Regarding what’s canon to what, Super doesn’t really work as a continuation of Kai

Discussion specifically regarding the "Dragon Ball Super" TV series premiering July 2015 in Japan, including individual threads for each episode.

Moderators: General Help, Kanzenshuu Staff

User avatar
Nia
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: Regarding what’s canon to what, Super doesn’t really work as a continuation of Kai

Post by Nia » Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:01 pm

dbgtFO wrote:
Nia wrote:I have no reason to find the dates given in anything else to be incorrect: 784 was when Trunks left the future the first time, 785 when he left and returned the second time. And it would have to be 785 when he returned on the grounds of Cell leaving from 788.

It's clearly stated by Future Bulma that he requires 8 months for the Time Machine to charge for a round trip, and later Kuririn points out that it requires a long time to charge thus making him attempt to go further back in time a non-option. The year given from Cell's future is 3 years after his current time (age 788); Trunks very clearly says this himself.

You don't need him to say how much time had passed because the numbers are already there by his own word. It's simple enough to use a timeline to match this all up. So yes, there is a contradiction.
Only age ever stated in the manga is the age from which Cell came, 788. Age 784 is not mentioned in the manga.
The 8 months line comes from the Trunks special chapter in which it is also stated that Trunks' first trip will take him back 17 years, which is also how much time is between the two timelines in Super, so again no contradiction.
Actually, the 17 years line is a mistake on Toriyama's part. If he went back 17 years, then he'd return to a point in time where he was already born or was about to be born. He mentions that he wouldn't be born for a couple years when he arrives in the past. He's from 20 years in the future, not 17.
Now, if he waits 8 months and returns 3 years later to that timeline, then it's 17 years.

So yes, contradiction.

Then there's the minor issue of his aging: he returns "3 years later" practically the same, spends one year in the Room of Spirit and Time, and suddenly grows much taller (although, given Goten and modern Trunks I suppose this could be somewhat handwaved, but still).
There's also Toriyama's own history to Dragon Ball Online, though that's of questionable legitimacy at this point, although he still wrote it with very specific timelines in place.

User avatar
dbgtFO
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7888
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Regarding what’s canon to what, Super doesn’t really work as a continuation of Kai

Post by dbgtFO » Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:20 pm

Nia wrote:Actually, the 17 years line is a mistake on Toriyama's part. If he went back 17 years, then he'd return to a point in time where he was already born or was about to be born. He mentions that he wouldn't be born for a couple years when he arrives in the past. He's from 20 years in the future, not 17.
Now, if he waits 8 months and returns 3 years later to that timeline, then it's 17 years.

So yes, contradiction.

Then there's the minor issue of his aging: he returns "3 years later" practically the same, spends one year in the Room of Spirit and Time, and suddenly grows much taller (although, given Goten and modern Trunks I suppose this could be somewhat handwaved, but still).
There's also Toriyama's own history to Dragon Ball Online, though that's of questionable legitimacy at this point, although he still wrote it with very specific timelines in place.
Toriyama indeed contradicted his own manga with the later Trunks special chapter, but whether that was just a mistake or he just changed his mind and Trunks is now at all times from 17 years in the future, because the original author can't be expected to be consistent with his own work, is anyone's guess.
That's all there is to it, really. Massive contradictions can happen, but that doesn't equal non-canon or out of continuity or what have you, propbably not to those in charge at least, though it might not be desirable.

As for the general topic, I agree with a "broad strokes view."
That seems to alleviate most headaches.

User avatar
Miracles
I Live Here
Posts: 3745
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:31 am

Re: Regarding what’s canon to what, Super doesn’t really work as a continuation of Kai

Post by Miracles » Tue Nov 13, 2018 4:38 pm

You have to understand what is canon first. It's simply authority. Guess who you would want to ask concerning plot points about their story? Akira Toriyama.

Ultimately, the Dragonball Super movies are the supreme canon. His outlines are merely adapted and expanded upon by TOEI and Toyotaro for the series and he just gives them approval.

Post Reply