Talk:Dragon Ball Z: Broly - Second Coming

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve and expand anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
This article is supported by the Dragon Ball work group.

Contents

[edit] Broly's blood

Um, why is the fluid that comes out of his heart green? Shouldn't it be red?--suit-n-tie 05:28, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It must be the reflection from his green aura or green energy ball attack. Johnny542 20:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I myself think its from his LSSJ power itself and not a reflection. Remember in both REAL Broly movies when he got beat both times his blood was green(Goku's Punch and the explosion of his heart in the sun). Only time you seen it reb was in this normal from when Goku kicked him in their first fight of movie 8 it dripped from Broly's mouth, and the begining of this movie when he was in his SSJ and normanl state before the ice froze him. Heat P 07:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I remember those parts. Since his LSSJ form is sometimes shown with green hair (except in movie 10 hwne his hair is just normal) and a green aura, they must have something to do with the greenish blood. It must be a rection from being hit from a powerful attack like Goku's final punch or the triple kamehameha attack. Johnny542 17:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Added some missing parts

a part is missing from this article, when Trunks launch a ki-blast and passes out, later as Broly is overpowering the tripple kamehameha he launches one blast at his own attack to strenghten it, note one, but as its about to hit, a secound blast is seen, a yellow one. note that Broly only launched one. so it is safe to assume that the secound attack was that of trunks. anyway we seen an explotion, and a far off shot of his entire energy ball being weakened. at that point he tries to strenghten it further, to correct the damage. but the damage was allready done. it was at this point that Goku and his sons pulled out all stops and managed to break the attack. edning broly's life.

(note that personally i belive that goku was allso ss2, as it would make no sence for him to hold back when his sons life was at stakes, cause as we well know, his ss1 state is no match for broly lss. but this is specualtion, as it is hard to see the diffrence between goku's ss1 and ss2 state.)

(note #2 that the fact that there was no lightning in their aura dosnt mean that they where not ss2's, during ss2 vegeta's fight with kid buu, he rarley had lightning in his aura. it seems that the lightning only appear when they power up.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.0.151.131 (talk • contribs) 12:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC).


You are definately right. Just because there was no bio-electricty doesn't mean Gohan was not a Super Saiyan 2 during his fight against Broly. If he was a Super Saiyan, why would he hold back, that would be stupid so this is why I think Gohan was a Ssj2. It might have been possible that Goku may have also been a Super Saiyan 2 since, like you said before, there is no point for him to hold back at all. It is sometimes hard to tell Ssj1 Goku from Ssj2 Goku.

I think you should add all the stuff you have at the first paragraph as it might help.Johnny542 01:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you actually watch the movies and series? I will say this but i still do not believe it but it is possible Gohan did go SSJ2. But there is no real evidence he did go SSJ2. No electic aura and his hair in both forms looks the same as like Vegeta in both his SSJ and SSJ2 forms. So as it goes he was just a SSJ. But Goku's spirit was just a SSJ. There is two ways to tell Goku is either SSJ or SSJ2 and one EVERYONE knows, thats the electic aura but the other is Goku's hair. As a SSJ his hair has 5 bangs hanging over his forehead and his hair is looser but as a SSJ2 he only has 3 bangs hanging and his hair is more stiff. So sorry guys look at the movie closer and you see Goku was just his normal SSJ self. Heat P 07:39, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I have to correct you about Gohan. If you notice that Gohan had to actually try to power up to his SSJ2 level, or which ever it was. But if I'm not mistaken, Gohan was trained to sustain his SSJ level when he was young and training with Goku. But it seemed to take all of the energy he had just to power up to the level which appears to be a SSJ2. So that's all of my solid evidence.  ?Halo3master5000 9:05, 05 March 2007 (UTC)

I find it funny that people still believe that Gohan was in his Super Saiyan 2 form. It makes me remember the morons who thought Vegetto went SSJ2 as well. Let me refresh you memory so that this debate ends here.

Teen Gohan had a diferent haircut from his Adult timeline. This one ressembles Teen Gohan SSJ2 form haircut. If you watch Dragon Ball, the World Tournment saga you will see Adult Gohan as an SSJ and as an SSJ2. NO DIFERENCE IN THE HAIRCUT just the electricity in his SSJ2 form (not bio-electricity like some kid said). So yes sparking is a requirement for SSJ2.

Regarding Vegeta fighting Buu and his lack of sparks. Yes its true he doesnt always have the lighting bolts around him but you must blame Toei for that. In the manga SSJ2 and SSJ3 ALWAYS have sparks. Check it out if doubt me. In the anime the lazyness of the producers made this important details irrelevant. And now im gonna edit the article.

[edit] ye

i've added it, personally i see not fault in it. even though i am a broly fan, i dont see why i should be wrong in what i added. trunks did help out, and because of his interference broly was defeated. same as the TOEI punch in movie 8, goku seemed to be leeching energy from Broly as he punched his hand. if you rewiev the scene you can see Goku powering up after the hit, which looked like it actually allowed Goku to leech from Broly, so when he did power up, his hair becomes lime green. i dont see why this is to be an coincidence. it would seem that Broly did not die on a whim. allthough it looks like it on the first view.

but i've only added the content that whereb relevant to the movie. which Broly was shown to overpover goku, goten and gohan untill Trunks attack messed things up for Broly.


The stuff you said you added is not there. Maybe somebody erased it?Johnny542 00:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] super saiyan 2 goku

I was on youtube last night and I looked up the beam battle in Broly Second Coming and I am not sure but when Goku said "Together" at the end when Broly threw that huge green energy ball at Gohan, Goku and Goten, it looked like Goku powered up to his Super Saiyan 2 form as he seemed to only have one strand of hair around his face: much like his Super Saiyan 2 form. I am not sure whether he was a Super Saiyan 2 when he said this or if he just powered up just enough in his Super Saiyan form to help his sons win the beam struggle or if it was just my imagination. Just personally want to tell you.Johnny542 00:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

No he was not. it was just the blast of wind from the Kamehamehas that was blowing his hair back. Also there is something you should know. When the movie came out Goku in the series had just come back to earth. The movie took place doing the begnning of the World tournment saga. Just before Goku arrived so his SSJ2 form was not even seen as of the movie. Heat P 07:44, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ye

it looks like it. i whish whoever did it (prob the person who wrote this in the first place) would bother to give a reason. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.252.27.111 (talk) 14:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

it would seem that someone edited in parts of my suggestions, but that was not me. but i would still like the one who keeps editing back the trunks part to explain. i could very well prove my suggestions if it would come to that.


yeah you are right about the Trunks part in Broly: Second Coming, whoever keeps deleting this stuff must be a little slow. Here's my advice, keep on editing this part into the section and if somebody changes it, go to the History section and found out the name of who is doing this. If you do find him or her, just discuss this at their talk page. Hopefully things will work out for you. Johnny542 19:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vidal and Trunks Part

I might add these parts into the Broly: Second Coming article. Since Vidal did save Gohan from being killed by Broly by throwing a crystal at him. While Broly was destracted, Gohan was able to kick him in the stomach and prepare his Kamehameha attack. Also after Trunks threw that energy blast at Broly and then passed out, Broly was shooting his green energy balls at Goten, Gohan and Goku when I thought I saw Trunk's energy balst block all of Broly's own attacks. This is how Goku was able to tell his sons to deliever the final blow. Without this, Gohan, Goten and Goku would have been defeated, if Gohan gived it his all and turned Super Saiyan 2, but like you said before, the animators wanted to limit the strength of Gohan by making Broly a worthy villian. Anyway thanks for the info of the Energy Clashes in the game, it was useful and now I don't have any problems anymore. Johnny542 17:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

That not a problem to edit. If it happened in the movie and was an important part of the battle which it was it can be edited into the article just make sure if you do so just make sure that its not too long or that it make complete sense with the article and not to just put it anywhere in the article. It would be fine to add it in. You are welcome on the info I gave you. Happy to help out a Dragon Ball fan and fellow gamer.
Heat P 06:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks man. Johnny542 17:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] editing and fixing

I went back through the article and fix and edited a few things. Read over it an tell me if you like what I fixed or added. -Heat P 20:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Umm bulletproof I know you mean well but you are commenting vandalism by erasing sections and summaries of people discussions. I know sometimes some of us are turn it into a forum but usually it is to explain something to the less knowledgeble people on editing articles. Now unless it has some really big form of violation like old Jrapidfire did, then I can understand. But If it is just talk then you are doing the same thing Jrapidfire was doing by deleting. Please do not do this anymore, it is wrong and if I or someone as to explain to someone that they are wrong to try and edit the article with there or someone else opinion let us. Do not erase the section. Thank you

Heat P 08:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

ahem... ahem please see Wikipedia:Vandalism to see what the correct definition of the policy really is. Cheers! -- bulletproof 3:16 00:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Do you want the correct policy on talk pages of vandalism,here it is via the same link you just gave me. CHEER!!

Talk page vandalism
Removing the comments of other users from talk pages other than your own, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc. is generally considered vandalism.(which you did on this page with is not your talk page) Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate (which I said I can undersatnd), and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long talk page by creating an archive page and moving the text from the main talk page there.(Which you done before but is ok with many of us) The above rules do not apply to a user's own talk page,(which again this talk page is not yours) where this policy does not itself prohibit the removal and archival of comments at the user's discretion. Please note, though, that removing warnings from one's own talk page is often frowned upon.

Next time don't shove a policy or rule infront of me or anyone unless you read it yourself so again do not remove section or summaries because you feel it is not right, nothing on the resent summary you just erased violated any rule or policy. Heat P 13:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Ahem ahem...aside from removing internal spam(which is what you were doing that made me remove it in the first place), vandalism, etc... might want to take that into consideration Heat.-- bulletproof 3:16 00:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I got you now. sorry. Thanks for letting me know. Anyway what was it that I spammed on? I can't even remember it. Hit my page up so we don't have to take up much of this page's space.

Heat P 06:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:DBZ THE MOVIE NO. 10.jpg

Image:DBZ THE MOVIE NO. 10.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:DBZ THE MOVIE NO. 10.jpg

Image:DBZ THE MOVIE NO. 10.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:04, 1 January 2008 (UTC)