Unpopular DB opinions

[Saiga]

You seem to be under the impression that you can't judge a show from an objective standpoint at all, which is entirely false.

For example, if we can't judge shows objectively, then that means that Jersey Shore is just as good as Breaking Bad.

It's completely true. There is simply no way to divorce yourself entirely from your own beliefs, preferences, and judgements. Otherwise you'd be completely impartial to every form of entertainment you consume. There's no such thing as objective quality, and no such thing as objective good or bad. You can try and judge something with an unbiased view point, judging two shows by saying "if it has X, it's good, if it has y, it's bad" and comparing them the same way, but to decide what qualities are good and what are bad is still a very subjective thing.

All you keep doing is appealing to popular opinion. As much as I, and plenty of others, hate Jersey Shore, how it compares to Breaking Bad is entirely subjective. People who prefer it to Breaking Bad are not "wrong", but I believe they have incredibly shitty taste. It doesn't mean they're as good as each other, because that too is subjective.

I would go so far as to say that except in the most outlandish and extreme cases, there is no such thing as objective quality in entertainment. There will always be people who disagree on your opinions, and why should their opinions be any less valid than your's?

I wouldn't even say there are cases where there is an objective quality in entertainment.

[thatdbzguy]

You can be entertaining and still not have writing that even My Little Pony laughs at.

DBZ is clearly not an example of this.

If "bad writing" doesn't negatively affect people's opinion of the show or manga, then is it truly "bad writing?" Dragon Ball doesn't claim to be some grand bastion of superb storytelling. It starts out as a gag manga with poop jokes, and ends up as a fighting gag manga with non-poop jokes. A story does not have to have Tolkienesque writing to be a good show.

I've been part of this fandom for over a decade, and I have yet to see this huge section of the population who have watched or read the series, and look down on Dragon Ball (Z) for it's bad writing, or for it being "objectively bad" (whatever that means )

I would go so far as to say that except in the most outlandish and extreme cases, there is no such thing as objective quality in entertainment. There will always be people who disagree on your opinions, and why should their opinions be any less valid than your's?

Bad writing is bad writing, no matter how it affects people's views on a show. No one is saying that DBZ has to be the most incredibly written thing in existence to be good, but it can sure as hell have better writing than what it came up with.

[ABED]

The fact that someone disagrees doesn't mean it can't be objective. Having your stories, themes, characters, etc. well integrated is objectively better than not.

[Kamiccolo9]

Tolkienesque writing

I know this will get some flack but the guy was not as good a writer as he is given credit for. Some enjoyable stories but the guy writes 70 pages of exposition about a ring and has characters come into the story that serve little purpose beyond doing one thing then never being seen again. That said, I get your point.

Well, that goes back to what I was saying. I've been on a big Tolkien kick lately, and his writing style just resonates with me. You obviously feel differently, and that's fine. It doesn't make Tolkien's writing bad, it just doesn't suit everyone. In the same way, me liking his writing doesn't make it good either.

Oh, and I know you weren't starting a discussion with that or anything, I was just using your reply to reinforce my point.

[Saiga]

Bad writing is still completely subjective, as "good" and "bad" are subjective concepts. Disliking the writing only means it's bad to you, liking the writing only means it's good to you.

@ABED That's simply not true. That is subjectively better for a person who appreciates that, but there are people who don't. Some would think that such a level of integration is unnecessary, for example. And they're not wrong, because that's just their own opinion. And determining what is well integrated is yet again a subjective thing.

[Gaffer Tape]

But ABED is correct in saying that dramatic criticism is predicated upon a commonly agreed upon set of objective standards by which art is judged. Now that might often be used as window dressing for one's ultimate subjective feelings on a particular piece of art, but objective criticism does exist.

[thatdbzguy]

Having your stories, themes, characters, etc. well integrated is objectively better than not.

Which is exactly why DBZ is objectively bad.

[Saiga]

But ABED is correct in saying that dramatic criticism is predicated upon a commonly agreed upon set of objective standards by which art is judged. Now that might often be used as window dressing for one's ultimate subjective feelings on a particular piece of art, but objective criticism does exist.

Doesn't this just come right back to subjectivity, in the setting of such standards? And from what you describe, than that's really not about good or bad then is it?

@thatdbzguy Are you not paying attention to anything that anyone who doesn't support your argument is saying?

[ABED]

Tolkienesque writing

I know this will get some flack but the guy was not as good a writer as he is given credit for. Some enjoyable stories but the guy writes 70 pages of exposition about a ring and has characters come into the story that serve little purpose beyond doing one thing then never being seen again. That said, I get your point.

Well, that goes back to what I was saying. I've been on a big Tolkien kick lately, and his writing style just resonates with me. You obviously feel differently, and that's fine. It doesn't make Tolkien's writing bad, it just doesn't suit everyone. In the same way, me liking his writing doesn't make it good either.

Oh, and I know you weren't starting a discussion with that or anything, I was just using your reply to reinforce my point.

I enjoy his stories, just think that it's irritating when he brings in characters that have no point in the story like Tom Bombadil, or drop out a chapter later, such as the elf that saves Frodo. It's like in Dragon Ball when Tenshinhan comes in and then doesn't do much else that's interesting beyond his introductory story. He helps out on occasion which is nice, but Toriyama has a problem making good use of his characters.

Saiga, you are completely and utterly wrong on the issue. However, we aren't gonna come to any sort of consensus since subjectivity/objectivity is debated even in regards to ethics.

Which is exactly why DBZ is objectively bad.

Doesn't make it objectively bad, there are plenty of things it does well such as humor and fun well defined characters.

[Saiga]

So I'm just wrong, with no elaboration? That's a very classy way to try and end a debate.

[thatdbzguy]

The only reason the Cell and Buu arcs are as popular as they are is because of the growing audience of children who watched DBZ back on Toonami.

You thought I was talking about Toonami. I was talking about worldwide pal. There's a reason(besides looking alike) that every Saiyan is getting SSJ3 before SSJ2 in Heroes. There is a reason why promotional artwork mostly show Cell Arc characters. There a reason why fan works have more post Freeza stuff then Saiyan arc.

Then let me repharse my statement:

The only reason the Cell and Buu arcs are as popular as they are is because of the growing audience of children who watched DBZ back when it was still airing worldwide.

And all Battle of Gods proved is that there are a lot of adults who have nostalgic feelings towards DBZ. It doesn't prove that DBZ is any good.

[Looneygamemaster]

I don't agree that DBZ is bad, and here's why: with the possible exception of the Saiyan arc, the show never aspired to be anything more than an advertisement for the manga. Something like that can never be good, but give the show credit, it's nearly always watchable at the least. Therefore, it's accomplished its goal.

Just my two cents.

[Saiga]

I don't agree that DBZ is bad, and here's why: with the possible exception of the Saiyan arc, the show never aspired to be anything more than an advertisement for the manga. Something like that can never be good, but give the show credit, it's nearly always watchable at the least. Therefore, it's accomplished its goal.

Just my two cents.

Seems people are talking about the manga anyway, from what I understand.

[ABED]

So I'm just wrong, with no elaboration? That's a very classy way to try and end a debate.

I didn't say you were dumb or insult you. Fine, you want more elaboration? Objectivity doesn't mean agreed upon standards, it comes from the nature of the object itself, in this case "art". There's something that separates it from other concepts. I'm not the best communicator, but I don't agree that everything is subjective. Preferences, sure, but not things like criteria of artistic merit (e.g. acting, integration of plot and theme, etc)

Something like that can never be good,

Why not? It's close to the source material, what's wrong with that?

[thatdbzguy]

Doesn't make it objectively bad, there are plenty of things it does well such as humor and fun well defined characters.

Both humor and "fun" characters are entirely subjective. Basically, if we're looking at DBZ's characters from an objective standpoint, all of them will be incredibly underwhelming due their black-and-white philosophies and one-dimensional personalities.

[ABED]

Doesn't make it objectively bad, there are plenty of things it does well such as humor and fun well defined characters.

Both humor and "fun" characters are entirely subjective. Basically, if we're looking at DBZ's characters from an objective standpoint, all of them will be incredibly underwhelming due their black-and-white philosophies and one-dimensional personalities.

First off, it's two dimensions, but why does black and white make it inherently worse? For something to be grey it has a mixture. Whatever philosophies the characters have are hardly clear cut. And you are wrong by the way. Goku recognizes that letting Vegeta go is not the right thing to do but he wants to fight him again, so he spares him.
Most of the characters has a flaw of some type. Goku often doesn't think beyond range of the moment satisfaction, Tenshinhan trained to be an assassin, Yamcha was a thief, Muten Roshi was a lech, Vegeta is a mass murderer, Piccolo once tried to murder people, and Kuririn used to be a dick.

What you stated wasn't objective, it was a preference.

[Saiga]

So I'm just wrong, with no elaboration? That's a very classy way to try and end a debate.

I didn't say you were dumb or insult you. Fine, you want more elaboration? Objectivity doesn't mean agreed upon standards, it comes from the nature of the object itself, in this case "art". There's something that separates it from other concepts. I'm not the best communicator, but I don't agree that everything is subjective. Preferences, sure, but not things like criteria of artistic merit (e.g. acting, integration of plot and theme, etc)

I'm not saying you were calling me dumb or insulting me, it's just poor form to tell someone they're wrong without elaborating, and even more so to expect that to end the debate. It's like you were trying to say "agree to disagree" but that doesn't work if you're just telling someone they're wrong.

How can there be any objective way of measuring acting, plots and themes? I can't see any way that won't come down to subjective value judgements.

[Looneygamemaster]

Why not? It's close to the source material, what's wrong with that?

I'm not saying sticking to the source material is bad. But a good adaptation must be able to stand on its own as well, and that's something DBZ and most other Shonen-Fighting anime simply aren't interested in. They're content to be commercials for the manga.

[ABED]

Why not? It's close to the source material, what's wrong with that?

I'm not saying sticking to the source material is bad. But a good adaptation must be able to stand on its own as well, and that's something DBZ and most other Shonen-Fighting anime simply aren't interested in. They're content to be commercials for the manga.

I don't see how "standing on its own" is a requirement for it to be good. It's not a commercial for the manga because you don't have to read the manga to get the full experience.

How can there be any objective way of measuring acting, plots and themes? I can't see any way that won't come down to subjective value judgements.

It's not like the hard sciences, but you can certainly take easy examples like Daniel Day Lewis vs Jason David Frank as to who is the better actor. If every line in a story connects back to the theme, that's a better integrated book than one that doesn't.

[Saiga]

It's not like the hard sciences, but you can certainly take easy examples like Daniel Day Lewis vs Jason David Frank as to who is the better actor. If every line in a story connects back to the theme, that's a better integrated book than one that doesn't.

That's not easy at all. Seems to still be a subjective judgement to me. The old "compare one popular thing to an unpopular thing" really does nothing on it's own to convince me that such a thing is objective.

For the second point, yes that means the first book has integrated its theme better than the one who doesn't, but that doesn't make it a better quality book. You can objectively say the theme is more integrated, but not that it is a better book because of it. Better integration = better book is where subjectivity comes into it.