Future Warrior said:
To what extent do you believe time travel plays a huge role? It serves as a backround for a lot of characters, but the main conflict arises at the main timeline.
Trunks going back in time is the catalyst to events in the entire arc, including the changes to the timeline that drastically change the plot (present twins being stronger, #19 and #20 showing, Cell's entire source for being there) which are overall just handwaved away with the cheap explanation of "because time travel".
I think we have different standards when it comes to evaluating media. Maybe Trunks' involvement in Cell's timeline doesn't go in line with previous lines of logic, but why should it matter to me? I don't read the series to dissect the different timelines. If I wanted to do that, I wouldn't do it in a childrens manga made by gag artist Toriyama of all people.
I wouldn't want to read the series to dissect the timelines either, but not having coherent logic in a notable aspect of the arc is a major flaw regardless of one's intent in reading the series. I wouldn't say the target demographic would alleviate this either when plenty of other Shonen such as Fullmetal Alchemist or Ashita no Joe (both of which were accessible to the same target audience despite their more mature approaches) were able to go throughout their entire run without any major hiccups. It being made by a gag mangaka, likewise, can't be used as a shield when, as you said, the story of the Cell Arc took itself far more seriously with more mature themes and tone than any of Part 1's comedic arcs.
All it amounted to was inconsequential dialogue, because that Trunks that Cell mentions doesn't play a role in the story at all. It doesn't take away from the narrative.
It's pretty much just one or two lines that don't make sense out of a whole arc of utter badassary.
I can agree with this to some extent. I wouldn't say Cell's backstory damages the arc that much. As I said, things like #19 and #20's existence are far more relevant than the problems with Cell showing up, and I wouldn't say it outweighs the good aspects of the arc. However, it's far from the only major flaw of the arc when the Rosat never being used in place of the 3 year training is a far bigger issue, and there are some issues involving Goku's rationale when it comes to remaining dead, considering all the bad guys he apparently "attracted" to him with the debatable exceptions of Mecha Freeza and Raditz would have otherwise remained unopposed if not for him, not to mention being a direct opposition to Kuririn's line about Goku turning so many former enemies into allies.
Agree to disagree. I'm not saying he can't be horny, but a kiss on the cheek shouldn't be the decisive moment that makes him trust them. They may have only wanted to kill Goku, but that's his best friend right there.
To be fair, Kuririn only solidly made a decision when having the opportunity to deactivate #18. Until then, most of his thoughts on her were presented more as doubt in Trunks' opinion than an outright 180. By the time he made the decision, her desire to kill Goku was pretty much a non-issue with how much Vegeta and Trunks had surpassed her, with Goku doing the same being definite to anyone who knew him.
If your talking about the Freeza arc, that's a pretty different scenario imo. Both of them had a common enemy at that point, and it was clear Vegeta was gonna end up killing Gohan and co. if their goal had been accomplished. I think it's far different from the Cell arc where we see him on earth.
Your wording of it though was:
Seeing a villain like Vegeta cooperating with the heroes, while does his evil antics that put the group in jeopardy was something not many people had seen prior.
This is, at its core, something that had been done in the Freeza Arc, hence why I brought it up. I fully agree that the aspects of it were different though, such as exploring what would happen to a villain turned ally who hadn't gone through a redemption arc and how others would realistically view his presence.
All of this is pretty basic stuff when compared to the later arcs. I've said before that being complex doesn't mean it's better than being simple, but the Pilaf arc is so basic that there's pretty much no room for there to be any flaws in it's story. It's probably more suited to Toriyama's taste than to create a more drawn out serious story to be quite honest. Considering Toriyama never took his own work that seriously at the end of the day I shouldn't do it either.
Yet, if a comedic arc is indeed more to Toriyama's taste and talents; reflecting what he wanted to do most (make a fun story for boys/young teens), we should see it as being a great success as it perfectly captured the artist's intent with the art. Meanwhile, the Cell Arc had Toriyama clearly intent on making a serious story with time travel as a focal point and, thus, should be taking seriously when assessing it.
It's pretty similar to the whole powerscaling and power level culture surrounding this series, where I just go ''why are you wasting so much time discussing this shit?''
I wouldn't say they're really that comparable, at least note power level culture. Battle powers were never presented as having some golden mathematical or scientific law when it came to correlation beyond Kaioken and some characters having naturally great durability like Goku and Vegeta make dissecting things such as tanking feats ultimately flawed from the start. Power-scaling can be seen as a more legitimate point of comparison when the story's majority is told or progressed through battles, though there's so few within the original manga that it isn't really a major issue (unless getting obsessed things like Tao Pai Pai's relevance in the 22nd TB or the Babidi's spaceship powerscaling; both of which have simple explanations in Tao's skill and Babidi's inexperience with gaining great amounts of energy for Boo before respectively). A story that takes itself seriously enough to present dark scenarios and genuine character drama being judged in how effectively it sticks to its in-universe logic and/or rules (or, in the case of the time travel, how well defined those rules are), however, definitely isn't irrelevant in determining its overall quality regardless of the genre, demographic or medium. If a story takes itself seriously enough to present rules in its mechanics yet offers vague to messy rules in its time travel or baffling moments such as the Rosat contrivance, then that's a surefire way to break immersion regardless of what a person is watching the series for.
At the very least the Saiyan-Freeza arcs pretty legit themes in it's characterization of Goku where it's impossible to say that the Pilaf arc comes close to any of that stuff.
I can agree to this. That said, despite my disagreements with your comparisons at several points, you do bring up a strong argument for the Cell Arc's quality
.
Still waiting for a counter to the flaws I mentioned for the other arcs though