Talk:Dragonball Evolution

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dragonball Evolution article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Dragon Ball Wiki? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Do not bite the newcomers Respond in a mature manner Be welcoming Maintain civility at all times	Article policies No opinionated research for articles Have a neutral point of view Verifiability

Out of 100%...?

18% out of 100%? Riiiight, because we all would have thought that it would have been 18% out of 80% or 120% or something *eyeroll*

I only put it like that because that is the proper way to right it, explain to me how that is such a big deal? SSJGoku93 05:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

It is not the right way to put it. Percent means per cent. For every hundred. To mention that 18% is out of 100% is completely redundant.

Title

The title is actually 'Dragonball'. --Kuriza 09:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! I've renamed the article accordingly. -- nonoitall 22:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Differences between anime/manga and movie

Are we at least going to get a differences section so we can point out the terribly pathetic monstrosity that this movie is?

I can see that happening, not necessarily to point out the "terribly pathetic monstrosity" of the film, but to point out the differences between the film and Toriyama's original series. As little faith as I have in the film myself, a neutral point of view must still be respected. Storm talk – projects 02:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I know I'm a few days behind, but in all honesty we won't have much to write until the film is released anyway. --  talk contr 21:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I've whipped up a list of most of the similarities and differences between Toriyama's work and Dragonball: Evolution (see Dragonball: Evolution#Comparison to Akira Toriyama's manga). By the way, to address the first comment, the movie wasn't that bad. If you watch it expecting to see everything you like about the anime, you're going to be disappointed because this is a live-action film about a series which there is almost nothing realistic about. But if you go in with an open head expecting to see a live-action martial arts adaptation of Dragon Ball, then your reception might stand a chance. The problem had less to do with what a "terribly pathetic monstrosity" the film is to the original series, and rather was more related to a production POV. It moves so fast that you don't get a lot of time to adapt to the characters and by the end of the film everybody is little more than one-dimensional; Roshi and Piccolo were probably the most memorable characters though. Anyways, that's my take on the film. Storm talk – projects 00:26, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Just saw the movie, boy was it bad. One thing I noticed is that Roshi spends a lot of time in the film explaining to Goku how to use his Ki, & what it means to be 'at one with yourself' and he discusses these with Chi Chi as well. In the series Goku just does stuff by 'trying his hardest,' I never heard the word Ki once in the series.98.144.5.92 18:23, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, the use of ki isn't a very good reason to rag on the film. Toriyama originally created the Dragon Ball manga as something of a parody of a classic Chinese story called called Journey to the West, but as he continued writing it, it became less a parody and more his own testament to Chinese culture. In Chinese martial arts (among others), qi, or "energy flow", is a very important thing to master; even though the word was never really pronounced in the original series to my best knowledge, ki was definitely a concept Toriyama was using while writing Dragon Ball (the word is also used in the countless video game spin-offs). I don't know, I just think that if you're gonna hate something that's already being scolded in the public eye, you need to be sure to understand a few things about before judging; but you're free to your own opinion. As I said earlier, the only real problems I had were from a production standpoint; the relationship that buds onscreen between Goku and Chi Chi is pretty sappy too, but those scenes aren't numerous. Storm talk – projects 19:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sorry I was a bit misleading. I posted under the 'differences between anime and film' section so the discussion of Ki was meant to be one difference. It didn't have much to do with why I hated the film.18:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Ohh, I see that now haha. Storm talk – projects 19:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I recently saw the movie and thought it was good as a kung fu movie but as a Dragon Ball movie it sucked. It didn't even follow the full story of Dragon Ball. When I first heard it was coming out I thought it would have been like a story based in between Dragon Ball and Dragon Ball Z but I was disappointed when it completely changed the stories. Also in the article it says "Goku asked Chichi to marry him" I don't recall that happening.--Alpha Lycos 10:20, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Budget?

I read from http://www.dbthemovie.com that the ACTUAL budget of the movie is $45 million, not the rumored $100 million that we figured because of one interview.

THEIR source is a forum where an uploaded image of a Spanish-language magazine says so.

http://dragonballmovieforum.com/showthread.php?t=2612

I'm merely saying this to help keep this page as right as possible. :)

Reviews

I hate this movie, but I think it's only fair the reception section has at least one positive review--Rod|talk 20:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned I give them props for trying. I felt ripped off because of the $7.50 I paid but for a $5.00 showing I was happy. Not the best but it was fine. (Dankedude 03:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC))

Sequels

Not very likely is it? --SS INFINITY 19:13, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it was just green lit.-- bulletproof 02:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

But, couldn't it be cancelled since it did so bad in theaters? --SS INFINITY 14:05, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

So bad? Its already done 3/4 it's budget. By industry standards, thats actually pretty good. -- bulletproof

Well, over here in the U.S.A. it was a failure, critical and financial wise. --SS INFINITY 15:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

What's this comment about Fox already looking and "rebooting" the movie in the sequel, i haven't heard anything like that - 121.44.9.164 02:52, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh cme on!!

I loved it! I thought it was really good and had a nice spin on it. :3

gohanRULEZ 01:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

• Heck yeah. This movie did not deserve the flak it gets. --68.165.246.242 18:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Lock article?

I found the article have a few sentences which basically found the movie unfavourable. Particularly the Synopsis heading, which had changed what was probably paragraphs into just one vulgar word. I took care of it all, but I'm kinda afraid it might happen again. The Dragon Ball film is still relatively new, so I was wondering if it could be locked until the backlash died down?

Oh, and the Synopsis section does need sprucing up. I only saw the film once, and that was on its release date, so I can't really remember every detail (memory like a sheep these days). Zerolus 11:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)Zerolus

Announcing DVD Release Date?

I just got word of the DVD release date for Japan and the specs, and wanted to add it in, but I wasn't entirely sure how or where to put it, do you think we should include it in the article to make it more up-to-date?

Source http://movies.foxjapan.com/dragonball/ Supersaiyanbatman 16:49, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Reception, Budget, and Gross Revenue; Is it a Flop?

If the movie Budget was roughly $45 Million and the gross revenue is at $56 Million total worldwide, then this movie can't technically be classified as a success. The movie was a flop based on revenue alone (not including critic reviews; people's reviews, and reviews in general). I didn't like this flick for various reasons, but that's besides the point. The fact that the movie was a failure in the box office itself is highly crucial to the article; hence people adding in that it received positive reviews is a detriment to the fact itself, when anyone in their right mind can tell that this movie specifically didn't do so well in the global market. - User:PrinceZarbon/sig 17:25, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

While no one can get away from the fact that it was a flop at the Box office, wouldn't it Ruin the neutral point of view to have just negative reviews in the reception?

Then again, most likely I'm misinterpreting what you're saying, but it wouldn't be unfair to state the fact that the reception was generally Negative, at least from the US anyway

Even if I like the movie, I can't deny the facts. Supersaiyanbatman 17:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedic resource. It's not a fanbase. It's not about whether or not someone likes the movie. It's about the overall budget, gross, reception, etc. If the movie is a flop based on technical results, then it's our duty as editors to state the truth, not go on about it in our own opinion, trying to pass our opinion on as fact. A true test of editing skill comes from being able to separate fact from opinion. If this is a flop as a fact, then we must keep our opinion out of the equation. Basically, yes mate, we can't deny the facts in this case. If everywhere else on the net, it is stated to be negative, we have a duty to follow this consensus based on encyclopedic fact and leave our own opinion to the side. - User:PrinceZarbon/sig 17:53, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I fully understand where you're getting at man. As an Encyclopedia of Dragonball, we shouldn't make the articles seemed biased towards either hate or love, but to state the facts and not put our own opinion into the mix. As we all know, Alot of people hate Dragonball GT, but that doesn't mean the article should say that Dragonball GT is the worst thing to come out of Dragonball until the movie Not what I think, but what a General amount of people do. So, I say, Yes it was a flop and there's no getting around that. So I say, Go for it and add it to be correct on the subject matter, because no one can deny the flop.You're an Admin, do what you think is best for the Site.I say, Go for it.

Just as long as the facts are correct, I have no problem with it. And I doubt anyone else will Supersaiyanbatman 18:04, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I am waiting for the opinion from others as of now. My comrades will have to voice themselves on this issue in order to clear this up; Particularly the voice of nonoitall and SSJGoku93 is substantial and integral here. Once they voice themselves about this, then changes can be made. I need everyone to agree that this was a flop. - User:PrinceZarbon/sig 18:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I would definitely agree in noting the fact that this movie was a "flop" Now it is also important to note that on technical terms, in only flopped domestically (if you live in the U.S.). I suppose it did pretty bad in Europe as well, but gained most of it's earnings from the Asian market... and even there it quickly dropped down the box office.

talk contr

20:53, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

All these points you just brought up are very integral to maintaining this as an encyclopedic article. How should we implement them into the article? In the section that says Reception, I assume all those specific facts need to be noted. And some words like "mixed" need to be removed, as it was moreso not mixed, the overall consensus was negative in terms of reception. - User:PrinceZarbon/sig 23:38, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

You seem to have a pretty good idea as to what you want to add. I'd say just edit it in where you feel fit, and we'll go from there.

talk contr

00:36, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Alright. I also went and added a nice source from IGN as the first quote for the reception area; that segment should convey how most people feel about the movie being a flop. - User:PrinceZarbon/sig 01:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually Zarbon, the source from IGN that you added is clearly referring to the game. Additionally, IGN's review of the film is already in the Reception section and actually contradicts what you were attempting to mask. Now, I have changed the "review" note from negative to mixed yet again for the following reasons. The first of which is the fact that there are both positive and negative for the film, thus deeming the "overly negative" note inaccurate. Another more obvious reason comes as a result of the first. Due to the fact that there are both positive and negative reviews, "mixed reviews" is the more accurate statement. As there is simply no way to measure the number of positive or negative reviews of the film out there, statements such as "more/overly negative or positve" cannot be used. Therefore, "mixed" is the simplest most neutral alternative. -- bulletproof 02:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

This is exactly the type of opinionated chatter we are trying to avoid here. I looked through the article and that specific notation that I made was about the movie, NOT the games. It mentions that fans are still interested in the games regardless of the fact that the movie was a flop. What you are doing is completely ignoring the only facet of truth and going by your own self-righteous crusade to make this movie more than it actually is. I've tracked the page history and found that you've reverted numerous times when many other contributors have tried to add the truth instead of "mixed" thoughts; when most of the planet doesn't concur with your perspective. The fact is, both SSJGoku93, myself, and maybe every other member here feels otherwise (not to mention actual sources to help prove this argument. You are all alone when it comes to maintaining the movie as a "mixed" review rather than a "negative" flop. I suggest you leave the negative assertion intact so the article doesn't border on favoritism. Sometimes it's important to state the truth, even if you don't like it. The truth is the only way to make things better. However, if you can find ONE other member on this ENTIRE wiki who genuinely feels that there shouldn't be a negative assertion in the evolution article, I will personally remove it. But as of now, you seem to be fighting a losing battle. - User:PrinceZarbon/sig 04:07, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Zarbon it actually appears to me that it is you who is seemingly on a POV pushing crusade here. Due to your previous history with favoritism and basing your contributions on your personal opinion of subjects on say... another encyclopedia I won’t name, I have reason to believe that you compromise this project. You claim that I seem to be making the movie out to be more than it really is when really I have done nothing to so much as hint my opinion of the movie in the article. You cannot deny that there are both positive and negative reviews for this film and you will never be able to prove that the negative reviews outweigh the positive as the internet is immeasurable. Therefore, the only accurate statement that can be said of the reviews is that they are “mixed”. Its as simple as that really. -- bulletproof 04:31, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

On another note, I believe you seem to be confusing your previous discussion involving SSJGoku93 and Supersaiyanbatman about the movie being a flop with mine about the reviews of the film. Whether or not you consider the movie to be a flop, you can continue to discuss the issue with SSJGoku93 and Supersaiyanbatman. Hell, quite frankly you can even add a note to the article stating that “fans generally feel the movie was a flop” provided that a proper and “DIRECT” source is given (not a simple mention in a psp game review). However the discussion between you and I is in regards to the notation made about the general reviews for the film.-- bulletproof 04:43, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the truth seems not to coincide with what you're saying. Like I said, I've followed your constant reverting of the page and it's highly notable that you even TRY to assert your opinion as fact. The fact, my friend, is that the movie is not attune to mixed reviews. The fact is that the movie received negative reviews. I've gone and added a slew of other sources specifically stating the movie was a flop. There's now more than 4 sources. If for some reason you feel that a 13% out of 100% is a good review, then you are blinded by your own crusade. And I will say again, if you can bring just one person forth who feels otherwise, I will allow your assertion to pass. But thus far, after receiving complaint after complaint after complaint about the page's inaccuracy to follow norm consensus of avoiding opinions and merely stating facts, I had to look into this matter. I did not find ONE article that favored this movie on a positive note. Some say the good points, but don't neglect to say the bad. Others only state the bad. For you to pinpoint these good assertions (which are very rare) and bypass everything with your own set of principles, I'm appalled. What you need to do is try to convince everyone on this wiki, LITERALLY, that this movie was not open to negative reviews, but rather, mixed reviews. If more than 70% of the critics feel that this movie was a flop, then I have no choice but to follow that assertion as a cordial and professional editor and administrator equally well. It is not in my right to pass judgment on the movie, it is my duty to report the truth and nothing but. That's what makes a truthful editor; one who leaves his own opinion out of the equation. I suggest you patiently wait for a response from SSJGoku93 and nonoitall on this matter. I truly need further opinion on this matter. - User:PrinceZarbon/sig 04:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Please take note that I noticed the first of the articles I sourced was about the game and not the movie so I moved it accordingly to the game's page. - User:PrinceZarbon/sig 07:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, it's not normally my thing to get into tension-fests, but...Wikipedia's page on Dragonball Evolution seems to indicate that the movie recieved mixed reviews from critics all over the place. Some people liked it, some people hated it. I'm no professional critic (though I damn well SHOULD be!), but I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, not because it has the words "Dragon Ball" in front of it, but because I found it to be a good movie over all. Then again, I also liked "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within". Maybe I'm just mentally and emotionally drawn to what most people consider "bad movies". ;P
In any case, if Wikipedia (and its sourced material) is any incidication, the movie did indeed get mixed reviews. Not negative ones. ~ Doc Lithius [U|T|C] 08:02, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I thought Wikipedia's section was a good example as well. It seems to me that it would be most balanced to explain that there have been many notable negative reviews, but some positive ones as well, cite sources (without adding anything to them) and leave it at that. Let the facts speak for themselves and let the readers draw their own conclusions. I've highlighted a few problem areas in the current material:

Thus far, Dragon Ball: Evolution has been received with overall negative reviews from critics. One of the frequently discussed elements based on the movie's reception has been the dilemma of staying true to the manga and anime series. Numerous changes have left fans (1. Which fans? While this sort of wording is sometimes acceptable in some less sensitive areas of the wiki, this isn't the place for it.) of both the series and manga frustrated based on actual character design, background, and story implementation. The movie has left most, if not all, (2. We haven't polled the millions of fans the series has. Clicky.) fans of the series upset for various reasons. Zac Bertschy of Anime News Network describes the film. "Here's what happened instead: a bunch of talentless hacks with studio money slapped together a big steaming pile of baffling garbage that fails utterly on every possible level and will please no one at all. The fans were right." He continues to explain that "In the end, it all boils down to one thing: this movie appeals to nobody. It was made for no one. People who aren't familiar with the Dragon Ball story at all will be so flabbergasted by what's happening that they will likely tell everyone they know that it's one of the worst movies they've ever seen. Fans who do know what the general story is will be furious at just how unbelievably badly they screwed this entire thing up. Kids are used to better writing than this in their weekday afternoon cartoons. It's a clunky, tiresome, badly executed, horribly written pile of shame that deserves no quarter. In short, it's as bad as the fans said it would be."

TV Guide's Jeremy Wheeler probably expresses his emotion without hesitation, much like many Dragon Ball fans have across the world. (3. See #1.) Wheeler says frankly "Just know there's a whole lot more great stuff out there than just what Evolution has in store for you -- namely, the anime that it was based on."

Furthermore, the Hollywood Reporter's Frank Scheck tries his best to explain the films' problematic points. Scheck specifically states that the movie was "Completely lacking in visual, narrative or stylistic coherence, the film also suffers from cheap-looking visual effects and poorly staged and edited action sequences that will not exactly please the fanboys."

I'd also try to condense the negative reviews a bit and put them all together in one or two paragraphs, then have the positive reviews all together in one or two paragraphs — it will assist readers who would prefer to read one or the other.

Finally, let's all calm down a bit. No one needs to get blocked for good faith edits, and we're all out to make this article as encyclopedic as possible. --  talk contr 09:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

The only reason I initially maintained that it was negative and not mixed was because the highest rating of the movie I could find was a 70 (and that's not a positive review). Anyone interested in finding more reviews can check this list at metacritic, Reviews. The initial consensus is negative, not mixed, as most scores were 45 and well below (which is a negative review to say the least). Metacritic may summarize as "mixed" but that's merely because the site has a auto generated message. The movie has to fall below 40 to receive negative, I believe, based on their scale. I hope to remain neutral on this matter. However, I will not edit the article further to express the negativity because I don't want to open a conflict where there is none, and I had initially maintained that consensus based on what other members had suggested to me prior, not what I personally felt. I do, however, hope to hear from many other members on this matter. The article is ever-changing. If for some reason positive reviews are added, then I welcome them. Nonoitall is correct; there should be a section that notes positive remarks, anyone who wishes to fixate that section is welcome to do so. - User:PrinceZarbon/sig 15:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh my God, just write in mixed to negative, and stop arguing about this, it's pointless--Rod|talk 02:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

The reception from fans and critics was overwhelmingly negative. You may find a good review in evry 25 reviews of this movie. Almost every major film critic gave it a bad review and the best review is an NBC's news anchor off hand comment. That't bad