when he was a villain...but when he turned good he was still an asshole so that kind of didn't work so well)

Calm down, I wasn't saying you were defending Vegeta (though I guess it could have come across that way, in which case, my bad ^_^; ) - that was more of a remark towards the fandom in general. Time and again I've seen people complain about Kuririn's decision towards 18, while not saying a thing against Vegeta's stupid decisions. I can only assume a lot of this is because Kuririn's stupid decision is more of a character-driven emotional thing, whereas Vegeta's gets us more punchy-punchy, and as that seems to be the #1 thing most people care about... *shrugs*

Kuririn's decision is still believable enough, IMO, though. We know how much he wants to settle down and have a family eventually, and while 18's kiss bringing that back to the forefront is a bit much...eh, I'd fault that more on Toriyama being a poor writer of romance than being a fault of the character.

The way I see it...Vegeta is more believable
He had quite the inferiority complex going on...him being jealous of Goku being stronger than him,him being ashamed he got his ass kicked by a Girl etc.(plus he always was an arrogant git) there was a lot more build up behind Vegeta's decision(even though it was a dumb decision)

I don't see it that way...a kiss isn't enough to fall in love with someone
And guess what Yamcha wanted to get married from the beginning of the series(that's why he looked for the dragon balls in the first place) but he never pulled the shit Krillin did

As for AT and Romances...the best romance in DBZ...and the only decent one...I would have to say is Gohan and Videl
They look cute together...I dunno
Yamcha and Bulma were alright too...poor Yamcha got dumped for Vegeta
AT can make some OK relationships when he wants to...but he obviously didn't want to make Dragon Ball a Soap Opera(which is why I don't like Krillin in the Cell Saga)

[EXBadguy]

Two unpopular opinion I have.

For me, DBGT>DB. The thing about the pre-King Piccolo DB stuff is that it can get a bit too lighthearted and half of the humor ain't funny to me. At least GT was trying to be like Z by balancing awesome action, seriousness, and to a certain extent, comedy.

Another one is about Yamcha, and he's got a bit of spunk and a good fighting style. Unlike other fans, I give credit where it's due. But I still think he's the worst character of DB and deserves the poor fan receptions.

[ImmaDeker]

"It's kinda like Expendables" is a different argument from "Based on how you criticize Dragonball specifically, this is how you perceive the portrayal of all violence."

Because again, disliking Dragonball's execution is impossible. It's someone else's problem.

What I said is simply that you link action to a more serious tone. Maybe that doesn't cause problems for you in other works of fiction due to how specifically everything comes together in them, but it does create problems for you in Dragon Ball. That's all fine and ok, I just simply don't agree with that viewpoint for the reasons I stated.

Right.

But my point is, and what gets my gullet, is you associate how I feel about the execution of how Dragonball presents its action (after a certain point) with how I must feel about ALL EXAMPLES OF THAT THING. Your mind leaps to "this is what he links to all action", not "this is how he perceives the execution of Dragonball's action."

Because this, like the Abridged thread, is you just unable to process that someone can not like the specific execution of something (you like). It has to have some wider application beyond the context it presented.

Which is wrong and it is genuinely bizarre you are incapable of processing this. Is it so impossible that someone just thinks Dragonball did this wrong?

You can DISAGREE with my perception all you like, but you thinking I don't perceive Dragonball's action correctly is not the same as "based on how you comment on one fucking comic book, this must be how you see action is all societal and fictional contexts."

[rereboy]

The funny thing is, I didn't actually state anything contrary to what you just said. You just, as usual, missed my point. Here:

"What I said is simply that you link action to a more serious tone. Maybe that doesn't cause problems for you in other works of fiction due to how specifically everything comes together in them, but it does create problems for you in Dragon Ball."

Like you just said, the execution, aka how specifically everything comes together in Dragon Ball, is what you consider the problem in dragon ball, since other works of action don't cause you problems. As you can see here, I actually agree with you on that point. My point was just adding that, from my point of view, since my perspective on action seems to be different than yours from the get go, I have no problems with its execution since I necessarily view its execution in a different perspective than yours because I also view action in a apparently different perspective. That's all.

My perspective is not "right" or "wrong". Its just how I view things. And me disagreeing with your perspective doesn't mean that you are "wrong" or "right". It just means that I have another opinion. And all I was doing was offering my opinion on the subject based on what you said.

But if you prefer to go on rambling about how much I'm incapable of processing things and how much I try to vilify your posts and opinions, instead of you actually getting my points, or maybe looking at yourself and realize that you were being completely over-defensive just because people disagreed with you, then, please, do carry on.

[dbzfan7]

Dragon Ball Evolution would still be a bad movie even if you changed the title and rename all of the character. The movie has a poorly written story, awful acting, characters with zero personality and special effects that make the movie look like it was made in 1997 or 1998. DBE felt like if they had the Disney Channel made their own Dragon Ball movie. I'm surprise that The Asylum never bother try to make their own rip off to cash in on the movie like they always do with their cheap rip offs. I was expecting them to do their own cheap version of Journey to the West to cash in on DBE.

Ironically DBE was advertised on the family channel...essentially Canada's Disney Channel.

[Dbzfan94]

My unpopular opinion is that some filler character's should've been in the manga.

Gogeta and Pikkon to name a few.
I think Gogeta was referenced while Goku & Vegeta were inside Buu in the manga, but I'm not sure.

[ImmaDeker]

"What I said is simply that you link action to a more serious tone. Maybe that doesn't cause problems for you in other works of fiction due to how specifically everything comes together in them, but it does create problems for you in Dragon Ball."

Right, but this statement doesn't acknowledge what I'm saying.

My only argument is "I think Dragonball Z executes this stupidly." Your argument is "There is a thing in your brain that perceives things differently from me, therefore Dragonball is not wrong and this doesn't cause any problems for you in other works but it does in Dragonball."

The idea someone just thinks Dragonball did it wrong doesn't process as a possibility. You have to somehow have both. Your cited sample you think addresses my concern ENDS with it perhaps being a matter of personal assessment, but the statement RIGHT BEFORE says "action must be this thing to you." I like a lot of Expendables-esque stupid action bullshit with no reservation. You're trying to ascribe some wider meaning to why I don't like Dragonball Z, rather than just the idea that's actually true: Dragonball sets out to do a certain thing, and I just think it did it like shit.

This statement doesn't address that. You're not ackowledging I'm assessing DBZ specifically at failing, like you think you are, you're just saying I have a certain set of thoughts that prevent me from liking DBZ's action. That's not the same thing. I'M saying "DBZ set out to do a certain thing and failed miserably." Your argument prevents the idea someone could find DBZ bad in execution and simply assumes that someone has a preconceived notion that would make DBZ bad to them, not that they find DBZ bad on its own executed standards and merits.

You're wording things in a way you don't realize isn't actually addressing my point and you THINK you're being civil, meeting me halfway, etc. But you're not. You're twisting words and via being overly wordy (and I certainly know something about being TOO wordy), you're changing someone's meaning.

You think you're talking about the execution, but your specific wording has that one little bit in it that doesn't really mean what you're saying it means. That's been my hang up. You still have that tiny little beginning clause that's like yeah, but it's not DB's fault. It's not Dragonball compared to preconceived notions in my head. It's Dragonball compared to what Dragonball sets out to do.

[rereboy]

If I have no problem with the execution, and you have a problem with the execution, then, obviously we have different perspectives. I merely offered an explanation on why we differ. You are free to agree or disagree with it, its just an opinion.

And obviously, Dragon Ball does it wrong according to you. Whether what it does is wrong or not is not a universal truth that can be determined objectively, it will always depend on the opinion of who answers because its a subjective notion and a subjective answer. So, obviously, if my perspective is different than yours, my answer will also be different.

That's actually why you have trouble getting my points, I believe. You don't actually understand that something like this is not universally bad or good. You are actively trying to state that Dragon Ball is objectively bad in what it does, that it being bad can be determined objectively without relying on opinion and subjectivity, and that me having another perspective and actually stating reasons for my perspective and offering my opinion on your perspective can only be an attempt at denying this universal truth, in not admitting what's bad in Dragon Ball.

But you see, its not a universal truth. Your opinion, no matter how well justified you believe it is, is not a universal truth. Being good or bad is inescapably a subjective exercise, not an objective one. You will find people that agree with you and people who don't, all with valid arguments, and no one will be objectively right because there's no way to determine that objectively. You can't grab Dragon Ball, add some sort of a reactive agent and see if it turns green or red (green for good, red for bad), you actually have to judge it according to your own opinion and perspective and reach your own personal conclusion.

Until you understand this, you will treat pretty much everyone with another perspective as someone who is trying to offer excuses and denials to what you see as as truth, instead of treating them simply as people with other opinion.

[VegettoEX]

The two of you are just going in "Yeah but...!" circles. You've made your points. I think that's enough unless you have something new to bring to the table.

[gohann]

I don't have a problem with "the next dimension" and its variations.
Kai's scripts, while an improvement, are overwritten -- also, Nicktoons Kai is better than Uncut Kai, I'd be watching that version if I had the channel.
Dragon Ball had the best dub of anything DB-related, then the first three Ocean DBZ movies, and Kai at third.
Stephanie Nadolny should have at least been contacted about Kai.
Ceyli Juliann Delgadillo could have been a great Goku with more practice and better direction, and could have been the best Gohan if cast for that role.

[RandomGuy96]

-I wish people would stop complaining that the humans didn't get their due. What people really mean when they say that is "Yamcha, Tenshinhan, and Chaozu didn't get enough credit", because Mr. Satan/Krillin/Bulma/Yajirobe clearly did, ignoring that they were never, ever supposed to be relevant fighters past their introductions. After their introductions, they remain not only weak compared to the main fighters, but static as characters. Not to mention they're just boring in general, closed books. I get wanting Krillin to get more to do in the Saiyan and Freeza arcs, and maybe treating the Jobber Trio with a bit more credit while they were around (that's why I like the filler Ginyu Force fight; it throws them a bone and at least lets them have a little dignity), but not giving them any story or battle relevance past the Saiyan arc.

-I hate Freeza's henchmen. They're ridiculously weak compared to their master, and as a result serve no useful function to him. The only reason they exist is to waste time. I also don't like the common idea that other people have of "just put in more weak henchmen!" to make the weaker characters "relevant". I don't have a problem with henchmen like Tambourine, Raditz, Nappa, and 19, or even the Saibamen, because they're not dimensions below their boss and can still help him in some ways. I just dislike Freeza's henchmen because he's so unbelievably strong compared to them, and they don't do anything except die. This is one of the reasons I love the Buu arc so much. Babidi sends his weaksauce henchmen, Pui Pui and Yakon, to fight the heroes, and they're both effortlessly dispatched in about five minutes each. Even Dabra, the only relevant henchman, is only strong enough to barely gain the upper hand on the weakest of the three SS2s.

-The "the non-Saiyans were irrelevant in the Buu arc" complaint doesn't hold up. Mr. Satan, Elder Kaisohin, Kibito, Dende, Mr. Buu, the entire population of Earth, and even Piccolo all played major roles in Buu's defeat. Heck, even Videl was able to buy some time for Gotenks to train due to Super Buu's fondness for her father.

-The Buu arc is far from Piccolo's worst arc. That'd be the Freeza arc.

-Freeza is a really overrated, generic, and boring villain.

-The post-Raditz manga is much better about being an ensemble cast story than the pre-Raditz manga.

[Doctor.]

-I hate Freeza's henchmen. They're ridiculously weak compared to their master, and as a result serve no useful function to him. The only reason they exist is to waste time. I also don't like the common idea that other people have of "just put in more weak henchmen!" to make the weaker characters "relevant". I don't have a problem with henchmen like Tambourine, Raditz, Nappa, and 19, or even the Saibamen, because they're not dimensions below their boss and can still help him in some ways. I just dislike Freeza's henchmen because he's so unbelievably strong compared to them, and they don't do anything except die. This is one of the reasons I love the Buu arc so much. Babidi sends his weaksauce henchmen, Pui Pui and Yakon, to fight the heroes, and they're both effortlessly dispatched in about five minutes each. Even Dabra, the only relevant henchman, is only strong enough to barely gain the upper hand on the weakest of the three SS2s.

This is because, at the time, they were the best you could find, excluding Freeza and his father (and Kaioshin, Boo, Dabra, Beerus and Whis...). Freeza even noted how Nail would have been a fine addition to his men.

[RandomGuy96]

-I hate Freeza's henchmen. They're ridiculously weak compared to their master, and as a result serve no useful function to him. The only reason they exist is to waste time. I also don't like the common idea that other people have of "just put in more weak henchmen!" to make the weaker characters "relevant". I don't have a problem with henchmen like Tambourine, Raditz, Nappa, and 19, or even the Saibamen, because they're not dimensions below their boss and can still help him in some ways. I just dislike Freeza's henchmen because he's so unbelievably strong compared to them, and they don't do anything except die. This is one of the reasons I love the Buu arc so much. Babidi sends his weaksauce henchmen, Pui Pui and Yakon, to fight the heroes, and they're both effortlessly dispatched in about five minutes each. Even Dabra, the only relevant henchman, is only strong enough to barely gain the upper hand on the weakest of the three SS2s.

This is because, at the time, they were the best you could find, excluding Freeza and his father (and Kaioshin, Boo, Dabra, Beerus and Whis...). Freeza even noted how Nail would have been a fine addition to his men.

I know what the in-universe reason is. I just don't like that it was written that way. Also, while that may explain why the henchmen are as strong as they are, we're never given any explanation for why Freeza is so strong. The most powerful being in the universe, x1,000 stronger than his strongest subordinate, just because.

[ABED]

Nadolny's Gohan is better than her Goku.

we're never given any explanation for why Freeza is so strong.

What explanation would suffice? It's simple genetics and pseudoscience.

[rereboy]

Yes, Freeza's family is simply, naturally, the strongest "animal" in the "jungle".

[TheZFighter]

-I wish people would stop complaining that the humans didn't get their due. What people really mean when they say that is "Yamcha, Tenshinhan, and Chaozu didn't get enough credit"

For me personally it isn't a matter of "getting enough credit". Yamcha, Tenshinhan and Chiaotzu are three characters I like and enjoy, and I like when they appear, even if it is a minor appearance. I don't expect them to keep up with the pace setters in a story which stars characters from a race of fighting machines, but I just find it nice when they're involved, hence my enjoying the fight with the Ginyu Force on King Kai's planet. I even liked little things like Yamcha simply using Spirit Ball to destroy some falling rubble in Yo! The Return of Son Goku and Friends! I've seen Tenshinhan tries to attack that Beerus thing in Battle of Gods, I'm very much looking forward to seeing that as well.

What explanation would suffice? It's simple genetics and pseudoscience.

It is the Dragon Ball universe, personally I'm not actually sure any reason is needed aside from "genetics and pseudoscience", but I'm pretty sure AT said in an interview that Frieza is an abnormally strong mutants amongst their race.

[Doctor.]

Although I love Trunks, I think he was an extremely useless character for the entire Cell arc, bar the end where he goes back home.