FUNimation "DBZ on Blu-Ray" Survey

[ABED]

I hope the blu rays bring back the Japanese title cards instead of just using the English title cards for every option.

[Raykugen]

I hope the blu rays bring back the Japanese title cards instead of just using the English title cards for every option.

And Next Episode Previews!

[JulieYBM]

I always forget, but does FUNimation have the proper credits for the openings and endings or are they still just using movie #1's credits? That's something a future Blu-ray release would have to fix.

[ABED]

I hope the blu rays bring back the Japanese title cards instead of just using the English title cards for every option.

And Next Episode Previews!

I'm almost certain that's out of their control.

[bkev]

I always forget, but does FUNimation have the proper credits for the openings and endings or are they still just using movie #1's credits? That's something a future Blu-ray release would have to fix.

As alternate angles are no longer their practice, is this still an issue? I thought the Levels sets were creditless OP and redone dub credits for ED.

[Ringworm128]

Science has a rulebook. You cannot change a work something and continue to call it by the same name.

That might not stop an individual from hitting the 'zoom' button on their remote, but if FUNimation wants to not be a laughingstock (again) it damn well ought to stop them from promoting such nonsense.

Except DBZ isn't science it's a kids cartoon made for people to enjoy, if you're going to get angry that there's an OPTION for 16:9 you might as well go "I'm not geting this set because it has the English dub as an option even though I could easily ignore it and just watch the sub version like I always do."

[VegettoEX]

The presence of an English dub does not destroy the product for those who want to watch it in Japanese, nor does the presence of the Japanese version destroy the product for those who want to watch it in English.

The existence of a cropped version in and of itself, BY ITSELF, destroys the product for a good portion of its audience when it doesn't have to because those that do not care about the integrity of the image can press "ZOOM" on their remote without having it ruined for the rest of us.

The end.

[OutlawTorn]

Except DBZ isn't science it's a kids cartoon made for people to enjoy

Would you go up to the Mona Lisa, say "I don't enjoy the colour of her hair, I'd enjoy it better if she was blonde" and demand it be altered to suit your own preferences? Altering the Mona Lisa or any other work of art would be defacing (at best) and destroying (at worst) that art. Animation, like music and poetry among other examples, is another form of art and cropping the picture defaces that work of art, even more so than edits made to censor things like cigarettes and blood.

[Ajay]

The way many are feeling about DBZ right now is the same way that filmmakers throughout the early years of home video releases felt about how their films were released. They feel like their baby is being tampered with unnecessarily.

Here's an example - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMJhM3So4y8

[dbzfan7]

I want Kai to be properly advertised. Let people know that Kai is closest to the source material. Help sort out all issues people have with it.

[Metalwario64]

The way many are feeling about DBZ right now is the same way that filmmakers throughout the early years of home video releases felt about how their films were released. They feel like their baby is being tampered with unnecessarily.

Here's an example - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMJhM3So4y8

What's funny is that DBZ wasn't even pan and scanned, it was simply cropped in the center. Imagine if instead all of those examples were only cropped in the center of the frame. Then you'd see a vast number greater of cut off faces and terribly composed shots.

[ABED]

Except DBZ isn't science it's a kids cartoon made for people to enjoy

Would you go up to the Mona Lisa, say "I don't enjoy the colour of her hair, I'd enjoy it better if she was blonde" and demand it be altered to suit your own preferences? Altering the Mona Lisa or any other work of art would be defacing (at best) and destroying (at worst) that art. Animation, like music and poetry among other examples, is another form of art and cropping the picture defaces that work of art, even more so than edits made to censor things like cigarettes and blood.

Not in the same league. For one, there's only one Mona Lisa, there are a ton of copies of Dragon Ball.

[Gaffer Tape]

Um, there are a ton of copies of the Mona Lisa as well...

[Kaboom]

If it wasn't meant to be cropped to widescreen, then don't crop it to widescreen. Period. That's all there is to it.

[ABED]

Um, there are a ton of copies of the Mona Lisa as well...

but defacing those is NOT the same thing as defacing THE Mona Lisa. "defacing" Dragon Ball isn't the same as defacing the original Mona Lisa painting. You can always put Dragon Ball to its original state, but if you ruin the original Mona Lisa, you're shit out of luck. My point is that OutlawTorn's point was a false equivalency.

[Gaffer Tape]

It's really not a false equivalency. Strictly speaking, all of the defacing that would be done to Dragon Ball would be to copies and would not affect the original negative. If that was done, it would be exactly the same as defacing the original Mona Lisa, and the damage would be done forever. That said, there's only one original of either of those things, so the only chance anyone has of ever owning either is through a copy, so for all practical purposes, copies are all there is. So changing a copy of the Mona Lisa so that she has different colored hair (for example) is going to make it worthless to anyone who wants a legitimate copy. Any copy that purposely does something different, like putting sunglasses on her, might be worth something to somebody, but it's still distinctly different from an actual Mona Lisa.

[eledoremassis02]

It's really not a false equivalency. Strictly speaking, all of the defacing that would be done to Dragon Ball would be to copies and would not affect the original negative. If that was done, it would be exactly the same as defacing the original Mona Lisa, and the damage would be done forever. That said, there's only one original of either of those things, so the only chance anyone has of ever owning either is through a copy, so for all practical purposes, copies are all there is. So changing a copy of the Mona Lisa so that she has different colored hair (for example) is going to make it worthless to anyone who wants a legitimate copy. Any copy that purposely does something different, like putting sunglasses on her, might be worth something to somebody, but it's still distinctly different from an actual Mona Lisa.

Thankfully though they did not ruin their own masters for the orange bricks. In fact they can look as good as the last bluray release.

It's a shame we can't get all the NEP and audio from the dragon box. If we can get English and Japanese OP ED and title cards with their English counterparts, it would probably be the best release ever. heck, I'd sell my Dragon Boxes of that was the case lol

[ABED]

It's really not a false equivalency. Strictly speaking, all of the defacing that would be done to Dragon Ball would be to copies and would not affect the original negative. If that was done, it would be exactly the same as defacing the original Mona Lisa, and the damage would be done forever. That said, there's only one original of either of those things, so the only chance anyone has of ever owning either is through a copy, so for all practical purposes, copies are all there is. So changing a copy of the Mona Lisa so that she has different colored hair (for example) is going to make it worthless to anyone who wants a legitimate copy. Any copy that purposely does something different, like putting sunglasses on her, might be worth something to somebody, but it's still distinctly different from an actual Mona Lisa.

That seems like a very specious argument. It's not the same, there's no way that all the copies of DBZ would be changed, only then would it be like defacing the original mona lisa. Unless there was no way to get the show back to the original state, then it's not like ruining the original mona lisa. I can't fathom how it would ever be feasable to destroy all the copies of Dragon Ball. Even if the original master was ruined, there would still be methods (maybe not ideal) to recreate the show as it once was. Ergo, your argument is a false equivalency.

[eledoremassis02]

It's really not a false equivalency. Strictly speaking, all of the defacing that would be done to Dragon Ball would be to copies and would not affect the original negative. If that was done, it would be exactly the same as defacing the original Mona Lisa, and the damage would be done forever. That said, there's only one original of either of those things, so the only chance anyone has of ever owning either is through a copy, so for all practical purposes, copies are all there is. So changing a copy of the Mona Lisa so that she has different colored hair (for example) is going to make it worthless to anyone who wants a legitimate copy. Any copy that purposely does something different, like putting sunglasses on her, might be worth something to somebody, but it's still distinctly different from an actual Mona Lisa.

That seems like a very specious argument. It's not the same, there's no way that all the copies of DBZ would be changed, only then would it be like defacing the original mona lisa.

I would say the equivalent is TOEI cropping their master, as that's the original source. Same could be said for throwing out the original audio and substituting it for a lower quality version....oh wait

[ABED]

It's really not a false equivalency. Strictly speaking, all of the defacing that would be done to Dragon Ball would be to copies and would not affect the original negative. If that was done, it would be exactly the same as defacing the original Mona Lisa, and the damage would be done forever. That said, there's only one original of either of those things, so the only chance anyone has of ever owning either is through a copy, so for all practical purposes, copies are all there is. So changing a copy of the Mona Lisa so that she has different colored hair (for example) is going to make it worthless to anyone who wants a legitimate copy. Any copy that purposely does something different, like putting sunglasses on her, might be worth something to somebody, but it's still distinctly different from an actual Mona Lisa.

That seems like a very specious argument. It's not the same, there's no way that all the copies of DBZ would be changed, only then would it be like defacing the original mona lisa.

I would say the equivalent is TOEI cropping their master, as that's the original source. Same could be said for throwing out the original audio and substituting it for a lower quality version....oh wait

I'm not a technophile, so I don't get it.

Even if the original negative was messed up, I still don't think it's in the same league. Maybe other sources wouldn't be ideal, but there are other sources for the footage and the audio. The Mona Lisa, Statue of David, etc. are singular works of art. They weren't made for reproduction. Their value comes not just from being an original, but by being the work of their creator, whereas Dragon Ball was a mass market product.