Can DB Ever Move Past Goku?

[Shaddy]

Did I kick your dog or something?

i don't even really care about this specific case, but I find it interesting that one would want a revival to experiment instead of being what it was. Why bring something back if you are just going to change it wildly? And don't just assume that just because I disagree with you I'm not interested in what someone has to say. I really want to understand what you mean by experimenting. Like doing what exactly?

By that logic, why did Goku ever become an adult? Did Dragon Ball stop being Dragon Ball when half the fighting cast turned out to be aliens? All series change and evolve as they continue, and most creative evolution comes from experimentation, otherwise there's no point to continuing. Revivals are no exception. This is Disney Star Wars all over again. If I wanted to see the thing I've already seen, I'd go watch that thing. I watch new material from established properties because I want to see how it can be used to do new stuff, and that usually requires changes. I want long-running established intellectual properties especially to experiment because they are the ones with the power to try out crazy ideas within a property that's pretty much guaranteed to sell. That doesn't mean they aren't still themselves, the same way Dragon Ball didn't stop being Dragon Ball when the title object of the series was essentially reduced to an extra life for most of the cast.

To put this in perspective, I literally have witnessed people saying Super is not a real Dragon Ball show because it doesn't fit with their powerscaling headcanons. And just because I think that's much, much dumber doesn't mean they aren't basically doing exactly what you're doing with characters. A series is not one thing, it is the intersection between many things of varying importance to varying people.

[ABED]

I'm not sure what I was thinking because when I think of experimenting, I wasn't thinking an alien reveal or Goku aging as somehow "experiments". I was thinking something more radical. It's certainly significant change, but getting older, DB remains fundamentally what it is. It's just further along in the story. So when you say "by that logic" I don't think you quite understood what I meant by revivals being what they used to be. When I read experimenting, I thought you meant something like a structural change. For instance, the revival of Arrested Development. Granted, the reasons were due scheduling, but it is what is. The show went from an ensemble with a few running plots in the same episode, to the revival following around 1 or 2 of the main cast for an episode or two as we see how the episodes intersect and overlap. It didn't work. It fundamentally changed an aspect that was at the heart of what made the original run work - the strength of that ensemble together.

Change too much and you lose what made it what it was and made it special, change not enough and you get a hollow repeat.

[Shaddy]

I'm not sure what I was thinking because when I think of experimenting, I wasn't thinking an alien reveal or Goku aging as somehow "experiments". I was thinking something more radical. It's certainly significant change, but getting older, DB remains fundamentally what it is. It's just further along in the story.

Not if I say it doesn't. Or if you say it doesn't. You're still viewing this through the lens of there being a correct answer as to what Dragon Ball is, but you have no way of telling a person who believes "REAL Dragon Ball was never about aliens, time travel or cyborgs" that they're wrong about their own opinion.

So when you say "by that logic" I don't think you quite understood what I meant by revivals being what they used to be. When I read experimenting, I thought you meant something like a structural change.

I do mean structural changes. You seem to be approaching this topic with the idea in your head no structural change for any preestablished property can create a good story, and I don't consider that to be a sound take. You can say for any number of reasons, that you think any number of structural changes for Dragon Ball wouldn't work, but "it wouldn't be Dragon Ball any more" is a justification for zero percent of them. It's a cop out, a catch-22. You could say that about any idea, structural or otherwise.

For instance, the revival of Arrested Development. Granted, the reasons were due scheduling, but it is what is. The show went from an ensemble with a few running plots in the same episode, to the revival following around 1 or 2 of the main cast for an episode or two as we see how the episodes intersect and overlap. It didn't work. It fundamentally changed an aspect that was at the heart of what made the original run work - the strength of that ensemble together.

Change too much and you lose what made it what it was and made it special, change not enough and you get a hollow repeat.

That's not a problem of change, it's a problem of doing a bad job. The problem was thinking that with their scheduling issues they could recapture the original, instead of working with the conditions they had to make something else. They did exactly what you would have asked them with the conditions they had been given, and it made the show worse. If they had left those dreams behind and simply focused on what would be the most fun, they would have made something better. Season 5 sucking despite having everyone around just goes to show how fruitless an effort it was. All that mattered was that the show they made was good. That is all that ever matters.

[Skar]

I don't look at it so much as replacing Goku as much as expanding Goku, adding to the character's totality and presence. Much like Ben Reilly was an extension of Peter Parker's character and identity, a clone or alternate version of Goku would be as well. Goku's character would become much more than that one guy.

We have Xeno Goku who's an alternate universe Goku. I'm not sure of all the differences in his timeline but he seems slightly different in personality.

If there's an audience for it, I don't mind DB moving past Goku. Even though I wouldn't be a fan of it and don't have a problem with the series ending, I try to remember that I'm not the target audience anymore. I read the manga on Mangaplus but I don't buy merchandise or video games. It's just that I don't know if there is much of an audience for it. Anything that didn't focus on Goku was only a short spin-off or special. The only alternate Goku appears in a short promotional manga/anime for Heroes. I imagine Heroes would've had a full fledged anime if they thought there was a big enough audience.

[ABED]

I'm not sure what I was thinking because when I think of experimenting, I wasn't thinking an alien reveal or Goku aging as somehow "experiments". I was thinking something more radical. It's certainly significant change, but getting older, DB remains fundamentally what it is. It's just further along in the story.

Not if I say it doesn't. Or if you say it doesn't. You're still viewing this through the lens of there being a correct answer as to what Dragon Ball is, but you have no way of telling a person who believes "REAL Dragon Ball was never about aliens, time travel or cyborgs" that they're wrong about their own opinion.

So when you say "by that logic" I don't think you quite understood what I meant by revivals being what they used to be. When I read experimenting, I thought you meant something like a structural change.

I do mean structural changes. You seem to be approaching this topic with the idea in your head no structural change for any preestablished property can create a good story, and I don't consider that to be a sound take. You can say for any number of reasons, that you think any number of structural changes for Dragon Ball wouldn't work, but "it wouldn't be Dragon Ball any more" is a justification for zero percent of them. It's a cop out, a catch-22. You could say that about any idea, structural or otherwise.

For instance, the revival of Arrested Development. Granted, the reasons were due scheduling, but it is what is. The show went from an ensemble with a few running plots in the same episode, to the revival following around 1 or 2 of the main cast for an episode or two as we see how the episodes intersect and overlap. It didn't work. It fundamentally changed an aspect that was at the heart of what made the original run work - the strength of that ensemble together.

Change too much and you lose what made it what it was and made it special, change not enough and you get a hollow repeat.

That's not a problem of change, it's a problem of doing a bad job. The problem was thinking that with their scheduling issues they could recapture the original, instead of working with the conditions they had to make something else. They did exactly what you would have asked them with the conditions they had been given, and it made the show worse. If they had left those dreams behind and simply focused on what would be the most fun, they would have made something better. Season 5 sucking despite having everyone around just goes to show how fruitless an effort it was. All that mattered was that the show they made was good. That is all that ever matters.

There is a lot here I agree with though to someone who says DB wasn't about aliens and cyborgs and time travel, none of those things break what DB was as it's broad enough since the start to encompas those elements. There are a lot of elements that make DB what it is, including things that aren't tangible like the character and the setting, but there are definitely things that separate the original story from GT which had a lot of similar things but was a pale imitation. GT is not quite Dragon Ball as it lacks that feel.

The change was a big part of the reason the revival failed. Yes, clearly it's not the only reason but it is significant as a reason why the original was so good.

I don't mean to make it seem like structural changes are always for the negative but it is a significant risk to change what works. And I wouldn't go as far to say that all that ever matters is that something is good. Something can be good but not be what I want to buy. If I'm in the mood for pizza, don't bring me a cheese steak. I like both but if I ask for something, don't give me something else I didn't ask for. I know with art it's not quite as clear cut as food classifications, but at the very least I hope you see what I'm getting at.

[WittyUsername]

The more I think about it, I’m not even sure how a next generation type of story would work, unless it takes place at a point when Goku is dead, like in Online or the epilogue in GT. If you had a show focusing on characters like Pan and Oob, I imagine you’d have to contrive a way to keep Goku and Vegeta out of the action. Either that or you make Pan and Oob stronger than them, but I don’t think that would go over well with fans.

[Adamant]

Your typical Toriyama "Get a load of this fucking dork" humor. The guy who doesn't realize he's the punchline. And while that character works great as a slapstick comedy protagonist, it doesn't work as the main hero of a fast-and-loose martial arts comic. Neither does Gohan's pre-Saiyaman character, unless you're looking to get really deep into the series' ethos...which of course Toriyama ain't gonna fuckin' do. So it makes sense that when he ditched the slice of life high school stuff and honed in on a villain, he'd go away from Gohan.

I can't really see Gohan working as the lead of a standard Toriyama Dragonball arc either. I CAN, however, see the Goten and Trunks duo working. If Goku absolutely had to be removed, those two would've been the best new lead characters - which is seemingly what Toriyama had intended when he had Goku go back to the afterlife mid-Boo arc, I don't think he had any plans to bring him back for the arc's endgame at that point.

[coola]

I would love to, unfortunately, Goku has been boring since Super. He became such dumbass and he refuse to learn anything, one of things i love in anime, is seeing character grow and realize his mistakes.

[ABED]

I would love to, unfortunately, Goku has been boring since Super. He became such dumbass and he refuse to learn anything, one of things i love in anime, is seeing character grow and realize his mistakes.

What did he learn in DBZ?

[jjgp1112]

I would love to, unfortunately, Goku has been boring since Super. He became such dumbass and he refuse to learn anything, one of things i love in anime, is seeing character grow and realize his mistakes.

What did he learn in DBZ?

The Kaio-Ken and the Spirit Bomb, of course!

[Shaddy]

There is a lot here I agree with though to someone who says DB wasn't about aliens and cyborgs and time travel, none of those things break what DB was as it's broad enough since the start to encompas those elements. There are a lot of elements that make DB what it is, including things that aren't tangible like the character and the setting, but there are definitely things that separate the original story from GT which had a lot of similar things but was a pale imitation. GT is not quite Dragon Ball as it lacks that feel.

Again, you aren't the arbiter of what makes something more Dragon Ball or less Dragon Ball, which is the point.

The change was a big part of the reason the revival failed. Yes, clearly it's not the only reason but it is significant as a reason why the original was so good.

No, the reason it failed was because it was bad. If it had been good, it would not have mattered. If, as you claim, that made it into a different thing people didn't want, they could just go back to the old thing. It hasn't disappeared or anything.

I don't mean to make it seem like structural changes are always for the negative but it is a significant risk to change what works.

Uh, yes? I am literally saying it should take risks! That's what a series that always breaks even should be for! If all you want to do is grind profits by cranking out cookie-cutter bullshit, you may as well not make a continuation at all.

I wouldn't go as far to say that all that ever matters is that something is good. Something can be good but not be what I want to buy. If I'm in the mood for pizza, don't bring me a cheese steak. I like both but if I ask for something, don't give me something else I didn't ask for. I know with art it's not quite as clear cut as food classifications, but at the very least I hope you see what I'm getting at.

Toei, Toyotaro and Toriyama aren't making the show to customer's orders. All this stuff is pipe-dreams, I'm not acting like they'll ever stray far from what shareholders want. Even if they did, you're still saying "if I ask for this" and "you give me this", which means very little to me, because I don't want the things you want. Responding with then you just don't want Dragon Ball is both wrong and conceited.

And even if you were right, think about this the way any creator might. If you ask for something as vague as pizza without specifying your own toppings, crust, cheese et cetera, then how can you blame them if the ones they choose aren't to your personal specifications?

Or hell, why am I not allowed to claim that, through "is a hot dog a sandwich" logic, that pizza and cheese steak are functionally the same thing?

Dragon Ball, in the same way, is only the thing that a given individual says it is. If you say about a Dragon Ball property "this is not Dragon Ball", then that is your opinion alone, and can only be shared by others incidentally, never a truth. Even if we agree that there is a ship-of-Theseus universe where Dragon Ball has changed so much that it crosses a line and is no longer itself, that line is still going to be subjective. You are going to say that plenty of new content is "not Dragon Ball", and plenty of people will claim that stuff you like is "not Dragon Ball".

[ABED]

No, the reason it failed was because it was bad

Failed in what way? Cause it sounds like what you're saying "it was bad because it was bad".

Again, you aren't the arbiter of what makes something more Dragon Ball or less Dragon Ball, which is the point. It's not a superhero story, it's not a medical drama, a workplace comedy, or a procedural. It's a lot of different genres and tones rolled into one and it switches but there are certain core elements that make it distinct.

I didn't say I was. All I've ever said is that DB isn't just anything.

Uh, yes? I am literally saying it should take risks! That's what a series that always breaks even should be for! If all you want to do is grind profits by cranking out cookie-cutter bullshit, you may as well not make a continuation at all.

Completely disagree. Why the hell bring it back if you radically change it? What's the point? And I wasn't saying I want something cookie cutter, though I honestly don't have an issue with that as an idea, but there are such things as calculated risks. If you aren't going to keep it at least close to what it is wouldn't the efforts and resources be better spent making something original? At a certain point, all you would be doing if you take such wild risks is counting on branding.

If it had been good, it would not have mattered.

Matter to whom? I shouldn't have to say that quality is subjective and that things like structure an ensemble cast being together will have a MASSIVE impact on people's enjoyment if that's the thing they like. Sure we could still recognize something as "good" and still not enjoy it.

Dragon Ball, in the same way, is only the thing that a given individual says it is

I think that's true only to a limit. Turning DB into a superhero story is not Dragon Ball.

[FoolsGil]

No, not mainline Dragonball. Now, though I have a dislike for what the series have become, there is one thing I know in my negativity: Dragonball is too big to fail. Even GT was good on ratings. And for all the stuff that can be said about Heroes, people still watch it. That in my opinion means that OVAs or mini-series of other characters have a good chance of being successful.

Now, I would start slow. Do a mini series with Vegeta, Goten, Trunks and Gohan to Planet Sadala. Goku doesn't want to go. See how ratings go on a show like that. Maybe next do a series about Future Trunks. Perhaps two Mais and Two FTs is a bit too weird for everyone involved, so the pair who went to that timeline decide they're going to try and find Planet Namek for their balls, jumpstart Earth's recovery or something. Once again, see how ratings would go. And if that series goes well, it would be good to talk about the Jaco prequel and The Time I got reincarnated as Yamcha getting greenlit, and proceed onward to tell other stories.

[Shaddy]

Failed in what way? Cause it sounds like what you're saying "it was bad because it was bad".

As in, the execution was what was poor, not the ideas behind it.

I didn't say I was. All I've ever said is that DB isn't just anything.

And I'm saying that's not really an absolute truth. It certainly hasn't been everything, but exactly what is it about the things it hasn't been that it shouldn't be, for any reason other than not having been them, and if those reasons even exist, why is that restraint worth preserving in any way?

Completely disagree. Why the hell bring it back if you radically change it? What's the point?

What's the point in doing the same thing over and over? If you refer to any of these changes as "radical" then all of the things you want can summarily be dismissed as rehashes. The definition is fungible.

And I wasn't saying I want something cookie cutter, though I honestly don't have an issue with that as an idea, but there are such things as calculated risks. If you aren't going to keep it at least close to what it is wouldn't the efforts and resources be better spent making something original? At a certain point, all you would be doing if you take such wild risks is counting on branding.

Well again, "what it is" is only up to your interpretation of "what it is".

Secondly, I never said you shouldn't calculate a risk before you take it, but that's not an excuse for stagnation.

Matter to whom?

Well, when you say that season 4 was bad, it seems to me at least that you said it with the assumption in mind that people weren't going to make a big fuss disagreeing with you, right?

I shouldn't have to say that quality is subjective and that things like structure an ensemble cast being together will have a MASSIVE impact on people's enjoyment if that's the thing they like. Sure we could still recognize something as "good" and still not enjoy it.

Because, again, what was wrong with the show was not that the cast wasn't together, but that in lacking their strongest asset, they refused to replace it with anything good enough to fill that gap. And when, again, season 5 had everyone around and was still not very good, it shows that the problem was deeper than scheduling.

In this manner, responding to "what if they tried something different" with "if you do it wrong, it's not gonna work" is not interesting or helpful feedback.

I fully recognize that if Dragon Ball dived deep into experimentation, it could still suck. However, the ways in which it would suck would most likely be the ways in which it already sucks right now, so taking the chance to, if nothing else, distract from those issues is a net gain.

I think that's true only to a limit. Turning DB into a superhero story is not Dragon Ball.

Yes it is, though. Or at least, it is if you want it to be. Toriyama made a silly, farcical joke of super hero stories, but Saiyaman isn't not a superhero just because he's a joke version, the same way One Punch Man is still a shonen action series despite being a parody of them.

If you combine this with the "Funimation made Goku a superhero" discourse, aren't you by proxy saying that fans of that version aren't real fans?

[ABED]

As in, the execution was what was poor, not the ideas behind it.

I would argue that the idea behind it was in fact poor as the structure was largely (but not wholely) responsible for how it turned out as it diminished the strength of the show. Heck, just the length of the episode hurt the rhythm. The recut they put out years later was much better. Still not great but much better. I'd bump it up a letter grade.

Because, again, what was wrong with the show was not that the cast wasn't together, but that in lacking their strongest asset, they refused to replace it with anything good enough to fill that gap. And when, again, season 5 had everyone around and was still not very good, it shows that the problem was deeper than scheduling..

It's a gap you can not hope to fill, and for the record, I found 5 to be no so much bad as boring, whereas 4 was flat out bad. The ensemble aspect isn't a cureall, but the lack of it hurt that season. It's not the only reason but them not being together was without a doubt a huge reason why it didn't work. It's like Dragon Ball. A huge asset of the show is Goku's relationships with the various characters. If the story got rid of him, sure they could try to replace it with something to fill in the gaps but that's an impossible task as he's irreplaceable.

What's the point in doing the same thing over and over?

I didn't say "the same exact thing", but please can we refrain from answering a question with a question? And to give a better answer the reason is "because people enjoy it" hence why you are bringing it back.

Yes it is, though. Or at least, it is if you want it to be. Toriyama made a silly, farcical joke of super hero stories, but Saiyaman isn't not a superhero just because he's a joke version, the same way One Punch Man is still a shonen action series despite being a parody of them.

If you combine this with the "Funimation made Goku a superhero" discourse, aren't you by proxy saying that fans of that version aren't real fans?

Again with answering questions with a damn question. First, there was tiny fraction of DB that could be classified as a parody of a superhero story but that isn't the case for the overwhelming majority of it. What you were talking about was a handful of chapters as opposed to One Punch Man where that is the entire story.

And um, no, not even remotely am I not telling dub fans they aren't real fans, but I would say that's not the real DBZ. The dub is not Toriyama's story. It's a poor adaptation that doesn't understand the source material and changes core aspect like characterization.

[Shaddy]

I would argue that the idea behind it was in fact poor as the structure was largely (but not wholely) responsible for how it turned out as it diminished the strength of the show. Heck, just the length of the episode hurt the rhythm. The recut they put out years later was much better. Still not great but much better. I'd bump it up a letter grade.

Well...that's a completely different problem then, isn't it. Your problem is less how it was structured around the cast's schedule, and instead that it was edited poorly. Another matter of execution.

A huge asset of the show is Goku's relationships with the various characters. If the story got rid of him, sure they could try to replace it with something to fill in the gaps but that's an impossible task as he's irreplaceable.

Well, let's say for the sake of argument that I think he isn't. Notice how there's no tangible objective truth you can use against me in that regard.

I didn't say "the same exact thing", but please can we refrain from answering a question with a question?

I mean, no, but I still don't see how you can distinguish between "new enough" and "too much of a departure" without acknowledging that those distinctions are subjective.

And to give a better answer the reason is "because people enjoy it" hence why you are bringing it back.

And I enjoy series that try to evolve, revival or otherwise. I know I'm not the only one, so there's nothing that makes your camp more worth listening to in that regard.

Again with answering questions with a damn question.

I don't really see what the big deal is with that.

First, there was tiny fraction of DB that could be classified as a parody of a superhero story but that isn't the case for the overwhelming majority of it. What you were talking about was a handful of chapters as opposed to One Punch Man where that is the entire story.

Uh-huh. So what? You've now introduced the amount of time we spend on a subject as a parameter to justify what gets to count as a part of the series' identity, but you don't have a real justification for that in and of itself. If we wanted to talk about that, I think the amount of chapters we spend where Goku is barely present or not present is a perfectly justifiable amount for saying they can function without him.

And um, no, not even remotely am I not telling dub fans they aren't real fans, but I would say that's not the real DBZ. The dub is not Toriyama's story. It's a poor adaptation that doesn't understand the source material and changes core aspect like characterization.

Well, it tends real enough for them to stay Dragon Ball fans, so I don't see how the rest of that stuff matters.

Like, before this gets any more circular, let's make it clear what's going on here:

You say "Dragon Ball needs to be these things in order to continue".

I say "it doesn't, actually"...and there's just no way to prove either of us is right over the other. The previous several pages now are just us spinning our wheels even though I'm the one acknowledging the subjectivity of it all.

[jjgp1112]

The chapters where Goku is absent don't exist in a vacuum. They're still part of a story where Goku's absence is a source of tension in and of itself.

As far as modern Dragon Ball goes, I'd say most of its issues come down to execution and rushed production. You can explore new concepts without straying too far from what's made Dragon Ball work. And a lot of what makes DB work is its simplicity, which is anchored by its choice of a main character.

[Yasai9001]

I adore Goku but I feel Dragon Ball has more than enough characters at this point to not even be about him anymore. The story is plenty capable of being compelling without him because at a certain point it has to constantly write him out of it for long periods of time anyway.

But even when Goku's out of commission, his absence is a crucial part of the story in and of itself. While Goku isn't loud or angry and doesn't have access to a time machine, when he's not on screen other characters frequently ask "Where's Goku?"

Dragon Balls not a story about Dragon Balls and martial artists. It's a story about Goku, and everything else is just there for the ride.

True about the story being about Goku as the very start of the Manga, that's pretty much what it was. The thing that I do miss, however, is the other character's involvement with Goku early on in the story as he continued his journey. The more things went on, the more things have become centered around Goku. Sure, Gohan, Vegeta, and everyone has their moments, but I genuinely believe people want to see other characters shine - not in place of Goku, but in their own right.

Best exampls I can give are moments such as Puar and Oolong helping out to save the day from Pilaf or pretty much the entire segment on Namek where we got to explore other characters for a great while before Goku finally hopped in to save the day. We got some of that in the Galactic Prisoner Arc with Gohan Piccolo and the others fighting, but I firmly believe Dragon Ball is still lacking in that department.

[ABED]

Shaddy, fair enough, though one final point, less is more with answering questions with questions. Do it too many times and it feels like deflecting.

[Lord Beerus]

I think Dragon Ball should at least try to shift the focus on new central characters, as I feel the current cast, from a character development standpoint, are beyond spent. The fact that some characters have gone through some form of regression to present the idea of development speaks volumes of how stagnant Dragon Ball currently is when it come to enriching the main cast's personalities.

You can only throw so many new forms for Goku (and Vegeta) to unlock before you become numb to the whole process. And I don't want to be going through the motions when I'm reading or watching Dragon Ball.

Part of the charm was seeing the cast grow and change, and despite all it's GT had the right message: it was time to move on. Granted GT spectacularly mishandled that narrative concept, I at least applaud GT for trying, in some areas, to mix up the formula.