Do you think DBS is a worthy continuation of DB and DBZ?

[TheMikado]

...

Yes, we are indeed speaking of two different things simultaneously. No, I first said I consider Super a worthy successor because of the content, this has nothing to do with canon or not. Then, on a side topic and on a reply to someone else mentioning GT, I said I Super is canon while GT isn't because Toriyama is directly involved in Super and wasn't in GT (sorry a few drawings with a lost note doesn't count), also because we had freaking Battle of Gods lol
Our main debate is not on the topic at hand mate lol

Sorry you are wrong. Toriyama was directly involved in GT.
Period. It doesn't matter how much you want to minimize his involvement it is factually correct that he was directly involved in GT. You may not want to admit that to yourself but why lie?

[PsionicWarrior]

Sorry you are wrong. Toriyama was directly involved in GT.
Period. It doesn't matter how much you want to minimize his involvement it is factually correct that he was directly involved in GT. You may not want to admit that to yourself but why lie?

In GT, the only contributions that I made were the title, the initial main character designs, some of the mecha designs, and a number of image cuts. But thanks to the excellent staff that I was having keep continuing Dragon Ball, I was able to relax and leave it to them.

Guess I should have precised, not directly involved in any of the writing lol

[TheMikado]

Sorry you are wrong. Toriyama was directly involved in GT.
Period. It doesn't matter how much you want to minimize his involvement it is factually correct that he was directly involved in GT. You may not want to admit that to yourself but why lie?

In GT, the only contributions that I made were the title, the initial main character designs, some of the mecha designs, and a number of image cuts. But thanks to the excellent staff that I was having keep continuing Dragon Ball, I was able to relax and leave it to them.

Guess I should have precised, not directly involved in any of the writing lol

And thank you for that. I was going to write a post about some parts of DB, DBZ, and Super not being canon but that's not even necessary because you just ended the topic yourself.

But thanks to the excellent staff that I was having keep continuing Dragon Ball, I was able to relax and leave it to them.

Toriyama himself, from his own lips, considers GT a continuation of Dragon Ball. Period. End of Story. Hope seeing the author himself state that GT is continuing Dragonball on his behalf is enough to end this debate permanently.

[PsionicWarrior]

He was obviously honored he inspired others and his answer is strictly professional here, how do you explain BoG otherwise lol
Yet again I don't get why you think the author acknowledging the work of others would have the same canonical value as if he was the one writing it lol
If you have something to reply I would suggest we take this in the 'is GT canon' thread lol

[TheMikado]

He was obviously honored he inspired others and his answer is strictly professional here, how do you explain BoG otherwise lol
Yet again I don't get why you think the author acknowledging the work of others would have the same canonical value as if he was the one writing it lol
If you have something to reply I would suggest we take this in the 'is GT canon' thread lol

Nah, I'm keeping it here because your own criteria questions Super's canonicity.
i.e. SSG was not Toriyama's idea or concept, in fact, the last statements we had were that he did not even feel the name SSG was fitting at all. It doesn't matter if he remade it or not, it wasn't his original concept to make a saiyan God form. Are the new Star Wars movies also not canon? What about the prequels?

What about Bardock, or DB minus which has something which contradict his manga and Super? Are we assigning canonical value now? So then GT does fall into canon, but not "as canon"? Basically I trying show that the argument of "canon" as a reason for validity fails in this concept because no such idea of "canon" exists. Thus Super being "canon" has no inherit weight in making it a worthy continuation of Dragonball because that concept itself has no weight. Essentially you are arguing that Super has weight as a continuation above others arguing on the basis of "legitimacy" where none has exists and has been refuted by the authors on words on what he considers a continuation of his work. Both Super and GT hold standing of continuations of DB/DBZ by the authors own admission, the only thing which can be contended is, as the title of this thread states, is Super a worthy continuation.

[Lord Beerus]

Toriyama himself, from his own lips, considers GT a continuation of Dragon Ball. Period. End of Story. Hope seeing the author himself state that GT is continuing Dragonball on his behalf is enough to end this debate permanently.

Actually, Toriyama has referred to Dragon Ball GT as a side-story.

Dragon Ball GT is a grand side-story of the original Dragon Ball, and it’ll make me happy for us to watch and enjoy it together.

And the term "side-story" ("gaiden" in Japansese) in Japan commonly used in popular Japanese fiction to refer to a spin-off of a previously published work that is neither officially considered a sequel nor a prequel.

[PsionicWarrior]

Essentially you are arguing that Super has weight as a continuation above others arguing on the basis of "legitimacy" where none has exists and has been refuted by the authors on words on what he considers a continuation of his work.

And you are putting words in my mouth, for the third time I said I consider Super to be a worthy continuation regardless of it being canon.

Both Super and GT hold standing of continuations of DB/DBZ by the authors own admission

Super is by Toriyama, GT isn't, really doesn't go further than that.

[TheMikado]

Essentially you are arguing that Super has weight as a continuation above others arguing on the basis of "legitimacy" where none has exists and has been refuted by the authors on words on what he considers a continuation of his work.

And you are putting words in my mouth, for the third time I said I consider Super to be a worthy continuation regardless of it being canon.

Both Super and GT hold standing of continuations of DB/DBZ by the authors own admission

Super is by Toriyama, GT isn't, really doesn't go further than that.

Toriyama said it's a continuation of Dragonball. Your opinion on the matter is less than meaningless.

Toriyama himself, from his own lips, considers GT a continuation of Dragon Ball. Period. End of Story. Hope seeing the author himself state that GT is continuing Dragonball on his behalf is enough to end this debate permanently.

Actually, Toriyama has referred to Dragon Ball GT as a side-story.

Dragon Ball GT is a grand side-story of the original Dragon Ball, and it’ll make me happy for us to watch and enjoy it together.

And the term "side-story" ("gaiden" in Japansese) in Japan commonly used in popular Japanese fiction to refer to a spin-off of a previously published work that is neither officially considered a sequel nor a prequel.

While the use of Gaiden can mean non-canonical work, it also emcompasses canonical works that are officially included as a prequel/sequel. Particularly if it is a short event or one falling outside main events. This does NOT mean the events never happened in-universe. Works that include the use of the word gaiden in their titles include Saiyuki Gaiden (prequel to Son Goku's past). This should be taken in account along with the author's take on the material. If the author states it continues his series, then it is a continuation of his series. Nothing Toriyama has said implies GT is "non-canon" as in the events never happened in-universe, further he has said more to indicate they have share the same universe and continue his Dragonball story.

[Cetra]

Toriyama himself, from his own lips, considers GT a continuation of Dragon Ball. Period. End of Story. Hope seeing the author himself state that GT is continuing Dragonball on his behalf is enough to end this debate permanently.

Actually, Toriyama has referred to Dragon Ball GT as a side-story.

Dragon Ball GT is a grand side-story of the original Dragon Ball, and it’ll make me happy for us to watch and enjoy it together.

And the term "side-story" ("gaiden" in Japansese) in Japan commonly used in popular Japanese fiction to refer to a spin-off of a previously published work that is neither officially considered a sequel nor a prequel.

Toriyama-san does not use the term gaiden but saido sutori - not that it really matters - and actually it is also a stretch because there a tons of side stories and spin-offs that are normal part of the franchise, like in Role-Playing Games for example. And Yamamuro-san himself half-dodged the question by saying it has the characteristics of a spin-off but also is a continuation.

The argument itself falls short though because this is just someone once again repeating the same kind of arguments that actually have no weight when it comes to what is canonical.

[BlueBasilisk]

Yes, I do. I'm at 50/54 on my first complete start-to-finish watch of GT. At its best I find it sorta underwhelming with some nice character moments that aren't really capitalized on outside the moment, on average mostly boring, and at worst an infuriating dumpster fire. Everything involving Dolltaki goes straight into 'dumpster fire.' I enjoyed the Goku, Trunks and Pan roadtrip parts of the show far more than the attempts to emulate Z. The writing in all the show's big fights was shaky and I get the impression that there was some kind of chaos in the writers' room because there are a couple points where the show feels like it's about to fall apart.

Super has its low points (looking at you, RoF arc), but I'm consistently entertained by it, the characters feel right now that I've fully adjusted to the Japanese voices, and there's a certain charm I'm just not finding in most of GT. I can't really pinpoint what it is, exactly. I do think it does a much better job of blending the silliness of classic Dragon Ball with the serious action of Z.

I am curious what GT could have been if made by the current writers and artists.

[TheMikado]

Toriyama himself, from his own lips, considers GT a continuation of Dragon Ball. Period. End of Story. Hope seeing the author himself state that GT is continuing Dragonball on his behalf is enough to end this debate permanently.

Actually, Toriyama has referred to Dragon Ball GT as a side-story.

Dragon Ball GT is a grand side-story of the original Dragon Ball, and it’ll make me happy for us to watch and enjoy it together.

And the term "side-story" ("gaiden" in Japansese) in Japan commonly used in popular Japanese fiction to refer to a spin-off of a previously published work that is neither officially considered a sequel nor a prequel.

Toriyama-san does not use the term gaiden but saido sutori - not that it really matters - and actually it is also a stretch because there a tons of side stories and spin-offs that are normal part of the franchise, like in Role-Playing Games for example. And Yamamuro-san himself half-dodged the question by saying it has the characteristics of a spin-off but also is a continuation.

The argument itself falls short though because this is just someone once again repeating the same kind of arguments that actually have no weight when it comes to what is canonical.

This is also why this misinformation needs to end. It's why we have threads about Cooler and Broly being "canon" because because the misinformation flying around has the common fan completely confused.

[Grimlock]

Yamamuro-san himself half-dodged the question by saying it has the characteristics of a spin-off but also is a continuation.

And Yusuke Watanabe himself outright stated that Dragon Ball GT is spin-off/non-canon/side-story/filler/not happened in the main continuity.

[Cetra]

Yamamuro-san himself half-dodged the question by saying it has the characteristics of a spin-off but also is a continuation.

And Yusuke Watanabe himself outright stated that Dragon Ball GT is spin-off/non-canon/side-story/filler/not happened in the main continuity.

You just contradicted yourself with the interview you linked because it is not even close to saying what you claim. And technically speaking Watanabe-san could even use the word canonical and it might still not have any weight as long as he is not in the position to decide. But as he said none of that in the first place this is not even necessary to talk about. I do not know if you purposely linked an interview that contradicts yourself but he said "not part of the original work". That means "it is not in Dragon Ball 1-42". Kami to Kami, Fukkatsu no F and Dragon Ball Super also are no part of that because they are not in it. That does not mean they are not a part of the story that happened in that original work. And that same goes for GT.

[PsionicWarrior]

Nothing Toriyama has said implies GT is "non-canon" as in the events never happened in-universe,

No but he wrote BoG and Super which acts as if GT never existed lol

Toriyama said it's a continuation of Dragonball.

Yet again I don't get why you think the author acknowledging the work of others would have the same canonical value as if he was the one writing it lol

A fan-fiction validated by original author still is a fan-fiction lol

[Grimlock]

You just contradicted yourself with the interview you linked because it is not even close to saying what you claim. And technically speaking Watanabe-san could even use the word canonical and it might still not have any weight as long as he is not in the position to decide. But as he said none of that in the first place this is not even necessary to talk about.

No I didn't. The words I used was just to please you, I don't know which words people like so I tend to use them all, and they all mean the same = not happened in the main continuity/manga/Toriyama's vision.

Indeed, I won't prolong this. I just brought this to contribute to the conversation here.

[Cetra]

You just contradicted yourself with the interview you linked because it is not even close to saying what you claim. And technically speaking Watanabe-san could even use the word canonical and it might still not have any weight as long as he is not in the position to decide. But as he said none of that in the first place this is not even necessary to talk about.

No I didn't. The words I used was just to please you, I don't know which words people like so I tend to use them all, and they all mean the same = not happened in the main continuity/manga/Toriyama's vision.

Indeed, I won't prolong this. I just brought this to contribute to the conversation here.

Why would you misread what he said to please me? That makes no sense. Within the given context it is just not true to say "he outright stated" as well as "not happened in the main continuity" is another claim. As said, "not being in the manga = part of the original work" is not the same thing as "does not happen in the event chain of the story that was established in it". Detective Conan movies are not part of the original work as they are not in the manga but that does not mean they did not happen in the storyline - something were a lot of fans also would say different but Aoyama-san very often showed how he somewhat includes the movies and sometimes even talks about certain plans concerning the movies. Pleasing me or not you cannot use terms that hint something unequivocal when it is inappropriate.

[Shinda Forever]

Of course not. DB super animation and fights are a lot worse than DB or DBZ. In therms of storytelling, i think DB super still has a chance to do a better job since they created Hitto, a great character with an awesome special ability. Let's see if Jiren has some special ability as well to make things interesting. The cast for this arc was the best of the franchise, but, in the next arc i would take, Gohan, Krillin and Roshi and i would add Hitto, Frieza and Jiren to the cast. Frieza was also a great addition to the cast since he can transform and compete with saiyajin transformations, therefore, i think that adding Hitto, Jiren and Frieza to the cast would help the series a lot since it wouldn't be focused in the saiyajins.

[PsionicWarrior]

DB super animation and fights are a lot worse than DB or DBZ.

Up to a point. Until FTrunks arc I agree, since then I think it's aside a few exceptions more or less on par if not better at times. There is some nice camera moves in Super we didn't have in Z and it creates for a better dynamic. Now the only thing that still makes Z fights more enjoyable to watch for me is the original Kikuchi score.

[JulieYBM]

Dragon Ball Super is what happens when people who fund anime have no interest in supporting the ideas of people who make anime. I cannot say it is as good a work as it ought to be.

[TheMikado]

You just contradicted yourself with the interview you linked because it is not even close to saying what you claim. And technically speaking Watanabe-san could even use the word canonical and it might still not have any weight as long as he is not in the position to decide. But as he said none of that in the first place this is not even necessary to talk about.

No I didn't. The words I used was just to please you, I don't know which words people like so I tend to use them all, and they all mean the same = not happened in the main continuity/manga/Toriyama's vision.

Indeed, I won't prolong this. I just brought this to contribute to the conversation here.

but the same thing was said about Super??? By Toriyama himself no less. IF we are going to take these comments to mean "it wasn't in the original work" to mean non-canon from the non-author. Then would the same comment by the author himself make the statement even more true and non-canon if this is the measuring stick we are using?

The point I'm making is that determining if something is worthy based on head canon rules of "canon" is literally one of the worse measures of value where this ranking and rating system does not actually exist from the author.

— The “Dragon Ball” kanzenban have brought in new readers, and I think that as fans it’s only natural that they’d want to see a new “Dragon Ball Z” title. What would you think about making a new anime work about once a year or so?

Toriyama: Oh, I’d like to see that.
Nakatsuru: But by the final chapter, Goku had gotten pretty old. And even after that he was the main character for the anime-original “Dragon Ball GT”. If we’re going to be making stories left and right here, maybe we should rewind time a bit and make them stories set sometime in the past.
Toriyama: I think so too. Instead of continuing the story further and further into the future, it’d be better to do a separate episode style of story development where you go back in time and go “this sort of enemy was here, and this sort of story”. Just say “it wasn’t in the original work, but this sort of story happened”. Maybe that would be better.