Are BoG and RoF dragging the series downhill?

[Sayo-chan]

I don't think being off-model makes the artwork bad. Things can be off-model and still looks great.

I disagree. In terms of animation, yes. The two aren't mutually exclusive. But the bad art in the movie hardly looks good.

[Zanza]

What I like about BoG and RoF is that, while objectively bad,...

No, they are not "objectively bad".

When comparing the writing quality (or lack thereof) of Dragon Ball to other shounen, Dragon Ball as a whole comes up incredibly short. There is very little meat to the sagas, character development isn't intricate, some characters are completely neglected, various inconsistencies/plot holes, etc.

For example, you can't honestly tell me with a straight face that Dragon Ball is as well written as Rurouni Kenshin. You can't use the "Dragon Ball was made for a younger audience!" excuse either, as both DB and RK are shounen, meaning young boys/teens. Rurouni Kenshin's story and characters are far more cohesive and detailed than anything Dragon Ball-related. Why? Because the mangaka of RK is much more skillful at writing stories than Toriyama is. Toriyama himself admits that he's not a very good writer, and focuses most of his work on gag comics because humor is where he shines, not quality story-telling.

[Luso Saiyan]

while objectively bad,

Objectively bad? Seriously?!

[ThatGuyNamedChancey]

words about Dragon Ball not being as good as other things and it being objectively bad because of it

At first, I just laughed at the idea of something being "objectively bad" and decided to not go into an argument about it with you. But since you brought it up again, I'm just going to say it simple and plain:

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SOMETHING BEING "OBJECTIVELY BAD"

"Bad" and "Good" are both subjective qualities something can have. Things are good and bad based on the standards and morals of an individual; what they deem right and what they deem wrong. For example, you can never tell anyone that their opinion is wrong, because opinions (subjective) are not facts (objective). Otherwise, you'd come off as an asshole.

Perhaps something being objectively bad can count as it having a general consensus say that it is bad. But it's not "objectively bad", it's just bad by what a general consensus says.

I understand if you're trying to say Dragon Ball is an inferior product to Rurouni Kenshin or whatever, but it can't be factually bad (which are two words that do not mix) because of that. Plus, you shouldn't let better storywriting and better characters of another product influence your enjoyment of Dragon Ball (or anything else, really). Find enjoyment in what you want.

Unless, you enjoy RK more, then nevermind.

[Sayo-chan]

words about Dragon Ball not being as good as other things and it being objectively bad because of it

At first, I just laughed at the idea of something being "objectively bad" and decided to not go into an argument about it with you. But since you brought it up again, I'm just going to say it simple and plain:

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SOMETHING BEING "OBJECTIVELY BAD"

"Bad" and "Good" are both subjective qualities something can have. Things are good and bad based on the standards and morals of an individual; what they deem right and what they deem wrong. For example, you can never tell anyone that their opinion is wrong, because opinions (subjective) are not facts (objective). Otherwise, you'd come off as an asshole.

Perhaps something being objectively bad can count as it having a general consensus say that it is bad. But it's not "objectively bad", it's just bad by what a general consensus says.

I understand if you're trying to say Dragon Ball is an inferior product to Rurouni Kenshin or whatever, but it can't be factually bad (which are two words that do not mix) because of that. Plus, you shouldn't let better storywriting and better characters of another product influence your enjoyment of Dragon Ball (or anything else, really). Find enjoyment in what you want.

Unless, you enjoy RK more, then nevermind.

Opinions can be and are often "wrong". You're hinging on semantics here. Someone can have an opinion that triangles have 2 sides, but they're still wrong. That aside, no these two movies can't really be objectively bad, but the art sure can be objectively off model which qualifies as bad per definition.

[ThatGuyNamedChancey]

You're hinging on semantics here.

Eh, shit like this tends to come down to that.

Someone can have an opinion that triangles have 2 sides, but they're still wrong.

That's because that's not an opinion. Going against a well known fact is not being opinionated. It's being stubborn. It's akin to saying, "Well, it's my opinion that the sky is green." That would be "false fact" (can't think think of any other word to give off the same idea ), if anything.

the art sure can be objectively off model which qualifies as bad per definition.

Not necessarily. Art that's "objectively" (sorry, it was just odd to me how you put it) off-model can be considered good. It just depends on what you think is bad or good.

[Sayo-chan]

That's because that's not an opinion. Going against a well known fact is not being opinionated. It's being stubborn. It's akin to saying, "Well, it's my opinion that the sky is green." That would be "false fact" (can't think think of any other word to give off the same idea ), if anything.

Well again, semantics:
a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

How are you defining opinion? This example fits most conventional definitions. I'd also like to raise the notion that not all opinions are equal, nor do they all deserve respect/scorn, whereas some certainly do. People deny facts and good arguments in favor of their own biases all the time, they're still usually classified as opinions. I would imagine the opposing parties would also say they're stubborn.

Not necessarily. Art that's "objectively" (sorry, it was just odd to me how you put it) off-model can be considered good. It just depends on what you think is bad or good.

objective: not influenced by personal feelings. If you have a storyboard that says this is wrong, odds are it's going to be bad. It can be considered good (unless you have no concept of what makes something good and purely base it off preference), but this is rare. For example, it works with Moe in the Simpsons, this is why they'd let off model drawings of him slide by, because nobody would notice; it'd only add how ugly he is.

[ThatGuyNamedChancey]

After thinking about my counter-argument to your post, I realized that my initial post was flawed in wording, and thus ruined any counter-argument I could think of. So, I kind of had a "aw shit!" moment and came to the conclusion that I lost this argument.

Sorry if I caused any headaches to Sayo-chan and to the moderators.

[Sayo-chan]

After thinking about my counter-argument to your post, I realized that my initial post was flawed in wording, and thus ruined any counter-argument I could think of. So, I kind of had a "aw shit!" moment and came to the conclusion that I lost this argument.

Sorry if I caused any headaches to Sayo-chan and to the moderators.

Nah, I cause myself my own headaches.

[Hellspawn28]

Not really. BOG is the best DBZ movie in a critical eye in years since it had a good bad guy that is generic as hell and a original story. The last good DBZ movie before it in my opinion was Wrath of the Dragon. ROF is weak on the story, but the action and the story was still enjoyable enough to make it watchable.

[Kamiccolo9]

Not really. BOG is the best DBZ movie in a critical eye in years since it had a good bad guy that is generic as hell and a original story. The last good DBZ movie before it in my opinion was Wrath of the Dragon. ROF is weak on the story, but the action and the story was still enjoyable enough to make it watchable.

So, the last good movie before Battle of Gods was the movie right before Battle of Gods?

[foxfang4]

I agree. I hope the animation improves though. At least by the Universe 6 arc. With that, it'll be easy to ignore the BOG & ROF arcs in favour of the films.

[Zenkai]

When comparing the writing quality (or lack thereof) of Dragon Ball to other shounen, Dragon Ball as a whole comes up incredibly short.

I completely disagree.

[Kid Buu]

Eh, most of the criticisms of the new films were already present in the original manga, so I'd say no.

[shinmaru]

It's the best thing that happened to us since GT ended

[Mystic Tien]

Yu-Gi-Oh! is the furthest thing from well written. I don't think I've ever been so irritated reading a manga series before. It's far more inconsistent than Dragon Ball. I think I counted about 4-5 plot holes in Yugi's duel with Pegasus alone. The anime's even worse about it. They just ignore what's written on the cards half the time and make up their own rules. .-.

Just wanted to mention Duel Monsters, but yeah =D The rules changed a lot of times. Yugi went from being slightly better than Kaiba (while being who we know he is) to one of the best duelists one arc later. Kaiba himself went from being a little maniacal kid to a tall and calm man. Also all of this Kaiba becoming evil after his father died made no sense at all, as he was shown to be evil in manga before it. His plan to build a theme park for kids also didn't make sense, as he was repeatedly forcing people to commit suicides because of cards, as well as trying to kill Yugi's friends, just because he lost to him once. Doesn't look to me as being a guy who cares about kids. Still love manga and season 0 though, despite all the plot holes and things which don't make sense.

As for the topic, I completely agree with your post. I don't dislike new movies or Super though. While I didn't like the script for RoF, but I still didn't watch the movie to pass my judgement. I find good things in the new material, while I am not particularly pleased with where it goes.

If GT didn't "kill" the franchise (it did cause it to be shelved for like eight years though), these new movies and Super certainly won't.

If it did, then Super certainly can as well. Both Toei and Toriyama don't care about franchise as they did before. And it reflects on a quality.

I wouldn't say that. While the Saiyan and Freeza sagas might not be as bad as other sagas in the series, I'd hardly call them meaningful or well-written. They were just simple good vs evil stories, and they never really went beyond that.

What about Vegeta? He was more than good and evil at this point.

[Zanza]

When comparing the writing quality (or lack thereof) of Dragon Ball to other shounen, Dragon Ball as a whole comes up incredibly short.

I completely disagree.

So Dragon Ball is on par with the likes of Rurouni Kenshin and Hunter x Hunter in terms of writing quality?

[Doctor.]

When comparing the writing quality (or lack thereof) of Dragon Ball to other shounen, Dragon Ball as a whole comes up incredibly short.

I completely disagree.

So Dragon Ball is on par with the likes of Rurouni Kenshin and Hunter x Hunter in terms of writing quality?

Comparing Dragon Ball to Hunter x Hunter is an insult to the former. They're both extremely sloppily written but at least Dragon Ball respects its fans.

[ekrolo2]

When comparing the writing quality (or lack thereof) of Dragon Ball to other shounen, Dragon Ball as a whole comes up incredibly short.

I completely disagree.

So Dragon Ball is on par with the likes of Rurouni Kenshin and Hunter x Hunter in terms of writing quality?

I don't think it compares to many of its successors as well. Dragon Ball is a lot like the Superman of Shonen manga as far as I'm concerned. The one that pioneered a lot of the days that are still being used, tweaked and played around with today by things even outside the Shonen genre.

[VintageSaiyan]

words about Dragon Ball not being as good as other things and it being objectively bad because of it

At first, I just laughed at the idea of something being "objectively bad" and decided to not go into an argument about it with you. But since you brought it up again, I'm just going to say it simple and plain:

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SOMETHING BEING "OBJECTIVELY BAD"

Yes it can. Mars of destruction is objectively bad, even though some people might enjoy and like it the same you would a bad film - kind of a "so bad, it's funny" thing.

You can like Super, but it's still objectively bad & this encompasses the whole thing - art, animation, character development, writing, choreography, atmosphere, etc. Basically the whole production as a whole is so far low on the totem pole compared to other pieces of work out there. You can blame deadlines, budget, or whatever. Doesn't change it.

They're both extremely sloppily written but at least Dragon Ball respects its fans.

That's such a joke - Dragonball is notorious for shoving anything down their fans throats for a buck. Look at how the video games were milked beyond belief year after year when it was obvious they sucked pretty bad. Not to mention I doubt anybody can watch Super without feeling as if the series is treating them like an idiot. (or 5 years old) DBZ wasn't a masterpiece by any means, but there is a significant dip in quality since Z ended. The new version of Hunter X Hunter looks and feels like if a bit of thought went into it to make it enjoyable for fans and newcomers, something you can't really say about Dragonball. If you compare the production value, it's literally night and day.