General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

[Anime Kitten]

Ich, no. The Ocean dub is terrible to me. I respect your guys' opinions, but I'm FUNimation all the way.

[TheGreatness25]

Let's say that they never did the cast change and at this point, we'd have an Ocean dub with accurate dialog, original music, and it would be uncut. That would be amazing. I think that they're really pros and sound so natural in their delivery. Everyone in the FUNimation dub sounds forced, like they're making a voice and while the Ocean cast obviously did too, the fact is that it comes off a lot more natural for them. It's like they're acting while FUNimation is doing funny cartoon voices. Sabat's Vegeta and Piccolo sound like he's trying to let out a turd for the fourth day in a row. Again, Scott McNeil, Saffron Henderson, and Ian James Corlette alone sink FUNimation's cast. Now yeah, I'm not a fan of Westwood Trunks and I think that FUNimation generally made good decisions with their casting for Goten and Trunks and whatnot, but definitely when Ocean was on their game, they wiped their feet with FUNimation even to this day.

[Anime Kitten]

Eh, that's just opinion. I love the FUNimation cast. But this isn't about dub voices, this is about canon and filler.

[TheGreatness25]

True. I feel like every topic somehow ends up being a dub or canon discussion. In this case, it's supposed to be[/i] a canon discussion and it moved onto the dub lol I guess those are the two biggest subjects about the Dragon Ball series. What a legacy FUNimation has carved out for itself being 1/2 of the biggest debates regarding the series lol

[Noah]

Since we don't get any official announcement explaning how continuity works on DB, I can say we have at least seven different ones:

- Original manga continuity (Vol. 1 to 42)
- First anime continuity (DB > Z > GT)
- First movie continuity (DB Movies 1 to 3)
- Second movie continuity (Z Movies 1 to 13)
- Second anime continuity (DB > Z > BoG and RoF)
- Third anime continuity (Kai > Super > Super movie)
- Super manga continuity (Super Vol. 1 to ?)


I usually stick with the first one was the current canon from this franchise, even though I do add some anime stuff on my personal canon

[Noah]

Nope, but there are several people misreading this fact and even insulting other people based on their sad misreadings.
Side story DOES NOT mean canon or not. It's the perception of the creator that matters. Is the creator TOEI? No, they are merely executionors, it's Toriyama / Shueisha who still determine the main story seed at this point.

Jaco the Patrolman that's a sidestory that Toriyama created, that's canon, GT or the orginal movies definitely are not. The manga's depiction of Goku greatly contrasts to the TV special Dragon Ball Z: Bardock - The Father of Goku. In this story, Goku's age at the time of Planet Vegeta's destruction is different than in other media: he is three years old, in contrast to a few days old. Of course he is going to be older in the Bardock special.

I didn't saw people insulting anyone on the movie thread. Although Toriyama is the author he's not in head of the franchise, if he was on the first place, he would never wanted to leave when dissatisfied with the quality of the show. He would have change that. Also Toei had to provide him ideas for a new arc.

Back to your point: people are misinterpreting his quotes, he saying that GT is side story or the movies are alternate realities doesn't mean they are non canon.

Toriyama of all people doesn't care about continuity at all, he's just concerned to the stories he wants to tell and to make clear for fans where they took place.

Nor Jaco the Patrolman or Bardock: The Father of Goku are part of the main story was they are absent of the original manga (even considering Bardock cameo on chapter 304)

[ABED]

There is a good deal of filler that I like in and of itself, but when seen in the context of the series itself, it causes huge pacing issues.

[Grimlock]

I think this thread should be pinned. It is so convenient and it would, theoretically, make people stop derailing other threads.

Anyway, here I can answer this one:

Main continuity is the modern word for canon.

No, it is not. As I said, "continuity" is one thing, "canonicity" is another. Google is there to help you understand it, use it.

If Toriyama or Shueisha had made multiple continuities that have relevance, like you have in DC or Marvel Universe, we can have several continuities that are 'canon'.
This is NOT the case.

Yes, that is exactly the case. A continuity does not need to have relevance, if it exists, it already counts in the grand scheme of things. There are indeed multiple continuities, otherwise, there would be even more plotholes than it already has. Once Goku and Vegeta sees Kale's form, they don't acknowledge Movie 8's Broly. Which obviously means that Dragon Ball Super anime happens in a different continuity than Movie 8 (therefore, avoiding all the contradictions that movie brings about). But that does not make Movie 8 "non-canon", as I said, "alternate dimension" exists in Dragon Ball, and exactly how Xenoverse shows us, if someone opens a portal leading to another dimension, movie characters can appear or vice-versa. This is how things work. I really don't understand why you people ignore even something Toriyama established. Aren't you the ones who religiously follow everything the author establish? Why are you so conveniently ignoring this?

What do you want? Him to make a public statement by video, declaring to the world, it's 'canon', guys?

Yes. That is how you establish canonicity.

It annoys me quite frankly because it misinforms other fans.

If you believe it, it's on your account, but please don't spread misinformation.

The only ones spreading misinformation are the ones saying what is canonical and what is not. And they say that as if their claims were true, when in reality it's their opinions and their mere preferences. Following just what Toriyama does is just as much a "headcanon" as people considering other works in their preferences. At the end of the day, since there is no canon, it's all a matter of opinion and your stance on the issue. With nothing being true.

[ABED]

Yes. That is how you establish canonicity.

It's not necessary that the author say his own story is canon.

[ShadowBardock89]

I'm sure everyone is aware by now of the disgusting trend of anime adapting movie plots into story arcs (Dragon Ball: Super and Boruto are prime offenders).
The trend calls into question of which sequence of events is to be accepted as canon? The original films (BoG and RoF, for example)? Or the retellings, which under other circumstance would be considered filler?
As of right now, the DBS Broly film is considered "canon." When Super is relaunched (not a matter of "if," but "when" at this point) and should the Broly film be adapted into a story arc, would the retelling be "canon"?
Or would you prefer the film to be referenced with some scenes used for flashbacks?

In my opinion, I miss the idea of events of movies being referenced instead of flat-out stripping the uniqueness and novelty of the film by elongating the plot into an arc.

[KBABZ]

I'm sure everyone is aware by now of the disgusting trend of anime adapting movie plots into story arcs (Dragon Ball: Super and Boruto are prime offenders).
The trend calls into question of which sequence of events is to be accepted as canon? The original films (BoG and RoF, for example)? Or the retellings, which under other circumstance would be considered filler?
As of right now, the DBS Broly film is considered "canon." When Super is relaunched (not a matter of "if," but "when" at this point) and should the Broly film be adapted into a story arc, would the retelling be "canon"?
Or would you prefer the film to be referenced with some scenes used for flashbacks?

I'm not very familiar or experienced with that sort of thing, but for me at least I would take the more expanded one to be canon If it's just an expansion of the movie it's relatively easy to figure out. But if both works have exclusive events, then it gets trickier.

Obviously, I'd prefer the film to be its own exclusive story that is referenced in flashbacks. I'd rather see new stories over retelling old ones unless there's a very good reason for doing so (say, telling the same story with a new perspective).

[Grimlock]

It's not necessary that the author say his own story is canon.

If it isn't, why people claim the retellings are canonical when they should say that to the movies? As we know the former are adaptations and the latter came straight from Toriyama. And why people pretend Dragon Ball Online does not even exist when there are multiple examples of canonicity expanding through different kind of media?

[Shineman]

I think this thread should be pinned. It is so convenient and it would, theoretically, make people stop derailing other threads.

Anyway, here I can answer this one:

Main continuity is the modern word for canon.

No, it is not. As I said, "continuity" is one thing, "canonicity" is another. Google is there to help you understand it, use it.

If Toriyama or Shueisha had made multiple continuities that have relevance, like you have in DC or Marvel Universe, we can have several continuities that are 'canon'.
This is NOT the case.

Yes, that is exactly the case. A continuity does not need to have relevance, if it exists, it already counts in the grand scheme of things. There are indeed multiple continuities, otherwise, there would be even more plotholes than it already has. Once Goku and Vegeta sees Kale's form, they don't acknowledge Movie 8's Broly. Which obviously means that Dragon Ball Super anime happens in a different continuity than Movie 8 (therefore, avoiding all the contradictions that movie brings about). But that does not make Movie 8 "non-canon", as I said, "alternate dimension" exists in Dragon Ball, and exactly how Xenoverse shows us, if someone opens a portal leading to another dimension, movie characters can appear or vice-versa. This is how things work. I really don't understand why you people ignore even something Toriyama established. Aren't you the ones who religiously follow everything the author establish? Why are you so conveniently ignoring this?

What do you want? Him to make a public statement by video, declaring to the world, it's 'canon', guys?

Yes. That is how you establish canonicity.

It annoys me quite frankly because it misinforms other fans.

If you believe it, it's on your account, but please don't spread misinformation.

The only ones spreading misinformation are the ones saying what is canonical and what is not. And they say that as if their claims were true, when in reality it's their opinions and their mere preferences. Following just what Toriyama does is just as much a "headcanon" as people considering other works in their preferences. At the end of the day, since there is no canon, it's all a matter of opinion and your stance on the issue. With nothing being true.

I subscribed to the idea that everything is canon, as long they are officially produced by the right-holders of the franchise; it includes everything with the Dragon Ball Brand, from comics, animated series, video games, merchandises and the sort falls under the canon. For an in-depth view of what "counts", that should be regulated as continuity. Everything is regulated to their own continuity, including the main continuity, the manga; whether or not extension of the manga should be included in the main one is up to airs among the fans (but of course, this doesn't matter in a long run: if the right holders declared that these extensions are part of the main ones and not their own continuity, that's a done deal).

[ABED]

It's not necessary that the author say his own story is canon.

If it isn't, why people claim the retellings are canonical when they should say that to the movies? As we know the former are adaptations and the latter came straight from Toriyama. And why people pretend Dragon Ball Online does not even exist when there are multiple examples of canonicity expanding through different kind of media?

The concept was first applied to stories whose author was long since dead - Sherlock Holmes. You don't need the author to say his own stories are canon. At the very least we can say the original manga is canon. What would it mean to say the DB manga isn't canon?

[KBABZ]

It's not necessary that the author say his own story is canon.

If it isn't, why people claim the retellings are canonical when they should say that to the movies? As we know the former are adaptations and the latter came straight from Toriyama. And why people pretend Dragon Ball Online does not even exist when there are multiple examples of canonicity expanding through different kind of media?

The concept was first applied to stories whose author was long since dead - Sherlock Holmes. You don't need the author to say his own stories are canon. At the very least we can say the original manga is canon. What would it mean to say the DB manga isn't canon?

To extrapolate from that, you can kinda get the impression that the manga is canon over the anime when, in instances where the manga overwrites something stated by the anime, the anime pretends they never showed it. For example, Dr. Frappe, the reason planet Vegeta got destroyed, and the origin of the Dragon Balls.

[Grimlock]

I subscribed to the idea that everything is canon, as long they are officially produced by the right-holders of the franchise; it includes everything with the Dragon Ball Brand, from comics, animated series, video games, merchandises and the sort falls under the canon.

Yeah, it is also a possibility. You can also think that everything is canonical, to exemplify, it is the case with Transformers. You just have to figure out which continuity that work you are dealing with belongs to. The same treatment can be applied in Dragon Ball.

For an in-depth view of what "counts", that should be regulated as continuity. Everything is regulated to their own continuity, including the main continuity, the manga; whether or not extension of the manga should be included in the main one is up to airs among the fans (but of course, this doesn't matter in a long run: if the right holders declared that these extensions are part of the main ones and not their own continuity, that's a done deal).

This is just the correct view on the matter.

You don't need the author to say his own stories are canon.

The retellings are adaptation from someone else (think of it as an "anime") and the movies came from Toriyama (here acting as a "manga"). Why do we have three different takes on the same events? With all diverging from one another and therefore cannot be put in the same bag, they all belong to different continuities, but one stands out: the movies. Which came from Toriyama, yet, people prefer retellings made by other people. So I ask again, if there is no need, why people claim the retellings are canonical when they should say that to the movies? I'm pretty sure if Toriyama had said that his movies are the ones to be taken into consideration, no one would dare to say the retellings are canonical.

[ABED]

Forget about Super for a second. You don't need Toriyama to say his manga is canon.

If you're looking for a single answer as to what is considered canon with a lot of material that overlaps or outright contradicts other material, you won't find it, and moreover, why does anyone care?

I think many place too much importance on what is and isn't canon.

[Mister_Popo]

I think this thread should be pinned. It is so convenient and it would, theoretically, make people stop derailing other threads.


Anyway, here I can answer this one:

Main continuity is the modern word for canon.

No, it is not. As I said, "continuity" is one thing, "canonicity" is another. Google is there to help you understand it, use it.


"In fiction, canon is the material accepted as officially part of the story in the fictional universe of that story. It is often contrasted with, or used as the basis for, works of fan fiction.
The alternative terms mythology, timeline, universe and continuity are often used.

The term "canon" nowadays refers to all works of fiction within a franchise's fictional universe which are considered "to have actually happened" within the fictional universe they belong to.
In the context of fiction, apocrypha includes those fictional stories that do not belong within a fictional universe's canon, yet still have some authority relating to that fictional universe. The boundaries between canon and apocrypha can often be blurred.

The word "Apocrypha" is sometimes used to describe works set in a fictional universe that may not belong in the canon.

These may include tie-in merchandise such as video games, novels and comics, which are sometimes termed 'Expanded Universes'."


Could it be you are confusing 'canon' with 'apocrypha' or 'expanded universes'?

GT or the old movies of course have ties with the canon, they are based on Toriyamas works.
They are official products of the franchise. They are sometimes mentionned on timelines, because the franchise still wants to sell the related products.
But they aren't actually 'canon' or part of the official continuity of the story.

If Toriyama or Shueisha had made multiple continuities that have relevance, like you have in DC or Marvel Universe, we can have several continuities that are 'canon'.
This is NOT the case.

Yes, that is exactly the case. A continuity does not need to have relevance, if it exists, it already counts in the grand scheme of things. There are indeed multiple continuities, otherwise, there would be even more plotholes than it already has. Once Goku and Vegeta sees Kale's form, they don't acknowledge Movie 8's Broly. Which obviously means that Dragon Ball Super anime happens in a different continuity than Movie 8 (therefore, avoiding all the contradictions that movie brings about). But that does not make Movie 8 "non-canon", as I said, "alternate dimension" exists in Dragon Ball, and exactly how Xenoverse shows us, if someone opens a portal leading to another dimension, movie characters can appear or vice-versa. This is how things work. I really don't understand why you people ignore even something Toriyama established. Aren't you the ones who religiously follow everything the author establish? Why are you so conveniently ignoring this?


This "fact" you state, these parallel dimensions of the old movies or GT truely exists never ever has been confirmed within the story itself.
It has never been confirmed the characters of these stories can take a hike and visit the main story.
In DB Heroes these worlds can interact, but that's no canon either.

Toriyama was only an observer when it comes to the filler events within the anime continuity, the old movies or GT.
It's for instance very clear, within the DB anime continuity, the events of Broly movie 8 didn't happen at all.
Broly from movie 8 is not going to visit the continuity and shake hands with rebooted Broly from the new movie.
By rebooting him, Toriyama made him a part of his universe, old Broly however does not exist within the contuinity (canon) of events.

I didn't actually state "sidestories" and "non-canon" are the same.
An example of a side story that truely belongs to the contuinity is for instance Jaco. Toriyama is not the observer in that case, he made it and it officially belongs to the story.

What do you want? Him to make a public statement by video, declaring to the world, it's 'canon', guys?

Yes. That is how you establish canonicity.


Star Wars franchise did an official 'canon' declaration. This musn't always be expected.
Toriyama always clearly stated, after the original run, which new story followed.
So we can very easily deduct what the canon (official) storyline is.

It annoys me quite frankly because it misinforms other fans.

If you believe it, it's on your account, but please don't spread misinformation.

The only ones spreading misinformation are the ones saying what is canonical and what is not. And they say that as if their claims were true, when in reality it's their opinions and their mere preferences. Following just what Toriyama does is just as much a "headcanon" as people considering other works in their preferences. At the end of the day, since there is no canon, it's all a matter of opinion and your stance on the issue. With nothing being true.

I didn't have the need to start this debate over again, definitely not in the Broly-thread.
References to canon are commonly made when it comes to Dragon Ball.
You suddenly reacted quite firm against some poster in the Broly-thread who was referring to 'canon'. I felt it wasn't justified and that's why i reacted in the first place.
There is too much discussion going on within the community concerning this issue, just to conclude one-sidedly 'there is no canon' or 'everything is canon' and spread it like a common fact.

[Grimlock]

"The alternative terms mythology, timeline, universe and continuity are often used.

It is erroneously used as an "alternative term" (to which I'm not surprised, people use the word "canon" wrong, we often see its "noun" form when it should be "adjective"...).

I know you took the definition of "canon" from Wikipedia instead of an actual dictionary, book or something, and while you are kind of correct in its meaning, that cannot be applied to the word "continuity".

"Continuity" is the flow of events in a logical order. Think of it as a "timeline" where you see the events summarized in a wall, that is a continuity. There is a continuity for the movies, as they all probably happen in the same dimension. The latter movies follow the former ones within a logical order, Movie 3 does not happen before Movie 1, for example.

Canon would be the acknowledgement of that continuity by the "main one", would mean the existence of an alternate dimension where all the movie events do exist/happen, it would coexist with the "main one". And canon can only be established by an official entity through commentary/claim/statement.

This "fact" you state, these parallel dimensions of the old movies or GT truely exists never ever has been confirmed within the story itself.

I thought just Akira Toriyama's claim would be enough, but here in this case it is not?

In DB Heroes these worlds can interact, but that's no canon either.

The worlds can interact no matter the media. It's that since games are far more interesting than the "main series" nowadays, that's why we see only games using that concept. But the anime/manga can also interact with other dimensions, it just needs to be handled by people who actually care about using wisely other ideas and stuff, instead of retelling stories unnecessarily or making endless tournaments.

Broly from movie 8 is not going to visit the continuity and shake hands with rebooted Broly from the new movie.

He is not going to, but is not something out of the realm of possibility.

By rebooting him, Toriyama made him a part of his universe, old Broly however does not exist within the contuinity (canon) of events.

In-universe, nothing was rebooted. This new Broly is totally new and the old Broly does not exist in this continuity, therefore the latter was not affected by the existence of the new Broly. The old Broly still exists in another dimension and can shake hands with the new one if the circumstances are met.

Only out-universe, for us, viewers, there was a reboot, because we already knew a character named Broly prior to all of this.

Star Wars franchise did an official 'canon' declaration. This musn't always be expected. Toriyama always clearly stated, after the original run, which new story followed. So we can very easily deduct what the canon (official) storyline is.

No, what Toriyama has been doing is stating when certain work takes place. There is a statement from Toriyama himself saying that Dragon Ball Online comes after the manga, yet, I don't see you taking it into consideration. Why?

There is too much discussion going on within the community concerning this issue, just to conclude one-sidedly 'there is no canon' or 'everything is canon' and spread it like a common fact.

It is a common fact when nothing has been established, it is the neutral stance to be taken.

[Mister_Popo]

"The alternative terms mythology, timeline, universe and continuity are often used.

It is erroneously used as an "alternative term" (to which I'm not surprised, people use the word "canon" wrong, we often see its "noun" form when it should be "adjective"...).

I know you took the definition of "canon" from Wikipedia instead of an actual dictionary, book or something, and while you are kind of correct in its meaning, that cannot be applied to the word "continuity".

"Continuity" is the flow of events in a logical order. Think of it as a "timeline" where you see the events summarized in a wall, that is a continuity. There is a continuity for the movies, as they all probably happen in the same dimension. The latter movies follow the former ones within a logical order, Movie 3 does not happen before Movie 1, for example.

Canon would be the acknowledgement of that continuity by the "main one", would mean the existence of an alternate dimension where all the movie events do exist/happen, it would coexist with the "main one". And canon can only be established by an official entity through commentary/claim/statement.

Yes, continuity refers to a flows of events in a logical order. With Dragon Ball, this continuity is determined by Akira Toriyama. Although he does no longer execute as much in detail as in the old days, he is still the creator who determins the continuity (= canon). Different continuities can theoretically interact, but with DB this never has been affirmed in the story itself.
I think there were different reasons why he declared these stories did happen in different dimensions (see next quote).

This "fact" you state, these parallel dimensions of the old movies or GT truely exists never ever has been confirmed within the story itself.

I thought just Akira Toriyama's claim would be enough, but here in this case it is not?

I think Toriyama made this statement to be 'loyal to the franchise'. Of course he wants to cooperate that all the products of DB franchise sell good.
You cannot expect that he would say these stories are "filler". But they basically are. Because TOEI made them on their own, without his cooperation.
Everytime when a new story (new canon) is announced, Toriyama affirms this.
So one can easily deduct what the official storyline is.

In DB Heroes these worlds can interact, but that's no canon either.

The worlds can interact no matter the media. It's that since games are far more interesting than the "main series" nowadays, that's why we see only games using that concept. But the anime/manga can also interact with other dimensions, it just needs to be handled by people who actually care about using wisely other ideas and stuff, instead of retelling stories unnecessarily or making endless tournaments.

That's only what you are suggesting at this point. If this is affirmed they can interact in the main story, i believe it. Untill now, this is not the case, so there is no reason to believe they can.
Existing concepts will be integrated in the main story, like Broly, but not in the way you are suggesting, it'll probably be in the form of a reboot, like with Broly.
If you let existing features constantly interact like you are suggesting, from a fanservice perspective, that's actually worse than retellings or tournaments (which is a classic part of Dragon Ball). That has a total lack of originality as farm as i'm concerned.

Maybe you like games, but that no objective argument within a canon debate.

Star Wars franchise did an official 'canon' declaration. This musn't always be expected. Toriyama always clearly stated, after the original run, which new story followed. So we can very easily deduct what the canon (official) storyline is.

No, what Toriyama has been doing is stating when certain work takes place. There is a statement from Toriyama himself saying that Dragon Ball Online comes after the manga, yet, I don't see you taking it into consideration. Why?

I basically just wait and see what effectively comes along in the story determined by Shueisha.

There is too much discussion going on within the community concerning this issue, just to conclude one-sidedly 'there is no canon' or 'everything is canon' and spread it like a common fact.

It is a common fact when nothing has been established, it is the neutral stance to be taken.

Then why do you state the world of the movies for instance can interact with the storyline? That's not been established as well.
Moreover: what sense does the statement make 'canon does not exist''? That basically means there is no official source material.
If one is entitled to that opinion, one should rather state 'everything is canon'.

When something hasn't been established as you state, why aren't several opinions allowed?
For me personally it's clear what's canon and what's not.
But i definetely feel no need to attack people in the middle of other threads about it, because they happen to have another opinion.
That's what bothered me more than the fact you think differently about it.