Whose idea was to create Broli? Toei or Toriyama?

[dbboxkaifan]

I've been wondering for quite a while now and would like to know who the hell decided to make such a pointless, annoying and mediocre character of all things? Couldn't we've gotten a brother of Tullece or something instead?

Such a waste of potential to focus three movies on a pathetic character like Broli.

[Bullza]

But he was better than Turles though....

[Lord Beerus]

Broly is pretty much Toei and Takao Koyama's baby and Toriyama was asked to design the character. That's all there is to it.

[Low Tone G]

But he was better than Tullece though....

I disagree, Broly is boring(for me at least). Turles even if looks like Goku it's a real villain, not a killing machine like Broly. Being a villain doesn't mean you're a strong guy with no equal, but you're a special in a way and quite the opposite of the main protagonist, so not a one-dimensional character.

[fadeddreams5]

Toei conceptualized; Toriyama designed.

He was a poorly developed character with an awful backstory and personality. However, he is the most popular DBZ villain among casuals due to his design, power, and status as a legendary super saiyan, so Toei succeeded in what they planned. The sequels were due to his success.

Case in point, majority of people disagree with you about Broly. I'm surprised people even give a shit about Tullece. I tend to forget he exists.

[rereboy]

Meh, I think Broly is over-bashed. The point of his character was basically to act like a force of nature. Like the embodiment of the brutal Saiyan essence. And his backstory and the way it was executed was perfectly fine, with more elements left to interpret than any other Dragon Ball movie, including the subtle nature of his relationship with Goku.

What fans don't like is the fact that he actually didn't have a personality. But that was basically the point. A force of nature is basically irrational, crazy, brutal. Its not intelligent. And so, he was a saiyan consumed by his own power, acting irrationally, crazily, brutally.

The actual problem with Broly is that he was over-used. His first movie was enough.

[Friezacooler]

Would have been better if Broly returned for a 4th movie. To make people forget about the Bio Broly, and to do his character more justice. He wasn't evil afterall.

[voltlunok]

Toei conceptualized; Toriyama designed.

He was a poorly developed character with an awful backstory and personality. However, he is the most popular DBZ villain among casuals due to his design, power, and status as a legendary super saiyan, so Toei succeeded in what they planned. The sequels were due to his success.

Case in point, majority of people disagree with you about Broly. I'm surprised people even give a shit about Tullece. I tend to forget he exists.

I think it's a little more then that. I think of myself a little above the casual fan bracket, I collect the stuff I enjoy and regularly binge my favorite parts. But I always saw Broly as one of the more memorable villains, not to say guys like Tullece and Cooler aren't memorable, I still think Tullece blasting Goku in the back at point blank range in rapid fire is still one of the most brutal scenes in the movieverse! But when I think of the movie villains...I always B line to Broly first then to Cooler, Slug, Tullece or Janemba. But that's just my thoughts. As for the topic, Toei and Takao Koyama created Broly's concept, Toriyama just gave a face to the name.

[dbzfan7]

Probably Toei.

Though Tullece better, I wouldn't say so. The guy leaves 0 impression. I forget he exists a lot of the time.

[EXBadguy]

Another "I hate Broly" thread huh?

Case in point, majority of people disagree with you about Broly. I'm surprised people even give a shit about Tullece. I tend to forget he exists.

Welcome to friggin Kanzenshuu, where we tend to care about the characters and parts of the series that nobody outside this community cares about.

[Bullza]

I disagree, Broly is boring(for me at least). Tullece even if looks like Goku it's a real villain, not a killing machine like Broly.

Turles is just a generic villain with generic motivations that doesn't even have an original appearance. He looks like Goku for seemingly no explained reason whatsoever.

Broly is at least more memorable and stands out amongst all the other generic villains. Being that he is more of a mindless destructive monster he's basically Dragon Ball Z's version of Doomsday which makes him far more entertaining.

[Kakacarrottop]

I disagree, Broly is boring(for me at least). Tullece even if looks like Goku it's a real villain, not a killing machine like Broly.

Tullece is just a generic villain with generic motivations that doesn't even have an original appearance. He looks like Goku for seemingly no explained reason whatsoever.

Broly is at least more memorable and stands out amongst all the other generic villains. Being that he is more of a mindless destructive monster he's basically Dragon Ball Z's version of Doomsday which makes him far more entertaining.

But Tullece was the star of a good, original movie. Most people are in agreement that Broly's films (especially the last two) were complete shit. Also in the end Tullece is no more generic than characters like Freeza, Nappa etc, it's just they got slightly fleshed out more due to having far more screen time. Basically every villain in Dragon Ball Z fits the generic 'evil take over the world' mold.

[Lord Beerus]

I disagree, Broly is boring(for me at least). Tullece even if looks like Goku it's a real villain, not a killing machine like Broly.

Tullece is just a generic villain with generic motivations that doesn't even have an original appearance. He looks like Goku for seemingly no explained reason whatsoever.

Broly is at least more memorable and stands out amongst all the other generic villains. Being that he is more of a mindless destructive monster he's basically Dragon Ball Z's version of Doomsday which makes him far more entertaining.

But Tullece was the star of a good, original movie. Most people are in agreement that Broly's films (especially the last two) were complete shit. Also in the end Tullece is no more generic than characters like Freeza, Nappa etc, it's just they got slightly fleshed out more due to having far more screen time. Basically every villain in Dragon Ball Z fits the generic 'evil take over the world' mold.

Uh, no. Turles is just basically evil Goku. He's your run-of-the-mill, generic doomsday villain. And I'm sure a lot o people would rank The Tree Of Might over the first Broly movie. If that were the case, Turles would be in every other video game like Broly is, but he ain't. Because he just ain't unique. Turles is like pretty much every DBZ movie villain, excluding Beerus. Freeza on the other hand, had an empire, a vision, a unique design, a backstory and a classic villainous character. Hence why he's getting his own movie.

[Kid Buu]

Freeza has a backstory?

[Lord Beerus]

Freeza has a backstory?

Of some sorts. He has been running an intergalactic planet trading organisation for God-knows how long.

[Bullza]

But Tullece was the star of a good, original movie. Most people are in agreement that Broly's films (especially the last two) were complete shit. Also in the end Tullece is no more generic than characters like Freeza, Nappa etc, it's just they got slightly fleshed out more due to having far more screen time. Basically every villain in Dragon Ball Z fits the generic 'evil take over the world' mold.

The quality of the movies had little to do with the villain. Tree of Might wasn't good because of Turles and the last two movies weren't bad because of Broly (more so the fact that it had way too much Goren and Trunks).

Nothing about Turles stands out. Most of the movie villains are basically poor wannabes of the series villains. Piccolo > Lord Slug, Vegeta > Turles, Frieza > Cooler, Android 16-18 > Android 13-15 etc

Broly was different because he was just a mindless destructive monster again. He wasn't a poor mans anyone and he has good character design.