"Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

[capsulecorp]

This entire arc feels like filler. They are probably doing this while Toriyama is writing a new story arc in the meantime.

Wait what? How is this in any way like "filler"?

It's pretty much the definition of filler. It ignored the cliffhanger and consequences of the previous arc to focus on secondary characters of the next "arc" aka the movie.
So far nothing shown offers any additional context or value to the movie.

Being filler isn't an insult, it's nice to see other characters get some development.

No, the definition of filler is new episodes or issues added to an existing work in order to pad out, or "fill" time in a schedule. For example, the false Namek storyline is filler because it was created by Toei in order to provide time for more manga issues to be created.

Filler has nothing to do with story beats that advance cliffhangers, are exciting, are interesting to you personally, etc.

[GreatSaiyaman123]

Nah it's definitely filler. This whole saga is a tie-in for a movie that came out months ago. Toyotaro is just buying time as he and Toriyama plan the next big saga.

[Rafa Fast]

Wait what? How is this in any way like "filler"?

It's pretty much the definition of filler. It ignored the cliffhanger and consequences of the previous arc to focus on secondary characters of the next "arc" aka the movie.
So far nothing shown offers any additional context or value to the movie.

Being filler isn't an insult, it's nice to see other characters get some development.

No, the definition of filler is new episodes or issues added to an existing work in order to pad out, or "fill" time in a schedule. For example, the false Namek storyline is filler because it was created by Toei in order to provide time for more manga issues to be created.

Filler has nothing to do with story beats that advance cliffhangers, are exciting, are interesting to you personally, etc.

It's at least what it's intended to be, but people always changes the way terms are used by the years.
Nowadays there's people using "filler" for almost everything, it's usual for me to see this term used in subjects as Video games.
Example: say that a certain level is just a "filler level" just to make the game longer.
I won't say that these people aren't aware of what "filler" is supposed to be, but I personally can see than when they use the term, they mean something that doesn't have any value story/continuity-wise (just as lightbing said in the latter part of the first paragraph on his post).

Not saying that it's the correct usage of the term, just saying that it's what I see happening nowadays.

(Also, the former part of the first paragraph in his post isn't true at all, it's not every filler that ignores consequences from the previous arc, There's no Goku during the Garlic Jr. Arc exactly because of the consequences caused by the end of the Freeza arc which led to him not being on Earth, Goku dying in Cell Games also led him to being in the Otherworld in the Otherworld Tournament arc.)

Edit: GreatSaiyaman123 has just used the term too, I believe they're really only using to say that this arc (at least for now) doesn't have any value for the continuity.

[LightBing]

No, the definition of filler is new episodes or issues added to an existing work in order to pad out, or "fill" time in a schedule. For example, the false Namek storyline is filler because it was created by Toei in order to provide time for more manga issues to be created.

Filler has nothing to do with story beats that advance cliffhangers, are exciting, are interesting to you personally, etc.

That's pretty much what I said, it's padding.

Filler is inconsequential for the "main storyline" because it doesn't matter, it can't interfere since they are gaining time. It's innocuous. Like this arc so far.

We've had a break of a few months. The mangaka returns, ignores his story to focus on characters not even worth a new design until recently for a role of comic-relief.

Like yeah, nobody is going to call it filler officially and the original author is working on it in some way: if you want to be pedantic.
However, I'm justifying the similarities with filler content and feel justified, like other people, here to use that word.

By all means offer a better word to describe what's going on with this change of tonality and progression. I'm open to learn more vocabulary.
If you think nothing is going on here, it's business like always. Then I disagree and that's that.

[Grimlock]

It's at least what it's intended to be, but people always changes the way terms are used by the years.

Which, needless to say, is what often leads to misunderstandings and the necessity of having to explain everything constantly. That being said...

but I personally can see than when they use the term, they mean something that doesn't have any value story/continuity-wise

... Its "misuse" often opens up other cans of worms. Fillers, in Dragon Ball, are a little bit more complicated to deal with. Heck, Dragon Ball openly uses a filler concept without providing any explanation whatsoever. Sure, it may not have any value "story-wise", but it does have "continuity-wise", as the whole driving school filler is the only thing that explains why we see Goku driving in the manga. The manga expects its reader to have watched the filler without acknowledging it.

We watch Goku waking up on a planet inhabited by pink aliens that teach him the Teleportation is filler, but you know that what you saw also happened in the manga continuity too, and the interesting thing is that enters another writer and not only acknowledges the visual of those pink aliens from the filler, but also acknowledges their alternative visual, essentially making filler to coexist with stuff already "in-continuity".

And then there's the whole dilemma of what is "filler" in a franchise that presents different timelines, continuities and dimensions for those that use this word to mean events that "didn't happen".

By all means offer a better word to describe what's going on with this change of tonality and progression. I'm open to learn more vocabulary.

Hah. It's interesting to see other people saying the exact same thing I have been for a while now. People do love to make up new words, so one can only wonder why we still don't have new ones for the strange and different situations Dragon Ball Super put us in. I could do it, but I'm afraid I'm not so creative (and I don't think people would just start using them anyway). But I already said I would be down for whatever term they come up with.

[batistabus]

All of Super is filler.

[JulieYBM]

All of Super is filler.

What does that mean and why do you think it's important to say that?

Like, do you mean "Dragon Ball Super is not the 1984 comic"? If so, well, duh, it's a project unto itself and being its own thing is legitimate.

[pepd]

It's at least what it's intended to be, but people always changes the way terms are used by the years.

Which, needless to say, is what often leads to misunderstandings and the necessity of having to explain everything constantly. That being said...

but I personally can see than when they use the term, they mean something that doesn't have any value story/continuity-wise

Heck, Dragon Ball openly uses a filler concept without providing any explanation whatsoever. Sure, it may not have any value "story-wise", but it does have "continuity-wise", as the whole driving school filler is the only thing that explains why we see Goku driving in the manga. The manga expects its reader to have watched the filler without acknowledging it.

That's ridiculous. The "whole driving school filler" is not "the only thing that explains why we see Goku driving in the manga", and the manga doesn't "expect its reader to have watched it".
Even leaving aside the most evident fact that the manga was conceived and presented before those episodes' conception: Those episodes expand on events (Goku learning) that we know happen but weren't necessary to cover (hence they weren't). That doesn't make it part of the og story. Goku could have learned on his own, or in a different driving school without Piccolo. The same applies for Yadrats, Yamcha's career, etc.

And of course constantly using terms with a non-standard definitions requires constant clarification.

[Scsigs]

All of Super is filler.

Not at all. When the main arcs & movies are all plot that add something that sticks around in the canon, affects the characters, then informs some of the future stories in some way, then events are referenced in suture things, it's hardly just "filler."

[Grimlock]

That's ridiculous. (...)
Even leaving aside the most evident fact that the manga was conceived and presented before those episodes' conception

The episode aired on January 1992, the chapter depicting Goku driving was released on September 1992. There is no scenario where Toriyama thought about showing Goku driving in the manga by the end of 1991 or early 1992, even before the episode aired. Toriyama took two months to portray Bardock in the manga after his debut on October, 1990.

I don't know how the process work for filler material, but if there was anything resembling "planning", then the medium that first had the idea of making Goku driving and had this idea conceived in advance (that is, before being shown to the audience) was the anime. As Toriyama couldn't have possibly thought about portraying Goku driving while drawing the early part of Cell saga (Vegeta vs Android 18, Piccolo's fusion with Kami, etc. That's what was happening by the end of 1991, early 1992).

The "whole driving school filler" is not "the only thing that explains why we see Goku driving in the manga", and the manga doesn't "expect its reader to have watched it".

It is. The whole filler episode was conceived and presented before, way before we see Goku driving in the manga, and yes, so far it's the only thing that explains Goku driving in the manga. You may want to do some research before ranting that something is "ridiculous" next time.

That doesn't make it part of the og story. Goku could have learned on his own, or in a different driving school without Piccolo.

It does. Otherwise all you have is your "headcanon", which is what you already presented here.

And of course constantly using terms with a non-standard definitions requires constant clarification.

Which isn't the case of "filler". This word does have a standard definition (already stated in this very page). If people love to misplace words into wrong contexts is another issue (problem) altogether.

[Zephyr]

Goku's driving in Chapter 392 would not have been wanting for explanation even if DBZ Episode 125 never existed.

Setting aside that a man knowing how to drive is in general not some crazy weird outlandish thing that warrants explanation, Goku drives a motorcycle in the very first chapter. Outside of the story, Goku is drawn operating all manner of vehicles on the covers of chapters and collected volumes throughout the series' run. So the idea of Goku driving is certainly not something Toriyama "couldn't have possibly thought about portraying".

Nevermind that DBZ Episode 125 is clearly an expansion of the bit on Chapter 255's cover, something Toriyama drew.

The animated adaptation of the original story is, by definition, not part of the original story. It is an adaptation of it. Nothing in the adaptation of the original story is necessary for reading and understanding the original story; the idea that the animated adaptation can enhance the original story is a valid, but entirely different, point.

With regards to what content is expected to have been consumed, if I remember correctly, the animated adaptation was created with the idea that the audience was already reading the manga in mind, hence the episode titles containing blatant spoilers.

[Grimlock]

No, he doesn't. First because motorcycle is quite different than a car, it literally goes on its own after spinning the handle. Second, Goku has no control over it, which is the most basic thing you need to have in order to drive. So you can't call that "driving" by any stretch of the word.

Anything that happens on covers and volumes don't count for very obvious reasons. Also, drawing Goku driving in all manners of vehicles in those circumstances isn't necessarily and directly tied to have thought, at some point, of putting those same manners into the story. For all we know, it was just Toriyama having fun putting Goku in other situations without thinking "I will draw Goku driving in the manga", since they're covers and volumes, which aren't obligated to represent and/or be part of the story being told at that time.

[capsulecorp]

No, the definition of filler is new episodes or issues added to an existing work in order to pad out, or "fill" time in a schedule.

That's pretty much what I said, it's padding.

By all means offer a better word to describe what's going on with this change of tonality and progression. I'm open to learn more vocabulary.

It's not padding because the DBS manga is not an adaption. The DBS manga IS the "main storyline", even if you happen to be more interested in certain parts than others. For an example of filler in DBS, think of the false Vegeta story added to the DBS anime.

I don't think its really necessary to come up with a new term to describe parts of a story that some people are bored by.

[Zephyr]

No, he doesn't. First because motorcycle is quite different than a car, it literally goes on its own after spinning the handle. Second, Goku has no control over it, which is the most basic thing you need to have in order to drive. So you can't call that "driving" by any stretch of the word.

I mean, a car literally goes on its own after pressing the gas pedal.

My point is that Goku was clearly able to operate one type of motor vehicle to some extent, fresh out of the woods, with no instruction, even if he wasn't in complete control. After years of experience in the outside world, and as an adult, it should not come as a surprise that he has learned to drive a car. It's fun that the driving episode exists and showed us how, in the animated adaptation's version of the story, Goku made his first attempt at learning how to drive. However, if the driving episode never existed, his operation of a car in the manga would not have broken any reasonable reader's suspension of disbelief. The driving episode is not, in fact, "the only explanation" for why Son Goku, a grown man, is able to drive a car, in that it's not a thing that is in any need of an explanation; it's a normal thing that happens.

Also, drawing Goku driving in all manners of vehicles in those circumstances isn't necessarily and directly tied to have thought, at some point, of putting those same manners into the story.

Well, I never said that these were 'necessarily' tied to that thought; that would be too strong of a claim for me to make, so I didn't make it. But their existence does throw a wrench into the (incredibly strong) claim that Toriyama "couldn't have possibly" thought about it.

[batistabus]

Like, do you mean "Dragon Ball Super is not the 1984 comic"? If so, well, duh, it's a project unto itself and being its own thing is legitimate.

That's part of it. My statement has nothing to do with legitimacy, quality, integrity, or stakes, and it's not meant to be an insult.

[Grimlock]

My point is that Goku was clearly able to operate one type of motor vehicle to some extent, fresh out of the woods, with no instruction, even if he wasn't in complete control.

Yeah, but you are leaving this small but very important detail out. He "was clearly able to operate" because he saw Bulma doing it.



Tell me, does that mean when a kid lit up a stove that they saw someone doing it, they know how to properly cook too?

After years of experience in the outside world, and as an adult, it should not come as a surprise that he has learned to drive a car. It's fun that the driving episode exists and showed us how, in the animated adaptation's version of the story, Goku made his first attempt at learning how to drive. However, if the driving episode never existed, his operation of a car in the manga would not have broken any reasonable reader's suspension of disbelief. The driving episode is not, in fact, "the only explanation" for why Son Goku, a grown man, is able to drive a car, in that it's not a thing that is in any need of an explanation; it's a normal thing that happens.

Alright, I'll withdraw the "it's the only explanation" argument. But I will maintain the point that the episode is directly tied to that manga panel. Toriyama had all the time in the world to portray Goku driving, but he only did that after the episode aired. It isn't a coincidence. As the episode is the only actual source providing some context to that scene in the manga, it can't be overlooked.

[Skar]

No, the definition of filler is new episodes or issues added to an existing work in order to pad out, or "fill" time in a schedule. For example, the false Namek storyline is filler because it was created by Toei in order to provide time for more manga issues to be created.

Filler has nothing to do with story beats that advance cliffhangers, are exciting, are interesting to you personally, etc.

I've seen "filler" and "padding" being used to differentiate the two. They usually mean the same thing in fiction so the distinction is mostly in the context of anime. "Filler" includes extra scenes or episodes added to an anime adaptation to avoid catching up to the manga while padding includes filler and anything that doesn't move the plot forward and easily skipped without affecting the story.

I don't think either one is bad and all that matters is if you enjoyed it or not. Technically all of DBS could be considered filler or padding since you can read the last chapters of the manga without needing to watch or read DBS first. Someone could watch Broly and Super Hero without stopping to read the three manga arcs taking place between them. It's also possible to stop at the Granolah arc and watch Super Hero skipping this arc.

[FlpShimizu]

We can't say for sure what implications this arc wil have later on, there are only two chapters out. Just say you don't like it, too soon to call it irrelevant.

[Mr Baggins]

I've seen "filler" and "padding" being used to differentiate the two. They usually mean the same thing in fiction so the distinction is mostly in the context of anime. "Filler" includes extra scenes or episodes added to an anime adaptation to avoid catching up to the manga while padding includes filler and anything that doesn't move the plot forward and easily skipped without affecting the story.

This is true, and both definitions are valid.

It's preposterous to claim that either definition applies to this arc specifically. With the rationale that some are using in this thread, you might as well say that the entire Future Trunks arc is filler because it doesn't follow up on the Universe 6 arc's promise of a big multiversal tournament and only minimally contributes to the next arc. It's inconsequential.

Dragon Ball's arcs are independent stories that, for the most part, either have pretty loose connective tissue or barely any at all. That hasn't changed much with Super, which is why filler in the sense of "padding" is best discussed in a within-arc context, not a between-arc one. This ain't Fullmetal Alchemist.

Some of y'all are clearly employing this word in very meaningless, unconstructive ways. Also, we're literally just two chapters in. Cool your jets.

[pepd]

Even leaving aside the most evident fact that the manga was conceived and presented before those episodes' conception

The episode aired on January 1992, the chapter depicting Goku driving was released on September 1992. There is no scenario where Toriyama thought about showing Goku driving in the manga by the end of 1991 or early 1992, even before the episode aired. Toriyama took two months to portray Bardock in the manga after his debut on October, 1990.

I don't know how the process work for filler material, but if there was anything resembling "planning", then the medium that first had the idea of making Goku driving and had this idea conceived in advance (that is, before being shown to the audience) was the anime. As Toriyama couldn't have possibly thought about portraying Goku driving while drawing the early part of Cell saga (Vegeta vs Android 18, Piccolo's fusion with Kami, etc. That's what was happening by the end of 1991, early 1992).

Fair enough. But is irrelevant to the point for the reasons exposed in 1, which is why I didn't look it up and started with "Even leaving aside".

The "whole driving school filler" is not "the only thing that explains why we see Goku driving in the manga", and the manga doesn't "expect its reader to have watched it".

It is. The whole filler episode was conceived and presented before, way before we see Goku driving in the manga, and yes, so far it's the only thing that explains Goku driving in the manga. You may want to do some research before ranting that something is "ridiculous" next time.

I was going to try to explain it again (because I already did in the part you ignored), but Zephir already did and you accepted it, so to cover what's left:

Alright, I'll withdraw the "it's the only explanation" argument. But I will maintain the point that the episode is directly tied to that manga panel. Toriyama had all the time in the world to portray Goku driving, but he only did that after the episode aired. It isn't a coincidence. As the episode is the only actual source providing some context to that scene in the manga, it can't be overlooked.

Which is...
1. that it isn't a coincidence because... that's it, because. It's perfectly possible he just didn't have a scene that he felt needed a car before, or that his own cover art inspired it, but even if the episode inspired it, so what?(rhetorical btw). Consequence in it's real world conception doesn't make it consequential in the story.
2. And then you just changed the already refuted "explanation" with "context", that as stablished it's not necessary, and therefore can totally be overlooked. It's entirely possible for one to read the manga without watching those episodes (as many have without needing them). That it fits doesn't make it part of it.


So, yeah. It doesn't even hold for the most convenient example, let alone for "filler in DB" in general, that is what you originally said.
It is ridiculous.

-----------------------------------------

And of course constantly using terms with a non-standard definitions requires constant clarification.

Which isn't the case of "filler". This word does have a standard definition (already stated in this very page). If people love to misplace words into wrong contexts is another issue (problem) altogether.

I didn't say it is. I was responding to the attempt of extrapolating its validity (that you are doing ones more) into other particular use of terms for your bizarre continuities-validation quest.