- 3,300
- 4,078
Because he’s talking about the way they DEPICTED his work. He directly wrote the scripts of literally half of GT and that literal final episode.Then why dose he word it like he wasn't part of the decision? even if he was. I maintain individuals on a writing team can have opinions about a open-ended vauge ending, however that dosen't mean anything one of them has the authority to say what is right intend of the GT ending to be open end it and for it to not be completely clear what happened is obvious.
Quote from him: “In the world of Dragon Ball, Goku had already died multiple times, and up till then, each time he appeared with a halo over his head. However, I didn’t want to go with the usual concept of, ‘even when he dies, he comes right back to life.’ I wanted the viewers to picture “death” in that way, and feel a sadness close to it in reality. So I had a “change” come over Goku.”
This is where the fan term “Change State,” comes from. It's literally Goku dying in a different way we’ve never seen before (becoming something beyond the usual concept of the life Death dichotomy), where Goku then, according to him, becomes untouchable due to this.
The other statement is Nozawa (Goku Voice Actor) explaining that same concept, talking about the depiction of that concept. Because the idea is that Goku has finally done the final level of evolution to a form of Godhood (having overcome Karma, Buddhist + Taoist influences and all that).
I don't see what the confusion is here. We’re saying the same thing, the only difference is you’re saying they’re temporarily alive when they come back instead of being living dead. (They merely gain their complete physical bodies).I'll pull up the episode of dragonball dissection that covers this if you want but, the show dose make it clesr that there actually currently living.
Point remains the same: Irrelevant, because they aren't in the Afterlife.
Last edited: