Canon matters

[ABED]

I think you're on safe grounds if you want to say the original 13 DBZ movies are not canon to Dragon Ball Super (especially given Broli's recreation). It's reasonable to explain certain parts of the franchise don't gel well with other parts.

The problem arises when people want to state an absolute canon. There just isn't one.

To that end let's look at the Bardock Special Vs DB Minus/DBS: Broly. One can certainly point out that DBS: Broly being a part of Dragon Ball Super supersedes the prior work when considering Dragon Ball Super, but it does not necessarily matter to someone viewing the original Dragon Ball Z. Someone in that case could choose whichever they like better and be perfectly valid.

TLDR: Canonization in and of itself doesn't matter, since there is no one objective canon, only relative canon, and for the bulk of the story, there are several potential canons.

No, you are not on safe grounds to say the original 13 DBZ movies are not canon because you're just a Dragon Ball fan. You're head canon is no more correct or incorrect than any other fan's head canon. These are just your beliefs after all and not necessarily theirs.

It's not "headcanon", the first 13 DBZ movies literally can not be canon. They don't fit in the timeline at all.

[Grimlock]

At this point, people just willingly refuse to learn and are just being stubborn for the sake of it. The original movies may not "fit" in the "main continuity" but that does not necessarily have anything to do with canonicity. We are talking about a franchise that bears the concept of alternate dimensions, introduced by the author himself, where different events may happen. And as we know, dimensions can collide with one another, characters can travel through one another through portals, black holes and etc.

I already said this before and find myself having to say it again here and now. But from where I see it, there is no point in wasting time saying and explaining this rather easy idea to understand over and over. People want to state their mere opinion as a fact, consequently saying that there is canon (without any official statement to back them up) either for "haha, look at that work, it's non-cannnon, (so) it's bad, haha" so to satisfy their personal choices or whatever the reason may be. We should drop this before it becomes one of those conversations that will not lead anywhere and the involved ones are trapped in an endless cicle.

[ABED]

When did these alternate dimensions colliding with one another?

Part of the problem nowdays seems like people are so hungry to know what the canon is or that everything be canon that it feels like authors create these alternate realities in order to justify it all co-existing, as if something be thrown out of canon or being non-canon to begin with is indicative of quality.

without any official statement to back them up

You don't always need one. Do you need one to understand that the original work is canon?

[laserkid]

You seem to really want to find a single canon - but there's no ONE way to decide what is and isn't in one.

I understand the desire to make sense of the story and to a certain extent you can, but it's a giant franchise with what I'd argue are -several- canons that one could go by.

One could go with manga only, excluding any thing not in the original 42 tankobon. Or, one could decide to include certain anime events that meet up with it, such as the Bardock special. Then there's the question of the Trunks special, do you take it or do you take the manga version?

As we keep going, do you count the Bardock special or DB Minus? There's multiple canons and people will pick the ones they want.

Do you go with Battle of Gods and Resurrection F, or the DB Super version of those events?

Do you count Super at all?

It's not as though there is a clear specific standard.

[ABED]

Not to sound like Travis Bickle, but are you talking to me?

I could see where at a cursory glance, it seems like I believe there's one canon. I actually don't believe that. I just don't believe the ridiculous notion that DB doesn't have a canon. You could argue that adaptations have their own canons.

There's multiple canons and people will pick the ones they want.

That's not how it works. Fans don't decide canon.

[Desassina]

Canon helps me know that DBS continues the story of Dragon Ball and not Heroes. That's about it. If I ever enjoyed the works of a single man due to his art and humour, then I'm pretty sure that I can find them in those that he contributes to, otherwise prepare myself for the themes and characters that never crossed his mind. This is why I'm going to watch Dragon Ball Super: Broly, because while it's not totally his, the intent was to change a character that didn't belong. Their differences in portrayal will say a lot about Toriyama's own direction and how much time has passed since then.

[Boulouki]

Hmmm to me it's more like "continuities"

The Dragon Ball Legends continuity
The Dragon Ball GT continuity
The Dragon Ball online continuity
And of course the Heroes continuity
I refer to the original manga + Super to be the
Main continuity of the franchise.
Nothing is canon or non-canon but everything is seperated in different continuities.

(Even though Heroes's premise is that everything exists, i wonder if the two Brolys meet and what their interaction will be, Xenoverse 2 already had a sort of interaction between Old Broly, and New Broly + Goku Vegeta from Super's continuity)

[ronaldnorth_03]

Old Canon:

Bardock - The Father of Goku > Dragon Ball > Dragon Ball Z > Trunks Special.

Spin-off: Dragon Ball GT


New Canon:

Dragon Ball > Dragon Ball Z > Trunks Special > Dragon Ball: OVA 2008 > Dragon Ball Super > Dragon Ball Super: Broly.

Opcional:
Dragon Ball Kai

[ronaldnorth_03]

[Hulk10]

Everything official is canon in its own right, but not necessarily to each other.

[PremiumSalt]

I prefer to look at it as, the "Toriyama" universe being the main one, and all the other stuff, like the movies, games, completely incompatible filler (the Garlic Jr. Arc for instance) as being "alternate universes", rather than have some sort of rigid "canon". To my understanding, this is the approach the games take these days, but I'm not familiar enough with them to be sure.

[dragon boss z]

Old Canon:

Bardock - The Father of Goku > Dragon Ball > Dragon Ball Z > Trunks Special.

Spin-off: Dragon Ball GT


New Canon:

Dragon Ball > Dragon Ball Z > Trunks Special > Dragon Ball: OVA 2008 > Dragon Ball Super > Dragon Ball Super: Broly.

Opcional:
Dragon Ball Kai

I assume you are talking about anime only? Because if anything was canon, it would be Toriyama's original manga.

Spoiler:

Where is this image from? Did you make it or is it official? Either way it doesn't make sense, as Yo son Goku and his friends return should be in the BoG, RoF, and Broly line since two of those films mentioned Tarble. Jaco should also be before both of the dragon balls, and dragon ball should be after Jaco in the BoG, RoF, Broly movie time line.

[ABED]

As long as you know which stories take into account which stories, you're fine. Anything else, especially figuring out some singular monolithic DB canon is a fool's errand.

[MasenkoHA]

, consequently saying that there is canon (without any official statement to back them up) either for "haha, look at that work, it's non-cannnon, (so) it's bad, haha" so to satisfy their personal choices or whatever the reason may be..

Well that’s the problem with the fandoms in general. The idea that if something is “non-canon” or doesn’t fit into the main timeline of a series then its automatically worthless or bad is such a stupid childish argument.

On the flip side I’ve seen fans (not necessarily Dragon Ball fans) bend over backwards and making mental gymnastics trying to argue how some clearly out of continuity film or special works into their respected series main timeline because they honestly feel like they have to validate their love of something.

Does it really matter that the Dragon Ball classic films are simply retelling of manga story arcs with a new movie specific plot? Does it really matter that almost none of the DBZ movies actually work in the series timeline? Does it really matter that Super and GT can’t co-exist in the same timeline?

[ABED]

, consequently saying that there is canon (without any official statement to back them up) either for "haha, look at that work, it's non-cannnon, (so) it's bad, haha" so to satisfy their personal choices or whatever the reason may be..

Well that’s the problem with the fandoms in general. The idea that if something is “non-canon” or doesn’t fit into the main timeline of a series then its automatically worthless or bad is such a stupid childish argument.

On the flip side I’ve seen fans (not necessarily Dragon Ball fans) bend over backwards and making mental gymnastics trying to argue how some clearly out of continuity film or special works into their respected series main timeline because they honestly feel like they have to validate their love of something.

Does it really matter that the Dragon Ball classic films are simply retelling of manga story arcs with a new movie specific plot? Does it really matter that almost none of the DBZ movies actually work in the series timeline? Does it really matter that Super and GT can’t co-exist in the same timeline?

Agreed. I get the idea of wanting to know what's in continuity for any long running series with so many movies and TV specials and such. However, I'd much rather ask a friend whose tastes I have a lot in common with which stories are good.

[Hulk10]

, consequently saying that there is canon (without any official statement to back them up) either for "haha, look at that work, it's non-cannnon, (so) it's bad, haha" so to satisfy their personal choices or whatever the reason may be..

Well that’s the problem with the fandoms in general. The idea that if something is “non-canon” or doesn’t fit into the main timeline of a series then its automatically worthless or bad is such a stupid childish argument.

On the flip side I’ve seen fans (not necessarily Dragon Ball fans) bend over backwards and making mental gymnastics trying to argue how some clearly out of continuity film or special works into their respected series main timeline because they honestly feel like they have to validate their love of something.

Does it really matter that the Dragon Ball classic films are simply retelling of manga story arcs with a new movie specific plot? Does it really matter that almost none of the DBZ movies actually work in the series timeline? Does it really matter that Super and GT can’t co-exist in the same timeline?

Agreed. I get the idea of wanting to know what's in continuity for any long running series with so many movies and TV specials and such. However, I'd much rather ask a friend whose tastes I have a lot in common with which stories are good.

All very good points. Non-canononicty is a stupid way to invalidate someone's ideas.

[ZodaEX]

Well that’s the problem with the fandoms in general. The idea that if something is “non-canon” or doesn’t fit into the main timeline of a series then its automatically worthless or bad is such a stupid childish argument.

On the flip side I’ve seen fans (not necessarily Dragon Ball fans) bend over backwards and making mental gymnastics trying to argue how some clearly out of continuity film or special works into their respected series main timeline because they honestly feel like they have to validate their love of something.

Does it really matter that the Dragon Ball classic films are simply retelling of manga story arcs with a new movie specific plot? Does it really matter that almost none of the DBZ movies actually work in the series timeline? Does it really matter that Super and GT can’t co-exist in the same timeline?

Agreed. I get the idea of wanting to know what's in continuity for any long running series with so many movies and TV specials and such. However, I'd much rather ask a friend whose tastes I have a lot in common with which stories are good.

All very good points. Non-canononicty is a stupid way to invalidate someone's ideas.

How so?

[ABED]

How so?

Because canonicity isn't a, much less the, criterion of story quality.

[Hulk10]

How so?

Because canonicity isn't a, much less the, criterion of story quality.

Thank you. You put that very nicely.

[KBABZ]

How so?

Because canonicity isn't a, much less the, criterion of story quality.

Very true. Let's provide three contrasting examples all dealing with the same character: Bardock. The original Bardock special is, despite it's now incompatible status, still considered to be a very good story that works entirely on its own merits. By comparison, Episode of Bardock is stated to be a What If? story and is considered to be a complete shambles. And of course there's the Toriyama take from DB- and DBS Broly: just because the original author wrote it doesn't mean that it automatically works and is good (probably should have been written in the 90s for that, haha).

To use another example, some of the best Marvel and DC tales are complete one-off stories that cannot be canon to anything else, such as Kingdom Come. That they don't link up or fit in with the established "mainline" story doesn't diminish (or accentuate) their own storytelling ability. Switching back to Dragon Ball, for me Path to Power doesn't work not because it has an accelerated pace and hasty editing, not because it's non-canon and can't work with anything else.