Lord Beerus wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 7:40 pm
I'm sorry, but that's bad writing if that's the case.
I'm sorry too, because this is the part where this whole discussion starts to feel disingenuous to me.
If you don't think that the narrative itself often serves as a catalyst for how characters react and develop, I really don't know what to tell you. That's one of the most basic, fundamental principles of storytelling, and circumstances alone can comprise the entire foundation for how a character's growth is integrated into the plot. Dragon Ball is no exception; pretty much every big character moment in the series is spurred by a combination of prior experiences and situations the protagonists find themselves in.
Vegeta suddenly addressing his treatment of the Namekians, totally unprompted, totally at random, in a situation that is completely irrelevant to the Namekians themselves would undoubtedly be among some of the most atrocious writing I've ever witnessed in fiction. Of course, nothing like that would ever happen simply because stories don't really work that way. Everything needs context.
However, the real absurdity of this argument isn't even plot-related. It's
behavior-related. Characters don't just randomly bring up emotional baggage out of nowhere. People in real life don't even do that. Vegeta especially doesn't do that.
Lord Beerus wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 7:40 pm
Like, of all the planets for Vegeta to revisit, Namek is actually the worst because all the Namekians that Vegeta's murdered were brought back to life, so the atonement feels hollow.
This isn't even factually correct, and the atonement is there specifically because Vegeta wants to make amends with an entire species he believes he wronged in the past.
Lord Beerus wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 7:40 pm
The issue is that the Namekian aren't the only planet in danger.
That's not an issue at all.
The Namekians are more relevant than other races because, out of all of Vegeta's victims, they're the only ones the audience is familiar with. They're the ones who were mercilessly slaughtered on-screen and fully represent the atrocities of his past, so it's only thematically and narratively appropriate that they're the ones Vegeta would later attempt to make amends with instead of Random Bum Planet #43.
Lord Beerus wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 7:40 pm
So when Vegeta confronts Freeza again like he does in the Resurrection F arc/movie and the Universal Survival arc, he's confronting his villainous past just as much as he would be going talking to a Namekian.
No. They're not remotely comparable.
The purpose of Vegeta's encounter with Freeza in Resurrection 'F' was to demonstrate how insignificant Freeza actually was to him at that point, despite the fact that it was Freeza who had full control over his life before. Their beef in that film concerned Vegeta's
subordination, not his experiences of committing genocide; the latter was something Vegeta would have enjoyed regardless of Freeza's presence. While the topic of Vegeta's baggage wouldn't have been unwelcome, it makes far less sense to have him confront that baggage if he's not explicitly confronting the people he killed. That's why it's considerably more necessary at this point than back during that story arc.
Lord Beerus wrote: Mon Jun 22, 2020 7:40 pm
He already knows he's a morally right at heart. He's not a fucking villain.
I don't think these are mutually exclusive at all. When Vegeta describes himself as a villain, he's telling Moro (but really, the audience) that he isn't simply letting himself off the hook for his actions in the past. Other people might, but he's not. Vegeta isn't one to let others' opinions dictate how he assesses himself, and if anything, being qualified for the God ritual only enhances that point.
Formerly Marlowe89.