Have you seen the Disney pixar Dragon Ball stuff on the internet?

Just so we're all aware, Disney only has the licensing rights to distribute the Bleach anime on Disney+, guys..

They didn't get the rights to make an adaptation of any kind, and nothing's changing the anime unless they go out of their way to censor it somehow. Y'all really just saw the topic and ran with it

Big longtime Marvel fan who enjoyed She Hulk:

Another massive Marvel fan who enjoyed She Hulk

There are plenty of us around, and check it out, the people I linked there aren't even women, avoiding the usual rebuttal of "only women liked She-Hulk, because it was about a girlboss and said MEAN THINGS about men!!!!!"

@ar-ninetysix beat me to it first, but it doesn't hurt to repeat it since some folks skip the conversation and go straight up writing their own two cents (sorry, not sorry ):

No, Disney didn't buy Dragonball. Neither did they buy Bleach. They just bought the streaming rights for Disney+

The next part will be me ranting about Disney and others (if you don't want to read all of this, that's okay) but just to make this clear:

If you like something I don't like, that's totally fine by me and I'm happy for you, but don't try to convince me otherwise. That's just a dick move.

Rant:
Let's say hypothetically, Disney did buy the rights to Dragonball (which they can't since they have to go against Toei. And that's a pissing contest they lose for sure.), it's 100% guaranteed that they mess this up. You don't believe me? Have you seen their live-action reboots? Or how they butchered Star Wars? They've made poor Mark Hamill cry during the production of "The Last Jedi".
Same with Marvel. Don't get me wrong. I did enjoy their movies till Endgame (which was okay, but some things could've been improved to make it a better movie after the huge build-up Infinity War had.), but people are exhausted from all the superhero movies and shows and want something different. Like Invincible, which is a superhero show, but it is refreshing to see something done differently. And you can clearly see that they struggle to catch the same magic the old movies had with all the mediocre writing they put in, for example, Morbius, The Immortals, the overworking of the CGI artist (which they clearly abuse), and let's not forget you have to watch all the shows and movies to understand what will go on in the next Avengers movie.
The next point I want to talk about is Netflix, but I don't have the energy to go in-depth there since you don't have to be an ultra-hardcore fan of a property to understand they clearly don't give a shit about the source material. Don't believe me? Have you seen their version of Death Note, Cowboy Bepop, and Resident Evil, to name a few? And I mean, watch all episodes and not just a trailer or two. They clearly do it for the money they can get from the fans and not that they're passionate about the source material. Sure maybe Netflix had a few hits from different IPs, but that's because there were people behind it who really cared for it. It's always important to see the red flags they put on themselves. Like with the Halo show, which wasn't on Netflix, but you get the point I'm trying to make. I do want to get excited for the live-action adaptation of One Piece, but even if the goat Oda supervised the production, I still keep my hopes down because of their bad track record.

I just wish companies would start to care again for the things they make instead of believing in the stupidity of the consumers who will buy everything just because it has the name slapped on it.

I.... didn't even know they made Mark Hamill cry. I know he's been openly critical with Johnson's direction but wow. I do think there's hope though. I feel like people are starting to notice a pattern as to why these adaptions aren't working and I hope Executives give it to people that care a little more?

The thing you have to remember is most of the people making the adaptations are not fans. James Gunn didn't want the actors to read any material of the comics before he made guardians or suicide squad. These are all just vehicles to tell their own story. Joker was only about the joker because that could sell their show. It was originally another script they adapted to a joker main character. All the Marvel movies from the beginning have nothing to do with the comics. Tony Stark did not act like the movie Tony until he became popular from the movies, then they changed him in the comics. Thor is not an alien. Black Widow is a spy, not an assassin in the comic. Hulk is COMPLETELY different in the comic. Going to witcher, the main character, the name sake of the series, was wounded in the back of a wagon for the season final. He didn't move the story. They had their story and didn't want the main story of the books to interrupt that. That why most people have gone from "wow, they are making a movie of my favorite comic/manga/anime" to "oh, god how are they going to screw this up for me..."

Wait... Tony didn't act like Iron Man at the beginning? Are you sure about that because the lists I'm writing on are all based on the storylines that the directors used and I won't lie... they were all pretty accurate (he was always a ladiesman with a mouth). I haven't gotten deep into Thor but I'm sure they retconned him into an alien somewhere down the line (or that may be an Ultimate thing which, keep in mind, they mix the 616 stuff with that).

Black Widow has done some assassination missions. She wasn't just a spy hence her name. If you mean Hulk is nothing like the Ultimates version then you'd be right, but Hulk seems to be taking notes from the 616 iteration where he has a kinder side.

Joker was very accurate to the comics (especially with that ending). And James Gunn is different from your Taikas where he's a major superfan. He may have told the actors not to read any comics, but I will give the man this, he makes characters accurate in a weird roundabout way. (LOVED Starro's depiction in Suicide Squad).

The reason why I love comic book movies so much is that everything is just one big jigsaw and you see how the writers are able to get certain things across in weird abstract ways. I think out of all of the movies, Moon Knight is the one I have the biggest issue with just because the creator openly admitted that they didn't want to remake Batman.

My issue with live action anime is, and nearly always will be, one of 3 issues: that they usually pick the wrong anime or in trying to change it too much and make it "theirs" they lose what people loved because they think they can "do it better" or "fix it" or aren't willing to put in the budget to make it a success. For instance MHA if given the right budget could be up there with a lot of the hero movies out there but likely won't or will be westernised losing its charm. If Death Note had been done straight and kept the mind games and essence of the manga rather than going all action scenes and wussy hero or not tried to convince us they were L and Light and gone down an original story, it could have been great. Hell Pacific Rim proves a mecha series can be adapted and loved. Live, Die, Repeat Edge of Tomorrow is a light novel from Japan. If these companies stopped chasing trends and thought about what they could genuinely adapt well, live action anime could be amazing but chasing zaney shounen titles that need serialisation and massive budgets is a bad idea. Things like The Compulsive Gambler, The Devil is a Part Timer, hell the recent Akiba Maid Wars, or any of the more creative but grounded high school or work settings could work a lot better than big crazy cgi heavy fantasy/scifi big budget serial pieces.

All this to say Wotakoi live action when???

Not everything is going to be one-to-one. Like how they adapted Henry Pym's abusiveness. His role is always facing a "past (Darren/His Wife), present (Scott), and future (His Daughter)". Them playing up Tony's playboy attitude I don't have a problem with. At the end of the day when doing adaptions, you want to get to the same end point by taking different trajectories if that makes sense. Kinda like with what they did with Spider-Man. I don't focus on what Spider-Man is at the beginning, I focus on what he becomes at the end. Just like what they did with Iron Man.

Thor always had issues with his father? I agree that 4... sucked. But I thought Endgame was daring by having Thor face a metaphor for the goddess of death, only for him to run into the GOD of death (I'm aware Thanos isn't a god of death, but his name is literally a play on "Thanatos").

Black Widow was one of my favorite MCU films BECAUSE Black Widow was clever af and I dislike Gunn's humor, but with him acting as producer, I'm 100% sure he's gonna give his crew more freedom to do whatever they want.

I'm pretty much the opposite; I don't think the changing would be an issue if not for the fact they own it If the existence of a poorly done adaptation/continuation of a series didn't prohibit the existence of a better version, I don't see nearly as much reason to care if someone ruined your favourite series And if an adaptation is divisive, fans who liked it get to be happy it exists and fans that didn't still have hope for a version they'd like better

Imo 'canon by IP owner fiat' can only be a remotely sane concept if said IP owner is the original writer(s); once it's transferred to another party, I feel no reason to respect their adaptation as canon any more than a hypothetical adaptation from some other rando ^^;

Btw just wanted to add that they're thinking about doing a Short Round series.

Ahh no, I got that you're cool with positive change and you're more against the kind of meddling that seem to be trying to maximise profits rather than story quality (e.g. forcing something to be child friendly to widen the net of potential audience members)

I just personally think that even if a story is meddled with not as a cynical cash grab but a genuine attempt at trying something they thought would be cool, the results can still turn out poorly, and many people (myself included, sometimes) don't like that :'D And in the end, regardless of why the result turned out not-so-great, I think it would be cool if we weren't stuck with it as the only/canonical version of that story (in that form) :]

Im just going to cut the chase, I believe without a shadow of a doubt that Disney will NEVER get there hands on the Dragon Ball Franchise. Unlike Star Wars or Marvel, Dragon Ball is too violent and, in the case of its earlier arcs, too politically incorrect for Disney's "family friendly" pallet. You could say that they would try to 'disneyfy' it regardless, but Shueisha (the company that partially owns Dragon Ball) would prevent Disney turning the franchise into something that its not. I cant say Toriyama would also be opposed to it but seeing as how he changed his mind on creating any new Dragon Ball stuff the garbage that was Dragon Ball Evolution, I dont think he'd be too happy with watching his creation be bastardized yet again by people who don't really care about the source material (not saying anything thats come post Battle of Gods has been God Tier, Im just saying).

And as a side note, the amount of online backlash this would incur would be bigger than anything thats happened with the fanbases for Star Wars or Marvel. With the way they've handled those two respective properties, the internet would not be kind to Disney afterwards. Even if whatever they churn out with the property happens to be good.

But thats just my opinion