"Explain why DBZ is bad."

[Kid Buu]

Even though Gohan defeated Cell; it was basically still all Goku as he and Cell were both holding Gohan's hand throughout the match.

[EXBadguy]

I actually though it was a emotional moment. *shrug* We can agree to disagree.

[Kid Buu]

I like it too, but I meant that its still really the Goku show even with Gohan beatin Cell.

[thaman91]

What does “objectively good” even mean? I think the lack of set criteria of what makes something “objectively good” is the main flaw in your argument. When I watch/read something, I judge it to be “good” if I enjoyed it. Thus, “enjoyable” and “good” are interchangeable for me. You talk about how people who have studied literature would laugh at DBZ; but what makes their opinion more valid than mine? The same goes for critics; all they do is analyze a piece of entertainment and explain why they either enjoyed it or did not enjoy it. We all probably do the same thing when we watch or read something. You even seem to do it as you’ve stated that you actually like DBZ. The only difference is that these critics do this for a living and can thus articulate their points better. I’d also like to add that I don’t think scholars who study literature study “quality” works; instead, they study significant works. Take Shakespeare for example. According to your definition, his works would not be considered “good” because the characters make stupid decisions and the plots all follow some kind of repetitive formula. But nobody really debates whether or not it’s “good”. They have more important things to talk about like themes, literary influences, literary comparisons, character motivations, and historical significance. Look up any essay written about Shakespeare on a database; I doubt you’ll even find one whose thesis is about whether or not Romeo and Juliet was “good”.

My guess is that you heard or read reasons as to why DBZ is objectively bad and found yourself agreeing with these reasons but still liked the series anyway; to reconcile this, you created this distinction between enjoying it vs. thinking it’s good. In my opinion, this distinction should not exist and the two are actually one and the same. If you actually do like the series like you said you did, then there must be reasons why you like it; you may just not be able to articulate them or may not think those reasons are valid. But fear not, your preferences matter just as much as those of a critic. Remember, critics can be a good tool to use when deciding whether to see something or not, but they are not the end-all-be-all deciders of what is good or bad.

You’ve listed reasons why you think it’s bad, and while some of them may be correct, it does not mean that we can necessarily make the jump that if we agree with these points, then the series must be bad. Additionally I don’t fully agree with some of them either. I’m going to attempt to refute them below:

A repetitive, overly simplistic story
Ever saga in DBZ follows the same basic formula: Bad guy shows up, good guys get there ass beaten, good guys train, Goku beats bad guy (excluding Cell Games). This would not be such a problem if DBZ provided some sort of depth and complexity for each saga that helped to separate themselves more form the basic formula. But no, that's far from the case. Instead, we get barebones stories that only show off this issue more than DBZ already was.

You could generalize any story this way. For example, in Breaking Bad, a show you consider to be “objectively good”, you could just say that Walt & Jessie cook/sell meth on their own, then work for a distributor, kill distributor, then do it on their own again, then work for distributor again, then kill distributor again, then do it on their own again. But you wouldn’t describe it this way because the various details, nuances, and characters are different throughout Breaking Bad’s major story arcs. The character development is different and the stakes are different as well.

The same goes for DBZ. In the Freeza arc, sure the good guys fail and then Goku shows up and saves the day. But it’s much different than the Buu arc and the Cell arc. With Freeza, all the characters are in different places in terms of their internal development. Goku’s realizing how he’s actually the last of an ancient race of warriors but doesn’t really know anything about them. Vegeta is going face to face against the guy who murdered his father and his entire race. He’s fighting the guy he feigned loyalty for but swore to destroy one day. He’s also trying to become a Super Saiyan like his father said he had the potential to do. Even Piccolo is seeing his own kind for the first time. The fight with Freeza is deeply personal for all three of these characters. Even the stuff that happened before Freeza wasn’t quite as repetitive as you think. With Raditz, Goku died and wasn’t the one who killed him. In the fight against the Saiyans, Goku didn’t actually defeat Vegeta; this was only accomplished with the combined efforts of him, Gohan, Krillin, and Yajirobe (lol). With the Ginyu Force, Goku defeated Burter and Recoome, but needed help to take out Captain Ginyu himself.

In the Cell arc, the characters are in different places as well. Vegeta begins to get caught up in his pride and constantly tries to surpass Goku. His ego leads to him making some very bad decisions, which creates an interesting dynamic with Trunks. Trunks, on the other hand, always tries to make the most sensible and practical decisions to end the threat as quickly as possible while at the same time trying to please and respect his father. Goku begins to understand the immense power that Gohan has and has to train his son to carry on the torch. Gohan has to deal with his fear of constantly letting people down and not believing in himself. The way the fights go is also quite different to how you described it and various other plot elements (like time travel, the heart virus, and the Cell Games) differentiate this arc from others. The villain is also composed of cells from all the Z fighters, which is interesting because while he may know their weaknesses, he may also share many of them.

In the Buu arc, the most notable piece of character development is Vegeta’s. His need to surpass Goku consumes him and he actually does some pretty terrible things as a result. But he then realizes that he’s not that evil Saiyan he once was and sacrifices himself to save his loved ones. At the end, he even swallows his pride and comes to terms with the fact that Goku is better than him. This arc even explores Mr. Satan’s character more. We are used to seeing him as a glory-seeking fraud, but his friendship with Buu showed us that he is actually a pretty caring and empathetic guy. To be honest, I do actually think that this is the weakest arc in terms of story, character development (outside of Vegeta), and originality.

Characters range from being one-dimensional to two-dimensional
DBZ's philosophies are very black and white, and the characters themselves almost never deviate from the traits that they're introduced with. (Ex: Goku) The fact that not a single character can be considered three-dimensional or more in the story is pitiful, and it goes to show that Toriyama hardly put any effort into making them. Even when character's do experience some kind of development, it usually feels forced and unnatural (like Piccolo's relationship with Gohan, Vegeta and Bulma having a kid, etc.)

A.) This is not always the case.
B.) When it is the case, that does not make it “bad”.

I am going to continue with my premise that “good” is interchangeable with “enjoyable”. Even though Goku’s character doesn’t really change (other than the fact that he gets smarter), I still enjoy it very much. I don’t think there’s ever been a moment where I was tired of his character. This holds true for many of the so-called two-dimensional characters; I enjoyed them and did not ever feel displeasure at their lack of change. But that’s just my opinion and it’s ok if yours is different because I don’t think there can be such as a thing as “objectively good” or “objectively bad”.

And I actually do think Vegeta is three-dimensional for the ways he grows and changes as the series progresses (I described it above). Gohan is also much different at the end of the Cell Games to when he was first introduced (though I do think his character development took a step backwards in the Buu arc). Even the fat Majin Buu significantly grows and changes in terms of his morality. Your point about the development feeling forced and unnatural is, of course, your opinion. I totally bought Piccolo’s compassion for Gohan. And Vegeta and Bulma having a child felt more like sexual attraction between the two rather than a genuine relationship, which fits Vegeta’s character. He begins to actually care about his family as time passes, but rarely displays this affection overtly (through hugs, kisses, saying mushy things). Instead he displays it through actions (like trying to avenge Trunks by attacking Cell head-on and blowing himself up to kill Buu and thus save his loved ones). I completely bought that.

Making everyone who isn't a Saiyan useless
This one is pretty self-explanatory. A good story knows how to properly balance the relevance of each character. DBZ does not do this.

While I agree that DBZ does this, I don’t agree that this makes it “bad”. Sure it would have been nice to get more of Tien and Krillin, but I very much enjoyed the focus on Goku, Vegeta, Trunks, and Gohan throughout the various arcs. And Piccolo was also relevant up until the Buu arc. Though Krillin was never in the position of being able to seriously challenge the main villains, his fate was vital to Goku’s Super Saiyan transformation and he was a good sidekick character up until the Buu arc. The Buu arc is really when the original Z fighters started to take a backseat. But again, the idea that a good story must able to balance all of its characters is just an opinion. I happened to have very little problem with focusing on the Saiyans.

Plot holes and inconsistencies
Vegeta saying self-inflicted wounds don't start Zenkai's despite Goku previously doing so, Freeza knowing the dragon he saw as he was heading towards Gohan and the others was Porunga despite having practically no knowledge of how the Dragon Balls worked, time travel in general producing plot holes, Cell surviving Goku's IT Kamehameha despite his entire upper body getting blown off, and God knows how many more. Does a story with countless amounts of plot holes seem like a good story to you?

Personally, I have criteria to determine whether or not I take issue with certain plot holes and inconsistencies. Yes they do exist in DBZ but for many of them, I able to overlook it and enjoy the show anyway. In general, I take issue with things more if they cannot possibly be explained. If a rational explanation is possible (like maybe Freeza was told about Porunga off camera, or maybe Vegeta was misinformed about Zenkai’s…etc.), then it doesn’t affect my enjoyment. If no explanation is possible, then I consider it a true plot hole and it affects my enjoyment. But when judging a series, I take into account all the positives as well as the negatives and then come to an overall conclusion. For me, the mere existence of plot holes is not enough to ruin my enjoyment of something; if the positives outweigh them, then I will still like the series.

Far too heavy of a reliance on characters making stupid decisions just to move the plot forward
Goku letting Vegeta go was stupid. Freeza ignoring Dende as he flew past him was stupid. Krillin never using the Kienzan + Taiyoken combo was stupid. Letting Gero create the androids was stupid. Vegeta letting Cell reach his perfect form was stupid. Goku not telling anyone about the RoSaT during the 3 year wait was stupid (although the RoSaT itself is a major deus ex machina). Goku not finishing off Fat Buu while he had the chance was stupid. Not saving time by teaching the fusion dance to Goten and Trunks in the RoSaT was stupid. A story should not have to rely so heavily on the stupidity of its characters.

My rebuttal for this is similar to the one for your previous point. I have issue with some instances but not others. And I look at things overall. In general, if the stupid decision fit the character, then I was ok with it. Goku letting Vegeta go seemed to fit his character because it would allow Goku to have a worthy rival to fight later on. What reason would Freeza have to worry about some tiny Namekian kid? I agree with your point about the Kienzan + Taiyoken combo and letting Gero create the androids. I think Vegeta letting Cell reach his final form fit his character during that arc. I agree with your points about the RoSaT. Goku not finishing off Buu kind of fit his character at the time given his explanation for why he did it (letting the others be the heroes since he wouldn’t be around forever, although this is still admittedly a little weak). There are definitely some stupid decisions made by the characters, but I am completely ok with them as long as they fit the character. And again, I look at them in combination with the positives of the series and see which side outweighs the other.

Deus Ex Machinas
The RoSaT, fusion, SSJ3, and pretty much everything else in the Buu saga are major deus ex machinas. DeM's tend to kill the beleivability of stories, even ones as ridiculous as DBZ's.

I agree with a lot of what you say here and I do take issue with deus ex machinas. And like I said before, I do think that the Buu arc is the weakest. That being said, I still enjoyed the arc because the positives outweighed the negatives for me. I’m not going to bother listing all the positives (unless you insist) but just know that that is the reason why I am able to overlook the deus ex machinas. Also, the other arcs don’t really have too many of them.

Death Meaning Nothing
Thanks to the Dragon Balls, we know that anyone who dies can simply just be wished back to life, and this kills so much of the drama that you just end up not caring when someone dies.

For me, it does take away a little of the drama. But I wouldn’t go as far as saying that I don’t care at all when someone dies. When Vegeta died on Namek, I was legitimately sad when I saw his tears. When Krillin died, it triggered Goku’s SSJ transformation from within. When Goku sacrificed himself in the Cell arc, the grief everyone displayed felt real, especially Gohan’s. When Cell kills Trunks, it causes Vegeta to attack Cell head-on, thus revealing that he actually does have a heart and does have feelings for his family and is not just some ego-driven maniac. There was a sense of finality to Vegeta’s self-destruction (even though he ended up coming back) and it was a great character moment for him because of the reasons he did it. So I guess what I’m trying to say is that the drama from death in this show comes not from the idea that we will never see someone again, but rather from the stuff going on internally within either the dying characters or their loved ones.

So to summarize these are the main points I’m making:
1.) There is no such thing as “objectively good” or “objectively bad”. People have different opinions so universal criteria determining “good” and “bad” cannot exist.
2.) “Good” should be interchangeable with “enjoyable” and you should not have to make a distinction between the two just because you happen to like something that a critic said was “bad”.
3.) Some of the things you said aren’t actually as true as you may think (repetitiveness, lack of three-dimensional characters…)
4.) Some of the things you said are true, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that agreeing with them means that the show is objectively bad. I happen to think that some of the things you listed as negatives are actually enjoyable aspects of the show (2-dimensional Goku for example).
5.) Some of the things you said are actually things I have problems with in the show. However, they do not ruin my enjoyment of the show because what I like about it outweighs these flaws.

[sangofe]

Last I checked DBZ was widely considered to be the greatest anime/action cartoon of all time.

By who? 5-year-olds?

If you look world wide and ask people in their late 20's, start of 30's, they'll give you the same answer.

[Kid Buu]

Yeesh. Reading some of the responses to this thread has made me very afraid to continue Dragon Ball Dissection.

I really want to defend my love of Dragon Ball, but when I keep seeing responses like, "You need to turn off your brain to enjoy it"... from those DEFENDING it, it makes me wonder if I should bother. Honestly? I mean, you don't need to go around burning out your brain cells trying to find the allegories to Tsarist Russia in Eureka's Castle, but if you can't think of a better defense than to say "don't think about it", then, sheesh, aren't you just proving thatdbzguy's point? I'm of the mind (no pun intended) that you should never not be thinking. Even in something as simple as Dragon Ball, you should still be thinking. And if inconsistencies and logical leaps are so bad in Dragon Ball that it requires you to shut off your brain to get through it, then is it worth defending?

Was reading through some stuff, and came across this:

"If you could please enjoy that Dragon World without thinking about anything, I’ll be happy." - Akira Toriyama

So it looks like even Toriyama wants us to turn our brain off.

[Akumaito Beam]

I watch, Confused Matthew

Why would you ever do a thing like that?

[Insertclevername]

In my eyes, stories exist to either convey a message or to simply entertain it's audience; or both. Dragon Ball definitely falls in to the "entertain" category as it's not exactly intellectually rich. It has themes and motifs, like any good story, but it's purpose isn't commentary or advice. It's to just entertain. What I think thatdbzguy is doing is that he comparing Dragon Ball with other fiction that are not really in the same league. The classic apples and oranges trap. That's not to say that Dragon Ball can't be put under scrutiny, especially when compared with other forms of fiction similar to it (like other shonen), you just have to criticize it on it's own merits. It's a martial arts manga featuring a fantasy inhabited by fairly simple, yet robust characters who participate in very silly gags and intricate fight choreography. It does what it sets out to do and it does a damn good job. I would say that Dragon Ball is a shallow series if it tried or pretended to be intelligent but failed miserably at it. But considering that it never really tried to be, can you really criticize it on that merit?

Also, if you ever took a gander at Derek Padula's threads, his website or his even his novel(s), you'll see there's a lot to take from this series. Inspiration and homage ranging from ancient East Asian (especially Chinese) legends and culture to more contemporary stuff like Jackie Chan films.

[dbboxkaifan]

All perfectly valid points.

I just want to point out one thing that annoyed me and still does if I watch it again: Freeza can't fucking count!

5 minutes till the planet explodes and it takes a whole episode or more? Ugh!

[rereboy]

A repetitive, overly simplistic story
Ever saga in DBZ follows the same basic formula: Bad guy shows up, good guys get there ass beaten, good guys train, Goku beats bad guy (excluding Cell Games). This would not be such a problem if DBZ provided some sort of depth and complexity for each saga that helped to separate themselves more form the basic formula. But no, that's far from the case. Instead, we get barebones stories that only show off this issue more than DBZ already was.

Its far better to have a good and simple story, even if sometimes repetitive, than a serious business story that takes itself too seriously and only has the appearance of complexity, without actually having a good amount of real depth, like many shonens out there. Dragon Ball is never like that, its story is fun, full of charm and its a perfect story for what Dragon Ball actually tries to do and for its genre. Toriyama is actually a better writer than people tend to think in Dragon Ball and most of the flaws of the story that fans point out are stuff they didn't get or stuff that they forgot or didn't watch / read.

Dragon Ball is not something like the Sopranos or Breaking Bad, but it never ever tries to or has that purpose. It fails at being something like the Sopranos just like the Sopranos fails at being something like Dragon Ball.

Characters range from being one-dimensional to two-dimensional
DBZ's philosophies are very black and white, and the characters themselves almost never deviate from the traits that they're introduced with. (Ex: Goku) The fact that not a single character can be considered three-dimensional or more in the story is pitiful, and it goes to show that Toriyama hardly put any effort into making them. Even when character's do experience some kind of development, it usually feels forced and unnatural (like Piccolo's relationship with Gohan, Vegeta and Bulma having a kid, etc.)

I disagree. The characters in Dragon Ball are compelling, interesting and memorable. They stick to people's memory because of those factors, which is proven by the fact of how so many people remember them even after so many years of seeing them. They are perfect for the story of Dragon Ball and its not true that there's no character development. There's plenty of character development, but its rather subtle and never in your face, often only made noticeable by the passage of time in the show (like in real life). Dragon Ball doesn't try to bank on "emo" factors like many shonens and, frankly, that makes it more natural than many other shonens. Often, Dragon Ball is even more effective in transmitting a character's train of thought, development or personality in one line or a couple of lines, than other shows in whole episodes.

Also, they aren't even meant to be as complex as you are demanding, even though they are complex enough for what the show wants to do. You seem to be demanding that the characters be as complex as a good drama series. Well, this is not a drama series. This is a action shonen manga with various gag and humor elements. If you are not going to consider the genre of which the characters exist in, then you can't even evaluate it correctly. It would be like reviewing a comedy like it was a drama.

Making everyone who isn't a Saiyan useless
This one is pretty self-explanatory. A good story knows how to properly balance the relevance of each character. DBZ does not do this.

What most people don't get is that the secondary characters' role changed as the story went on. They were still relevant, but not from a fighting perspective. Most people only think of Dragon Ball in terms of fighting ability, strongest, power levels, and the like. Well, Dragon Ball is not just that. The secondary fighters, as the story went on, simply lost some of their relevance as fighters, but they were still there in use until the end with other roles/relevance.

Also, one of the biggest problems regarding this is that people only think of Dragon Ball as DBZ. Well, Dragon Ball is not DBZ. The secondary fighters were relevant as fighters from the start all the way to the end of the Namek arc and even in the Cell arc they were there fighting. That is almost all of the series.

So I think this factor is greatly exaggerated. Its true that it would be cool to have the secondary characters be more fighting relevant in the later parts of the story, but its nowhere near as bad as people state.

Plot holes and inconsistencies
Vegeta saying self-inflicted wounds don't start Zenkai's despite Goku previously doing so, Freeza knowing the dragon he saw as he was heading towards Gohan and the others was Porunga despite having practically no knowledge of how the Dragon Balls worked, time travel in general producing plot holes, Cell surviving Goku's IT Kamehameha despite his entire upper body getting blown off, and God knows how many more. Does a story with countless amounts of plot holes seem like a good story to you?

Another problem greatly exaggerated... Like I said in the top, most flaws in the story are stuff that people didn't get and true plotholes and inconsistencies are nowhere near as prominent and numerous as people make it out to be. And guess what? Almost all stories have inconsistencies and plotholes. Most of the time they are details that can easily be interpreted in another way or some minor detail that we notice that the author forgot at that instant or made a small mistake. They are pretty much the story equivalent of the author drawing a character with sleeves in one panel, the next without sleeves and the next after that with sleeves. Its a inconsistency, its noticeable, it bothers the reader somewhat, but does that really make the art bad? Nope. Its the same with the story.

Would Dragon Ball be better without plotholes and inconsistencies? Yes. Do the ones that exist significantly reduce its quality enough to be refer as bad just because of it? Not at all. Its simply not as good as it could be.

Far too heavy of a reliance on characters making stupid decisions just to move the plot forward
Goku letting Vegeta go was stupid. Freeza ignoring Dende as he flew past him was stupid. Krillin never using the Kienzan + Taiyoken combo was stupid. Letting Gero create the androids was stupid. Vegeta letting Cell reach his perfect form was stupid. Goku not telling anyone about the RoSaT during the 3 year wait was stupid (although the RoSaT itself is a major deus ex machina). Goku not finishing off Fat Buu while he had the chance was stupid. Not saving time by teaching the fusion dance to Goten and Trunks in the RoSaT was stupid. A story should not have to rely so heavily on the stupidity of its characters.

Krillin tried once to use Kienzan on a character who wasn't seeing him or the attack. Oozaru Vegeta dodged it anyway. Even blind, characters still have ears and the other senses, and are way faster than Krillin. So, it wouldn't work.

Goku letting Vegeta go is part of his character. Goku knows full well the danger, he is not that stupid, but he is that selfish and he dislikes killing in cold blood. He even did the same with Freeza and would do the same with Tao Pai Pai when he was begging him for forgiveness and basically anyone else. So, its not really a way to move the plot forward, but it can be used as such. But its wrong to assume that the author had to make Goku choose that in order to make the plot move forward. The author could have easily made Krillin be too tired and injured to prevent Vegeta' escape, and Vegeta would escape all the same. The author simply chose this to develop the character of Goku once more. You know, the thing that people say that isn't enough of in Dragon Ball? Well, here's a example of the author going out of its way to create a situation where we can get a view of Goku's character.

Goku didn't think it was right to preemptively kill a man for what he is supposed to do in the future (besides wanting to fight the androids). Its a moral issue. There's nothing wrong with his decision, its a complicated issue.

Vegeta letting Cell reach his perfect form is stupid but it serves to show us his arrogance (aka character development of Vegeta as a SSJ). The author could have easily made Cell fool Vegeta and Trunks with a Solar Flare or some other strategy and absorb #18, even if Vegeta wouldn't allow him to complete his transformation, so its wrong to assume that the author only had that choice to advance the plot. The author chose that precisely to develop the character of Vegeta and Trunks, something that people are always saying that DB doesn't have.

Goku could only kill Buu with his SSJ3, and being dead his SSJ3 consumes drastically the time he has in the living world. Goku is sure that he could kill him, but could he do it before he ran out of time? And if he chose that and failed, everybody would die, because he wouldn't have time to teach the fusion. On the other hand, he is sure that with fusion the kids will be more powerful than him and even if they are inexperienced, they have Piccolo and the others to guide them, and that way, Earth would gain a more permanent champion. Seems to me like a valid choice.

I don't deny that there's some of what you stated, but once again its greatly exaggerated. Even some of your examples aren't good examples of it like I've just demonstrated.

Deus Ex Machinas
The RoSaT, fusion, SSJ3, and pretty much everything else in the Buu saga are major deus ex machinas. DeM's tend to kill the beleivability of stories, even ones as ridiculous as DBZ's.

What is wrong with Goku learning a new SSJ form and a new technique after 7 years in the afterlife? Seems typical progress of a shonen main character after 7 years in a new environment.

So once again, exaggerated. First of all, Deus Ex Machinas as a plot device fit much better into something like Dragon Ball than some other type of show due to the fact that its doesn't even try to take itself that seriously, its not that type of show. Second of all, they aren't as numerous as you are claiming, even part of your examples are very debatable.

Death Meaning Nothing
Thanks to the Dragon Balls, we know that anyone who dies can simply just be wished back to life, and this kills so much of the drama that you just end up not caring when someone dies.

It takes some of the tension later on because we know it can be fixed, but not from defeating the bad guys because without it they won't be able to fix things. Also, this problem is only a problem in the Cell arc and Buu arc. Most of the series doesn't have this problem. Dragon Ball is not just DBZ.

All perfectly valid points.

I just want to point out one thing that annoyed me and still does if I watch it again: Freeza can't fucking count!

5 minutes till the planet explodes and it takes a whole episode or more? Ugh!

It seems much faster in the manga and we can reasonably believe that it really was about five minutes, especially since they should be fighting at a tremendous speed. So, anime problem.

[NintendoBlaze53]

Okay Cross examination time "Plays Phoenix Wright Music"

A repetitive, overly simplistic story
Ever saga in DBZ follows the same basic formula: Bad guy shows up, good guys get there ass beaten, good guys train, Goku beats bad guy (excluding Cell Games). This would not be such a problem if DBZ provided some sort of depth and complexity for each saga that helped to separate themselves more form the basic formula. But no, that's far from the case. Instead, we get barebones stories that only show off this issue more than DBZ already was.

Every show or movie has a basic plot. Star Wars is just Farmer kid meets Jedi, they meat bounty hunter, they save princess, farmer kid blows up space station. The best part is the details Freeza sage starts with a tense game of cat and mouse before Goku arrives and they blow shit up. You also need to think of age demographic a show kids and adults can enjoy, what kid would understand 2001 a space odyssey so a story has to be tamed down a bit.

Characters range from being one-dimensional to two-dimensional
DBZ's philosophies are very black and white, and the characters themselves almost never deviate from the traits that they're introduced with. (Ex: Goku) The fact that not a single character can be considered three-dimensional or more in the story is pitiful, and it goes to show that Toriyama hardly put any effort into making them. Even when character's do experience some kind of development, it usually feels forced and unnatural (like Piccolo's relationship with Gohan, Vegeta and Bulma having a kid, etc.)

One word, Vegeta. Saiyan saga he's a murdering prick by the end of the Frezza saga just a prick, at the end of the Cell Saga he didn't change much, at the end of the Buu Saga he put aside his pride to save the earth. But in BOG the part with Bulma finishes his character arc he learnt to love.

Making everyone who isn't a Saiyan useless
This one is pretty self-explanatory. A good story knows how to properly balance the relevance of each character. DBZ does not do this.

You win this one except for Piccolo he is important in all Saga's. The humans though are useless unless you count Satan at the end of the Buu Saga as useful.

Plot holes and inconsistencies
Vegeta saying self-inflicted wounds don't start Zenkai's despite Goku previously doing so, Freeza knowing the dragon he saw as he was heading towards Gohan and the others was Porunga despite having practically no knowledge of how the Dragon Balls worked, time travel in general producing plot holes, Cell surviving Goku's IT Kamehameha despite his entire upper body getting blown off, and God knows how many more. Does a story with countless amounts of plot holes seem like a good story to you?

Every story has plot holes name one that doesn't. There is always a moment you say "But if they do...". Dragon Ball Z does have a lot but other Shonnen do to looking at you Naruto. Time travel screws everything up "Back to the Future" has plot holes cause time travel.

Far too heavy of a reliance on characters making stupid decisions just to move the plot forward
Goku letting Vegeta go was stupid. Freeza ignoring Dende as he flew past him was stupid. Krillin never using the Kienzan + Taiyoken combo was stupid. Letting Gero create the androids was stupid. Vegeta letting Cell reach his perfect form was stupid. Goku not telling anyone about the RoSaT during the 3 year wait was stupid (although the RoSaT itself is a major deus ex machina). Goku not finishing off Fat Buu while he had the chance was stupid. Not saving time by teaching the fusion dance to Goten and Trunks in the RoSaT was stupid. A story should not have to rely so heavily on the stupidity of its characters.

Stupid decisions or personality traits Goku would let Vegeta go & not kill Buu cause his personality is like that just cause you would let Vegeta go won't mean he will. Vegeta and Goku are pure blooded Saiyan's there hunger for battle and pride outway their mind.

Deus Ex Machinas
The RoSaT, fusion, SSJ3, and pretty much everything else in the Buu saga are major deus ex machinas. DeM's tend to kill the beleivability of stories, even ones as ridiculous as DBZ's.

Fusion is a Deus Ex Machina no argument there and SSj3 comes out of no where especially considering SSj and SSj2 where foreshadowed in there respective arcs. RoSaT however was Toriyama's way of writing himself out of a conner unlike novel which have a grand plan in motion, Manga is one chapter every week you don't know how long or short your manga will run nor do you have an overarching story unless your Hiromu Arakawa in which you can make Fullmetal Alchemist chapters monthly and yet make one of the most unbreakable story's in Manga. The RoSaT comming back in the Buu Saga is a throwback/DEM it's just there for plot convenience.

Death Meaning Nothing
Thanks to the Dragon Balls, we know that anyone who dies can simply just be wished back to life, and this kills so much of the drama that you just end up not caring when someone dies.

And that is why there is a only 1 death rule. when Krillin dies it's his second death so then you feel emotion same with Vegeta. Everyone brings this up but if you where watching or reading in japan in the 90's you didn't know what was gonna happen but now everyone does to you know they will come back to live, it's like re-watching a movie you know the plot and that might make it less enjoyable.

And these are the reasons I currently remember as to why DBZ is objectively bad. Show DBZ to anyone who has studied extensively in the study of quality literature, and they will laugh right in your face.

It's fine to enjoy DBZ, but for the very few fans out there who still consider it good, please open your eyes. A story that's guilty of everything I've talked about just isn't good.

As GafferTape's DB Dissection has gone into DB is a complex yet simple series but every grand story has high and low moments either a mediocre start and great finish or vice versea. What it boils down to is Dragon Ball Z is a Shonnen Manga, Shonnen do not have the same deep story of say Evangelion. Though Death Note is a Shonnen manga and up until episode 25 of the Anime is a masterfully detailed story but still has plot holes & Deus Ex Machina's. The saying "Nothing is Perfect" is true. DBZ is by far from the greatest thing ever but to some it is and to others it isn't individuality is key, if everyone liked the same thing the world would be boring but if a group like one thing like the kanzenshuu community, then we can all enjoy that one thing for what it is, not for what it isn't.

[rereboy]

So basically, I shouldn't expect DBZ to be good.

You should expect DB to be good FOR ITS GENRE AND FOR WHAT IS SETS OUT TO DO.

Tell me, if you see a comedy that makes you laugh all the way through, to the point you find its impossible for a comedy to be better, you will still consider it to be bad or not good because its characters aren't as complex as Breaking Bad, its plot isn't as good as Breaking Bad, etc?

If you do, you shouldn't. That comedy was never trying to be a drama like Breaking Bad. It was trying to be a comedy. And it did so flawlessly. Nothing less than excellent should ever be used to classify it.

Dragon Ball is the same. Look at its genre and what it tries to do. Only then you review it.

And yes, even something like Breaking Bad is only good for its genre and for what it sets out to do. For example, Breaking Bad is a terrible shonen and a terrible comedy. See how that works?

[DBZGTKOSDH]

The goal of a series/movie/comic/game/etc is to entertain the audience. All these points that you mentioned are true, but it still is an entertaining franchise, with millions fans from all over the world, and with massive success all over the world. So, Dragon Ball is definitely flawed, but it's not bad.

[B]

Characters range from being one-dimensional to two-dimensional
DBZ's philosophies are very black and white, and the characters themselves almost never deviate from the traits that they're introduced with. (Ex: Goku)

I personally would love to address this. Son Goku was never designed to be a character with a large amount of internal struggle, and there are a number of reasons why that works. I'd say the first and most obvious one is he's brain-damaged. The second, and more attune to this discussion of DB's literary merits, is that this moves the story along in a lot of ways. Every other character knows Goku is odd. Though he's thrust out into the world away from his mountain home, he rarely was ever fazed by people; it was always the opposite way around. Goku's immovability and "failure to deviate" from his initial behavior is a large part of why so many of the supporting cast around him change and grow. He is, in a way, fully developed when we meet him. He's kind and completely dedicated to self-improvement. He baffles the mind of everyone he meets; people with stronger convictions and more selfish desires. Bulma, Yamcha, Puer, Ooolong, Krillin, Tenshinhan, Chaozu, Piccolo, and Vegeta are, by the end of series, very different people. Dragon Ball is not the story of how Goku changes, but the story of how everyone and everything else is affected by Goku. It presents the idea that aiming to be a good person ultimately rewards you down the road.

And of course, this all goes back to what a number of people have been saying in the thread about the way the series is conceived. It completes what it sets out to do, and damning the series for not achieving goals it never intended to or aimed for is rather dishonest.

[thatdbzguy]

A few things to keep in mind:

A. I'm talking about the manga, not the anime.
B. I'm leaving the first half of the story out of this because it's objectively good, so talking about it would be pointless.
C. I like DBZ more than DB, but I acknowledge that DBZ is crap, unlike DB.
D. The fact that pretty much everyone here agree that DBZ sucks past the Namek arc should be a testament to its poor quality.

[VegettoEX]

First off, you're still hung up on "objective", which... doesn't exist when you're asking people to subjectively analyze their likes and dislikes. 2+2 is objectively 4. DBZ is objectively drawn by Akira Toriyama, but subjectively analyzed as a piece of art.

I see certain people (not "everyone") conceding that certain parts of the Cell and Buu arcs are not quite as good as things that came before it.

I don't think "My Apology" is up to the same standards as the rest of the songs on the album, but that doesn't stop the collective whole of The Get Up Kids' Something to Write Home About from being my absolute favorite album, and simultaneously still even liking "My Apology" as a song AND thinking it's a GOOD song.

[DBZAOTA482]

D. The fact that pretty much everyone here agree that DBZ sucks past the Namek arc should be a testament to its poor quality.

The only people who have that think the series outright sucks past that point here are Rocketman and Akumaito Beam. It's definitely true there's a concensus that the series did Jump the Shark but the people who think it outright sucks after the Freeza Saga are in the minority for the fandom (though the Majin Boo Saga is ragged on a lot).

[Sin]

I relate to pretty much all of the criticisms made towards the series, however I think that like most series, Dragonball Z has a great positive for every negative. For instance really, the only time I lose interest in Dragon Ball is everything after the Cell-Arc, I think that by that point some of it's material wasn't so repetitive and recycled that it made it a bad show; the entire Goku complex wasn't so prominent that it overshadowed the better qualities of some of the other characters; and the plot lines and characters weren't so generic as to hinder the atmosphere DBZ had.

The characters are one-dimensional, but they still have their moments (Vegeta and Piccolo's sacrifices, Gohan letting his rage go, the human characters putting their lives on the line when they know they're too weak). I realize the last point in brackets is negated by your point of death being a small consequence, but really there are still times when everything is on the line (for example when Vegeta was excused from the afterlife to fight Boo and was at risk of ceasing to exist entirely).

If I think of my favourite TV show, Twin Peaks, I can say that sure there were bad points, terrible points even, but these negatives are excused by the many excellent points in the series. And likewise there is something very magical about the world of Dragon Ball even in it's worst of moments, and I think this magic is different for many of us, for me it's probably the nostalgia of watching/reading something that takes me back to gentler times in life, for others it is the mythos and the sheer depth of information on the series, and I'm sure that there are others who just enjoy it for what it is.

[NintendoBlaze53]

A few things to keep in mind:

D. The fact that pretty much everyone here agree that DBZ sucks past the Namek arc should be a testament to its poor quality.

Grouping people is a bad thing to do. Just cause most people think it dosent mean its fact, there is no fact only opinion. And everyone has different opinions I for one like the Cell Games & Majin Buu sagas mainly for nostalgia but I still see their faults and accept them for what they are. There is no fact only opinion and opinion is influenced by nostalgia.

[Zephyr]

A few things to keep in mind:

A. I'm talking about the manga, not the anime.
B. I'm leaving the first half of the story out of this because it's objectively good, so talking about it would be pointless.
C. I like DBZ more than DB, but I acknowledge that DBZ is crap, unlike DB.
D. The fact that pretty much everyone here agree that DBZ sucks past the Namek arc should be a testament to its poor quality.

Well the problem here I'm seeing is that you want to discuss the manga, but then at the same time you want to only talk about part of it. The manga is a single work. Toriyama didn't stop after the 23rd TB arc, having a solid conclusion to the story being told, and then started up a new story called Dragon Ball Z. You're only discussing half of the work. It's like me splitting Breaking Bad in half and treating the halves as two separate entities to be compared, contrasted, and discussed on their individual merit. But that would make no sense at all, would it?

As others have said in the thread, you seem to be judging the series as if it was something that it's not, as if it were something that set out to be well written on the level of Breaking Bad. Yes, I'll agree that it's not well written, in that sense. But being well written in that sense isn't exactly its goal. You don't judge a horror story based on how funny it is, nor do you judge a comedy based on how terrified you were while watching it. To say that Dragon Ball, as a work, is bad because it fails to do something that it was never meant to do, then you're missing the point of it, just as much as the guy who wants to be terrified during an comedy.

And the fact that you can list a bunch of negatives about something does not make said thing overall "bad". It is certainly not perfect as a result of these negative qualities, but not necessarily bad. Whether or not said negative qualities make said thing bad is entirely subjective. Dragon Ball is repetitive and poorly written a lot of the time, but there are so many other things to enjoy in spite of this:
- The diversity and silliness of the world itself.
- The mix of sci-fi and fantasy.
- The character name puns.
- The plethora of Daoist symbolism.
- The art.
- The choreography.

I've said before that the Buu arc makes fun of the state the series was in by that point. Introducing more plot devices that other times would have saved the day, only for them to not actually save the day. Then you have the Genki Dama, which normally fails to save the day, and it finally works. It also gives non-Saiyan characters a chance to shine, with Mr. Satan convincing Buu to stop killing people, Mr. Satan convincing the Earth's people to donate their energy, and those same Earthlings providing the energy to defeat Buu.

Even in earlier arcs the non-Saiyan characters get their time to shine. Piccolo is the one to kill Raditz. He leads the battle against Nappa until Goku arrives. Krillin makes use of his techniques to help fight Dodoria and Freeza. Piccolo and Nail fuse and help fight Freeza. Piccolo fuses with Kami and has an excellent fight with #17. #16 and Tenshinhan both have their scuffles with Cell.

The fact that the characters continually make stupid decisions may be seen as poor writing, but it is still logical from an in-universe perspective given the nature of adrenaline-junkie protagonists. And it's actually somewhat funny that the characters make such stupid decisions. A major portion of the manga is comedy centric, and seeing the characters from this comedy centric story begin to take themselves, and everything around them, so seriously that you can't help but admire just how silly it all is, even while it's trying to play it straight.

All of these qualities prevent the complaints you listed in the first post from being able to stamp a big "objectively bad" label on the manga. Sure, you can subjectively believe that it is bad because of those complaints. I subjectively believe that it is good in spite of those complaints because of what I've listed, and possibly more. It's not failing to meet its goals. It tries to be a humorous, enjoyable, action packed adventure, and that's what it does.