What is the lamest thing to come out of modern DBZ?

[Majin Buu]

For example, Toriyama's script is hardly the shining element of Dragon Ball Super: Broli. It's the contributions of others that really elevate that material (and even then I think Nagamime should have pushed harder to influence the story and find the time to focus more on Broli and Cheelai). Shimada Bin and Mizuki Nana do a lot of heavy-lifting to sell the Broli-Cheelai relationship before the script is so timid.

Agreed. Broly's story as a whole is a good story that was only partially told.

Like for instance, the scene where Cheelai was arguing with Paragus about how he treats Broly and he responds by saying "it looks like we just don't agree here" and leaves. A better written story would perhaps have the next act consist of Cheelai and Leemu trying to convince Paragus to change the way he treats Broly, perhaps they succeed in getting through to Paragus but he's killed by Freeza before he can make it up to Broly.

There was more that could have been done to make Broly's story more of a complete narrative, instead it's left feeling a bit underdeveloped; and that goes back to the fact that Toriyama is a storyteller that doesn't like to do the storytelling things that would make his world and story feel more fleshed out. It's not for nothing that some fans feel certain arcs from the original series are better in the anime adaptation than Toriyama's manga.

[Luso Saiyan]

Would you call the story of Dragon Ball Z: Resurrection F "Good"?

I don't have a problem with the story of Resurrection 'F'.

[super michael]

Toriyama relies on mostly un-depicted training for his new power-ups because he doesn't really want to do the work of building up and relying on characters' emotional arcs.

It's just like how he off-panels certain relationships between characters.
Meanwhile, it's a completely different story in some other series (like Saint Seiya for example).

Just wondering, you seem to have found other IP's that handle this and many other elements better. Is it ok to ask what it is that makes you stick around with this particular IP?
(Personally, I only want to review it properly since I did it wrong the first time, after that I may probably be done.)

I'm sticking with DB for the contributions of artists other than Toriyama or Toyo-tarou. For example, my favorite writer of Japanese cartoons—Tomioka Atsuhiro—writes a large number of Dragon Ball Super episodes. I also like the creative decisions of directors like Nagamine and others staff members in pushing certain character arcs to the forefront. For example, Toriyama's script is hardly the shining element of Dragon Ball Super: Broli. It's the contributions of others that really elevate that material (and even then I think Nagamime should have pushed harder to influence the story and find the time to focus more on Broli and Cheelai). Shimada Bin and Mizuki Nana do a lot of heavy-lifting to sell the Broli-Cheelai relationship before the script is so timid.

This is why I am so against the general fandom's—and the industry's—obsession with giving comic authors so much control over the film and television adaptions of their works. They're downplaying not just creators who are experts in their fields, but also downplaying more talented artists. There's a reason why when Nagamime ignored Oda's request for more comedy in One Piece Film Z he in fact saved the tone of his film (this is the only example that immediately comes to mind).

I think that Dragon Ball suffers a lot from too many people who have too much power and too few desires to make something thematically and rich in character development all tripping over one another. We're damned lucky to have gotten stuff like Kale × Caulifla subtext as heavily as we did, but it's also undoubtedly one of the best parts of the entire franchise, dating all the way back to 1984.

Toriyama: doesn't want to make something good, and often just wants to perpetuate dumb sexist ideas.
Toyo-tarou: wants to suck up to Toriyama like Geoff Johns wants to suck up to Alan Moore.
Producers/editorial: gotta make this shit as lowest common denominator as possible, all while letting weird sexist bullshit to slip through.

Anyway, more Kale and Caulifla having metaphorical sex, please (and if you make a project for us adults, judt have them fuck for real plz k thx).

Some people believes GT could have been way better if Toriyama was involved, however that is something no one will ever know. However seeing DBS, I don't think that is true.

Some people believe canon is superior than filler and non canon episode, however from what I have been that isn't true. Sometimes anime exclusive episode can be better than canon episode.

So Tomioka Atsuhiro is a great writer. Nagamine is a great director. Just curious what other anime have they worked on?

[JulieYBM]

For example, Toriyama's script is hardly the shining element of Dragon Ball Super: Broli. It's the contributions of others that really elevate that material (and even then I think Nagamime should have pushed harder to influence the story and find the time to focus more on Broli and Cheelai). Shimada Bin and Mizuki Nana do a lot of heavy-lifting to sell the Broli-Cheelai relationship before the script is so timid.

Agreed. Broly's story as a whole is a good story that was only partially told.

Like for instance, the scene where Cheelai was arguing with Paragus about how he treats Broly and he responds by saying "it looks like we just don't agree here" and leaves. A better written story would perhaps have the next act consist of Cheelai and Leemu trying to convince Paragus to change the way he treats Broly, perhaps they succeed in getting through to Paragus but he's killed by Freeza before he can make it up to Broly.

There was more that could have been done to make Broly's story more of a complete narrative, instead it's left feeling a bit underdeveloped; and that goes back to the fact that Toriyama is a storyteller that doesn't like to do the storytelling things that would make his world and story feel more fleshed out. It's not for nothing that some fans feel certain arcs from the original series are better in the anime adaptation than Toriyama's manga.

Yeah, the film feels unfinished in that respect, which is a terrible shame, because I was really invested in the new Broli, but it felt like the script was afraid of suddenly being good. I really wish that someone had said "hey, we need to finish this movie."

[ABED]

Only so much you can do when the whole reason for existence is fanservice. Broli was pretty much destined to feel empty.

[The Monkey King]

Would you call the story of Dragon Ball Z: Resurrection F "Good"?

I don't have a problem with the story of Resurrection 'F'.

I'm asking if you'd call it "Good"

Also here's another question, which do you think had more narrative pay off and made for a better story when it comes to the 'Histoy of Trunks'

Trunks transforming into a super saiyan for the first time when finding Gohan's dead body (Toei)

Trunks already being a super saiyan prior to Gohan's death (Toriyama)

[Luso Saiyan]

I'm asking if you'd call it "Good"

I'd call it good for what its purpose was. In any case, I'm not sure what the relevance of my opinion on the story of Resurrection 'F' is.

Also here's another question, which do you think had more narrative pay off and made for a better story when it comes to the 'Histoy of Trunks'

Trunks transforming into a super saiyan for the first time when finding Gohan's dead body (Toei)

Trunks already being a super saiyan prior to Gohan's death (Toriyama)

Neither made for a better story, the story is virtually the same. It's a small detail that was shifted for more dramatic weight.

But if you're comparing between the manga and the anime, then I'd definitely say the manga made for a better story because it's the story, not a mere adaptation where all the creative and artistic heavy lifting is conveniently already done (and I'd say that's a very important and heavy weight on the scale of merits and quality). That doesn't mean that adaptations can't be enjoyable, but by their very nature they'll never take the place of the original (and thus more legitimate and authentic) work.

[The Monkey King]

I'm asking if you'd call it "Good"

I'd call it good for what its purpose was.

You keep changing my question, I'm not asking if you think it's good in regard to its "purpose" I'm asking if you think it's a good story by its own merits.

In any case, I'm not sure what the relevance of my opinion on the story of Resurrection 'F' is.

It's because as far as I'm concerned Resurrection F quite simply fails in telling a satisfying story. It would have no defenders (like you) if it wasn't written by Toriyama.

Neither made for a better story, the story is virtually the same. It's a small detail that was shifted for more dramatic weight.

Did you not watch the anime version at all?

Trunks was given an entire arc of trying to become a super saiyan so he could help Gohan fight the Androids, only for him to unlock said transformation because of Gohan's death. That right there is some tragic irony.

But if you're comparing between the manga and the anime, then I'd definitely say the manga made for a better story because it's the story, not a mere adaptation where all the creative and artistic heavy lifting is conveniently already done (and I'd say that's a very important and heavy weight on the scale of merits and quality). That doesn't mean that adaptations can't be enjoyable, but by their very nature they'll never take the place of the original (and thus more legitimate and authentic) work.

This is quite the pretentious word salad to avoid saying that someone else can improve on Toriyama's work.

Toriyama's 'History of Trunks' is quite infamous for just how bare bones it is compared to the anime special, to appreciate the original work is one thing but to say it's a "better story" just because he drew it is laughable.

[MasenkoHA]

But if you're comparing between the manga and the anime, then I'd definitely say the manga made for a better story because it's the story, not a mere adaptation where all the creative and artistic heavy lifting is conveniently already done (and I'd say that's a very important and heavy weight on the scale of merits and quality). That doesn't mean that adaptations can't be enjoyable, but by their very nature they'll never take the place of the original (and thus more legitimate and authentic) work.

Plenty of adaptations can and do improve on the original work. Within Dragon Ball alone, Monkey King already mentioned History of Trunks, but I'll throw in the Daimao and Saiyan arc in as well. The Daimao arc for mitigating the deus ex machina nature of the Super God Water and expanding on Piccolo's wrath and the Saiyan arc for giving Gohan proper development in his training and not making the Z warriors cannon fodder

[Grimlock]

It's also interesting and curious that a work doesn't need to be adaptation to be better, see Bardock TV Special and Dragon Ball Minus, both handling the same premise, yet one of them is masterpiece and the other one is... Uh...

[Luso Saiyan]

You keep changing my question, I'm not asking if you think it's good in regard to its "purpose" I'm asking if you think it's a good story by its own merits.

I'm not changing the question, I'm answering it. I do think it's a good story considering its purpose: to bring Freeza back. Do I like the purpose of brining back Freeza? Not really. But if that's going to happen, then I find the story Toriyama chose to develop is good for what it set out to do. If my answer is not the one you're looking for, then that's not my problem.

It's because as far as I'm concerned Resurrection F quite simply fails in telling a satisfying story. It would have no defenders (like you) if it wasn't written by Toriyama.

That's quite an assumption to make. An assumption with no basis.

If it wasn't written by Toriyama, it would be something else entirely.

Did you not watch the anime version at all?

Trunks was given an entire arc of trying to become a super saiyan so he could help Gohan fight the Androids, only for him to unlock said transformation because of Gohan's death. That right there is some tragic irony. [/quote]

Yes, and then what? It's also missing the point that transforming into a Super Saiyan is not and never was enough. Gohan's goal was to train and protect Trunks for the future's sake, being fully aware of his power.

The rest of the story remains the same. Like I said, they simply shifted a detail for dramatic weight. I have no problem with people who prefer it. Why that's not reciprocal is beyond me.

This is quite the pretentious word salad to avoid saying that someone else can improve on Toriyama's work.

Avoid?! No, it's a perfectly valid argument that you chose to completely dismiss because it's different from your own opinion.

There are people who not only find value in the creator's work but inherently prefer it because of the reasons I've already stated. How and why is that a problem?

Toriyama's 'History of Trunks' is quite infamous for just how bare bones it is compared to the anime special, to appreciate the original work is one thing but to say it's a "better story" just because he drew it is laughable.

It's not a better story because he drew it, it's a better story because (like the rest of the original manga) it was imagined and created from the ground up. It's a better story because it's the story, not a mere derivation. You're free to disagree, but you won't find me finding your preference problematic.

Plenty of adaptations can and do improve on the original work.

I'm sure many people feel that way. I don't.

It's also interesting and curious that a work doesn't need to be adaptation to be better, see Bardock TV Special and Dragon Ball Minus, both handling the same premise, yet one of them is masterpiece and the other one is... Uh...

I do think the Bardock TV Special is the best original DB work from Toei (which is not saying much, but I do quite like it), even if it's irrelevant to the story. It's not comparable to Dragon Ball Minus because each work had a different purpose. One was a story about Bardock, the other wasn't. It was just a prologue chapter depicting the circumstances behind Goku's departure from planet Vegeta.

[Cure Dragon 255]

You keep changing my question, I'm not asking if you think it's good in regard to its "purpose" I'm asking if you think it's a good story by its own merits.

I'm not changing the question, I'm answering it. I do think it's a good story considering its purpose: to bring Freeza back. Do I like the purpose of brining back Freeza? Not really. But if that's going to happen, then I find the story Toriyama chose to develop is good for what it set out to do. If my answer is not the one you're looking for, then that's not my problem.

It's because as far as I'm concerned Resurrection F quite simply fails in telling a satisfying story. It would have no defenders (like you) if it wasn't written by Toriyama.

That's quite an assumption to make. An assumption with no basis.

If it wasn't written by Toriyama, it would be something else entirely.

Did you not watch the anime version at all?

Trunks was given an entire arc of trying to become a super saiyan so he could help Gohan fight the Androids, only for him to unlock said transformation because of Gohan's death. That right there is some tragic irony.

Yes, and then what? It's also missing the point that transforming into a Super Saiyan is not and never was enough. Gohan's goal was to train and protect Trunks for the future's sake, being fully aware of his power.

The rest of the story remains the same. Like I said, they simply shifted a detail for dramatic weight. I have no problem with people who prefer it. Why that's not reciprocal is beyond me.

This is quite the pretentious word salad to avoid saying that someone else can improve on Toriyama's work.

Avoid?! No, it's a perfectly valid argument that you chose to completely dismiss because it's different from your own opinion.

There are people who not only find value in the creator's work but inherently prefer it because of the reasons I've already stated. How and why is that a problem?

Toriyama's 'History of Trunks' is quite infamous for just how bare bones it is compared to the anime special, to appreciate the original work is one thing but to say it's a "better story" just because he drew it is laughable.

It's not a better story because he drew it, it's a better story because (like the rest of the original manga) it was imagined and created from the ground up. It's a better story because it's the story, not a mere derivation. You're free to disagree, but you won't find me finding your preference problematic.

Plenty of adaptations can and do improve on the original work.

I'm sure many people feel that way. I don't.

It's also interesting and curious that a work doesn't need to be adaptation to be better, see Bardock TV Special and Dragon Ball Minus, both handling the same premise, yet one of them is masterpiece and the other one is... Uh...

I do think the Bardock TV Special is the best original DB work from Toei (which is not saying much, but I do quite like it), even if it's irrelevant to the story. It's not comparable to Dragon Ball Minus because each work had a different purpose. One was a story about Bardock, the other wasn't. It was just a prologue chapter depicting the circumstances behind Goku's departure from planet Vegeta.
[/quote]

If you dont want to answer the question he made then dont engage and just state what you feel without just pretending to.

[super michael]

Here is another thing, in DB Goku realized the truth on how Grandpa Gohan died, without anyone telling him. He realized the monster that killed him was himself. That is how smart Goku used to be in Dragon Ball, written by Toriyama.
We don't see that from Goku nowadays in Toei anime of DBS.

Nowadays Goku has to be dumb and clueless about everything, including the things that he should be good at.


DB Goku saw through Kami lies and disguise.
DBS Goku couldn't see through Beerus costume, lies and Puar transformation. Even Yamcha spilling the beans and Goku hearing their voice, still nothing. Goku has his skill to sense ki and smell, yet nothing.
Kuririn screaming Taiyoken in Goku face, that didn't give it away. Goku thought that scream and light was Monaka transforming.

DBS Super Hero Goku was a total amateur, who doesn't know what meditation is and why it is important to control one power and spirit.
DB Goku was a expert on those thing, even explained to Ginyu why he couldn't use Goku body max power and couldn't use more than 23,000 power level.
DB Goku used meditation to unlock SSJ Grade 2 and 3. He did meditation so many times.


While DBS Goku is supposed to be the same as DB Goku, DBS is nothing like DB Goku at all.


This brainless Goku in DBS is the worst part of modern Dragon Ball.


DB Goku did heroic things, he sacrificed his life to save the earth. He actually went out of his way to revive those that die, not many heroes does that.

[TekTheNinja]

To frame this more succinctly there is a faction of the fandom which truly believes:
Toriyama = Good content.
Non-Toriyama = bad content

I fail to see how this is a problem. All things being equal, deferring to the creator is the least worrisome standard anyone can have as far as fiction goes.

I wouldn't say this of Toriyama specifically but I've seen enough creators do a disservice to their own older work that I think stating "original creator means good content" automatically is naive at best. Plus as others have said, Toei has improved on Toriyama's work in the past in some parts, which I say even as a hardcore manga fan. The History of Trunks example is very much the best one because the source material for it is barely a story. It's more like a mostly expositional backstory. The animated version made it more of an actual narrative, with Trunks' now iconic SSJ transformation being one of the most universally preferred adaptational changes.

[capsulecorp]

Trunks was given an entire arc of trying to become a super saiyan so he could help Gohan fight the Androids, only for him to unlock said transformation because of Gohan's death. That right there is some tragic irony.

Toriyama's 'History of Trunks' is quite infamous for just how bare bones it is compared to the anime special, to appreciate the original work is one thing but to say it's a "better story" just because he drew it is laughable.

I actually thought that change was really disappointing. It's heavy-handed and melodramatic and really just a lazy callback to Goku unlocking Super Saiyan after Krillin dies. It's tidy and predictable and obvious and, when Dragon Ball is at its best, it should be none of things.

[Luso Saiyan]

If you dont want to answer the question he made then dont engage and just state what you feel without just pretending to.

What are you even talking about? I did answer his question.

I wouldn't say this of Toriyama specifically but I've seen enough creators do a disservice to their own older work that I think stating "original creator means good content" automatically is naive at best. Plus as others have said, Toei has improved on Toriyama's work in the past in some parts, which I say even as a hardcore manga fan. The History of Trunks example is very much the best one because the source material for it is barely a story. It's more like a mostly expositional backstory. The animated version made it more of an actual narrative, with Trunks' now iconic SSJ transformation being one of the most universally preferred adaptational changes.

Original creator means artistic integrity and authenticity (except when in cases of parodies and similar stuff, which aren't meant to be taken seriously to begin with), and I see the value in that more than in any adaptation, which by definition take something that already exists and twists it here and there for something more accessible (or in the case of the History of Trunks, for more dramatic/emotional weight).

I never said that many people don't prefer adaptations. I never said that it's not a legitimate preference. What I fail to understand is how the preference for the works from the creator is somehow problematic to some, considering it's perfectly valid and natural position to take.

I actually thought that change was really disappointing. It's heavy-handed and melodramatic and really just a lazy callback to Goku unlocking Super Saiyan after Krillin dies. It's tidy and predictable and obvious and, when Dragon Ball is at its best, it should be none of things.

I agree.

[ABED]

I'm surprised anyone would agree that it's either melodrama or that it's tidy. I don't see how the parallel to Kuririn is anything other than a superficial one. Sure the transformation were both unlocked due to the death of a dear friend, but it's not like it's a cheap knockoff. It's also not tidy. Trunks transforms and it amounts to nothing. He gets his butt handed to him. It didn't solve his problem.

Predictability isn't a bad thing, nor is it something DB never did at its best.

[capsulecorp]

Using character death as a motivation or a triggering event is about as good of an example of melodrama as I can think of!

[ABED]

Using character death as a motivation or a triggering event is about as good of an example of melodrama as I can think of!

Only if it doesn't feel earned. And there are WAY better examples of melodrama than using death as a motivation for something. That's why writers do it - to motivate something in the story.

Trunks was born into a world where death and tragedy was an everyday occurrence. What could motivate him to change that would make more emotional sense than the death of someone he cared for?

[Kaboom]

I always thought that Trunks finally gaining Super Saiyan only after Gohan died was, on top of just having more dramatic weight, also a good way to express the "passing the torch" themes at work in that special story. As if the hope of one day defeating the Androids has been directly passed down from Gohan to Trunks like some sort of inheritance.