To End or Not to End

[emperior]

He is the one that would shamelessly change stuff from the original WSJ to the Tankobon release and pretend that never happened.

What did he change?

Changed Gohan's age in his initial appearance from 3 to 4, changed the dialogue in a conversation between Gohan and Kuririn when they meet to fight the Saiyans, just to name a couple of examples.

I never heard of this Gohan's age retcon and the other retcon of his dialogue with Krillin, can you explain them to me please? I couldn't found anything on the internet.

[Nejishiki]

Gohan told Bluma he was three years old (the hand is pointing three fingers) & Gohan's dialogue was altered to acknowledge his first meeting with Kuririn (originally, he acted as if they first met).

[ABED]

Nolan doesn't have control of the IP, but the studio has enough respect for him to not use his take on the character.

But didn't he give it his blessing?

That depends on where my headspace is at.

It's not respect, Nolan's movies do really well critically and financially so they want him to keep making movies for them. if they tried to continue his trilogy he would've went to one of their rival studios which is something they don't want.

He also called it a side story later on so he obviously didn't agree with it being marketed as an official part of his story. His blessing was more than likely him just putting on a face.

At least you get my point, he essentially had to pick between 2 evils.

There are places where they do give shows and stories chances to grow.

Of course there are but in today's world you're more likely to find a company that wants a big hit from the start then one that's willing to wait for something to grow over time.

That's a cynical view. I do think WB respect Nolan as a filmmaker. Yes, they want to keep him happy, but it is a sign or respect to respect his wish that his films remain close ended.

Wanting a big hit off the bat is nothing new. Whether you are more likely to find a company that wants an immediate hit isn't that important as you only need on company that believes in your vision.

[Gaffer Tape]

I never heard of this Gohan's age retcon and the other retcon of his dialogue with Krillin, can you explain them to me please? I couldn't found anything on the internet.

Chapter 196 in the Manga Guide for Gohan's age
Chapter 213 in the Manga Guide for the Gohan and Kuririn conversation

Also, the Gohan age thing is highlighted in Kanzenshuu's Dragon Ball 30th anniversary magazine. That's how I first heard of it.

[MathSSJ]

The problem with Super is that it retroactively changes lore. The Beerus/Frieza thing being the big offender. The new material has changed your understanding of the old Material so it can't really just be ignored.

And the problem with changing lore is?

Toriyama retconned shit all the time. He would twist and discard previously established lore if it meant for a more interesting story. He is the one that would shamelessly change stuff from the original WSJ to the Tankobon release and pretend that never happened.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the Beers/Freeza segment is anywhere near close to being a worthwhile addition/retcon, but let's not lie to ourselves and say there is no precedence on that.

The Tankobon retcons are so small though and exist to make the overall story a bit tighter. Yeah, it's a precedent, but it's a bit more thought out I feel.

I don't see how retcons on a revived series with new material that at worst can be completely ignored if turns out to be complete shit are worse then outright changing what he did and pretending it didn't happen.

I don't mind plot holes and other goofs, just give us the story as it was, but we can't even have that anymore. That's far, far worse for me then some silly retcon or fluff interview that hardly matters in the long run.

[Basaku]

That's a cynical view.

But a realistic one. Everything comes down to what kind of a person is in CEO position at a time at a given company. Whether they're mostly interested in business side or they still care about the art side. Things like this can change rapidly with upper management shift.

In any case, Shueisha has just established what is essentially Star Wars Story Group for Dragon Ball + licensing arm at the same time and they were very open about the intentions to keep the series growing and running literally forever lol. A cynic could say "well won't just name it Shueisha Room for Milking Dragon Ball Dry?!" and he wouldn't be wrong

[ABED]

But a realistic one. Everything comes down to what kind of a person is in CEO position at a time at a given company. Whether they're mostly interested in business side or they still care about the art side. Things like this can change rapidly with upper management shift.

Agreed, my point was that not every CEO is like that. I also think that the art side and the business side are interrelated.

[UltimateHammerBro]

He is the one that would shamelessly change stuff from the original WSJ to the Tankobon release and pretend that never happened.

Changed Gohan's age in his initial appearance from 3 to 4, changed the dialogue in a conversation between Gohan and Kuririn when they meet to fight the Saiyans, just to name a couple of examples.

Gohan told Bluma he was three years old (the hand is pointing three fingers) & Gohan's dialogue was altered to acknowledge his first meeting with Kuririn (originally, he acted as if they first met).

I don't see how retcons on a revived series with new material that at worst can be completely ignored if turns out to be complete shit are worse then outright changing what he did and pretending it didn't happen.

I really don't see how this is supposed to be shameless. We don't really know why he decided to change Gohan's age (the chapter page just speculates, but it could have been something as simple as Toriyama writing 4 in the next chapter, realising the contradiction and deciding to keep 4 rather than 3) but the bit between Gohan and Krillin is just there to fix a plothole. If anything, I think fixing it should be something to congratulate him (or his editor) for.

[Gaffer Tape]

I really don't see how this is supposed to be shameless. We don't really know why he decided to change Gohan's age (the chapter page just speculates, but it could have been something as simple as Toriyama writing 4 in the next chapter, realising the contradiction and deciding to keep 4 rather than 3) but the bit between Gohan and Krillin is just there to fix a plothole. If anything, I think fixing it should be something to congratulate him (or his editor) for.

See, that's just not an philosophy I can get behind. The way I see it is a mistake happened, it's over and done with, move on. Don't try to cover up that it ever happened. It blows my mind that I had to be a fan for sixteen years before I ever knew that Gohan was originally 3! That should be a bit of humorous trivia we all notice, deal with, and enjoy. I'm not a fan of covering up artistic history.

[UltimateHammerBro]

See, that's just not an philosophy I can get behind. The way I see it is a mistake happened, it's over and done with, move on. Don't try to cover up that it ever happened. It blows my mind that I had to be a fan for sixteen years before I ever knew that Gohan was originally 3! That should be a bit of humorous trivia we all notice, deal with, and enjoy. I'm not a fan of covering up artistic history.

I have a more relaxed attitude when it comes to this. Mistakes like those happen all the time and get corrected. DC had to change some lines in comics they made after a continuity reboot because they were written with the previous continuity in mind and didn't fit anymore. The second Harry Potter book had "ancestor" when it should have been "descendant", and it got corrected because it didn't make any sense. I suppose it may seem like "I made a mistake and I don't want anyone to realise" but I see it more like "I made a mistake and I better correct it so it doesn't confuse readers". I don't really mind.

EDIT: In fact, I noticed a sentence in this very post could lead to confusion and corrected it