General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

[Dyno]

I know there must be already a hundred of topics specifically for this, but I decided to create the "contemporary" version of it in order to prevent this thread to appear again in the official Movie 15 topic and others unrelated. Moderators/administrators feel free to either delete it or contribute with your already posted information about this subject.

To begin with, I will post every statement for every material so far.

• Movies: I take the movies as “stories in a different dimension from the main story of the comic”. I’m entirely just an audience member for them.

This is from Daizenshuu 6 when asked what is Toriyama's position in relation to the movies for his manga. They take place out of the manga continuity, therefore, all that happen in the movies do not influence the manga by any means. Example: Freeza does not have a brother. That stupid thing is not the Legendary Super Saiyan and etc. Movies' plots also contradict many elements from the manga. You can't set one movie within the manga without find a plothole/inconsistency and such.

And, of course, it should be noted that all those movies which are not part of the manga, range from Movie 1 (Dragon Ball) up to Movie 13 (Dragon Ball Z). There are Movie 14 (Battle of Gods) and Movie 15 (Ressurrection "F"), both these movies are said by the author himself to take place within his original work, the manga. As you can see it here: [As with the last movie], I thought up the new story for the next Dragon Ball theatrical film as though it were a continuation of the manga when it was in serialization.

• Dragon Ball GT: Dragon Ball GT is a grand side-story of the original Dragon Ball.

This is from Dragon Ball GT's DVD Box, it is a message from the author, Akira Toriyama, summing GT up as to what he has done/contributed to the series. As you can see, he considers the anime as a "side-story". This word can slightly change its meaning from franchise to franchise (just like you can't use Star Wars' logic of "canon" to another franchise, as it may work differently). "Side-story" on its own does not help to claim whether the anime is or not canon, but Dragon Ball GT accepts movies continuity into his plot as you can see in the image below, and movies have been stated to be out of the manga.



• OVA's: Dragon Ball has three OVAs (I am considering just the ones that somehow are connected to the series, those from classic Dragon Ball are not meant to be taken serious); the first - "Dragon Ball: Yo!! Son Goku and His Friends Returned!", the second - "Dragon Ball: Plan To Erradicate the Super Saiyans" and the third - "Dragon Ball: Episode of Bardock".

The first OVA: In the modern days, it is canon, there is no debate over it. Tarble is mentioned in Movie 14 - Dragon Ball Z: Battle of Gods, therefore, it takes place within the manga continuity. Until Toriyama decides to come up with a new story for Tarble, both Tarble and his OVA are to be considered.

The second OVA: It is non-canon/filler/side-story/what-if (whichever other words you can use it). Why? Because its plot accepts movies, and movies have been stated to be out of manga continuity.

The third OVA: Neutral. Though its author, Ooishi Naho, stated to be "what-if", it is not like Toriyama couldn't intepose and says "but I want it in my original work", so, unless Toriyama himself says it does not take place in his manga, you can consider this OVA. Bardock's time travel is not limited to only "time", he can totally have traveled to another dimension as well. And since there is not a single explanation about how Bardock went back in time, you can create your own explanation for it to happen.

• TV Specials: Dragon Ball has three TV Specials; the first - "Dragon Ball Z: Bardock, the Father of Goku", the second - "Dragon Ball Z: Trunks, the Future Warrior" and the third - "Dragon Ball GT: A Hero's Legacy".

The first TV Special: For many years it was considered canon, but now we have Dragon Ball Minus, which deeply contradicts that wonderful Special. If you are a manga lover, then it is Dragon Ball Minus for you. For all the rest, you can still consider both. Yes, Dragon Ball Minus plot takes place one month before the destruction of planet Vegeta, this can be a gap to consider some elements from the TV Special, for example: All the planet Meat conflict, that specifically scene does not contradict anything. On the contrary, if you consider that scene, then you have an explanation to why Bardock is seen using a headband in Chapter 307 of the original manga. Ultimately, there is the "Bardock vs Freeza" scene, that specifically scene is canon, there is no debate over it as it is represented in the Chapter 307.

The second TV Special: It is canon. Though it is up to you if Trunks actually achieved the Super Saiyan transformation after Son Gohan's death. Personally, I consider the TV Special canon rather than the manga, since Akira Toriyama himself admitted he has a flaw of not knowing how to write deep and strong scenes such as it is Son Gohan's death.

The third TV Special: It belongs to Dragon Ball GT, if the anime itself is a "side-story", all other things belonging to it are as well. This special itself does not contradict anything, so... I think one might consider it if one is pleased to it.




Of course, I also put my pointview of "canon/filler", it may and will contradicts your view, but there we have it. I hope I was very clear in what I intended to say, I hope even more you understood what was said, any misunderstanding can be point out and I will either correct or explain to you.

[Mewzard]

When it comes to Jump series, I tend to stick with the creator's work as Canon.

The original manga, of course, is canon.

Battle of Gods may not have started as his baby, but he certainly made it his own by the end, so it's canon. It also refers to Tarble, so I count Yo! Son Goku and Friends Return as canon until such time as Toriyama contradicts it.

Naturally, since I counted Battle of Gods, I'll also count Revival of F, since this is straight up his idea.

Jaco the Galactic Patrolman directly ties into Dragon Ball, so I count it as canon. DB Minus as well, bumping out the old Bardock Special (I also count the manga Trunks the Story over the Trunks Special).

I don't count the rest of the animated material (I still love watching it *except for GT*, but I just don't view it as the 100% canon way things happened) or stuff like Episode of Bardock (not Toriyama yeah, also I didn't really enjoy it too much).

Still iffy on the whole DB Online stuff, since Toriyama did come up with a lot of it, but this was before the new movies...if Toriyama does some revising and makes it into something official like a movie, then why not?

[Hellspawn28]

I don't see how the Trunks TV special can be canon to the manga if it came out first and if Future Trunks was already a SSj before Gohan's death? I don't view fillers canon to the manga since they only appear in the anime and 95% of fillers are always ignore in the anime or end up being retcon fever (Like Dr. Flappe). I do view the pre-BOG movies as AU films going by Toriyama's comment. It makes sense that they are AU films given that they don't really fit and they are never reference in the anime and manga.

GT is not adapted from Toriyama's work and he had nothing to do with the main story of the show. To me calling GT canon to the manga is like calling Jurassic Park 3 canon to the Jurassic Park novels. I view GT as a spin off series since it can be view as a what if sequel to DBZ.

[Dyno]

I don't see how the Trunks TV special can be canon to the manga if it came out first and if Future Trunks was already a SSj before Gohan's death?.

As far as I know, TV Special came out after the manga. But I might be wrong.

[Kamiccolo9]

I view GT as a spin off series since it can be view as a what if sequel to DBZ.

And as mentioned in my thread the other day, your view of what being a spinoff series means in terms of it's canonicity is incorrect, and it has no relationship with what it actually means.

Going off of this, in the OP, it adds that "side story" quote along with the "different dimensions" one, and then goes on to acknowledge that they don't actually mean anything. So why even bring up those quotes to begin with?

Next, Toriyama is not the sole owner of the franchise. Why shouldn't we consider Toei's works equally as valid, since, as far as everything "official" is concerned, they are just as much "Dragon Ball" as anything Toriyama made?

[Big Momma]

This is the canon as far as I see it

DB- --> Jaco ---> Dragon Ball (The Manga)

And then, with in the confines of the main manga; Yo!, Battle of Gods, and FnF

Next, Toriyama is not the sole owner of the franchise. Why shouldn't we consider Toei's works equally as valid, since, as far as everything "official" is concerned, they are just as much "Dragon Ball" as anything Toriyama made?

What about when Toriyama's stuff and Toei's stuff start contradicting each other?

EDIT:

I don't see how the Trunks TV special can be canon to the manga if it came out first and if Future Trunks was already a SSj before Gohan's death?.

As far as I know, TV Special came out after the manga. But I might be wrong.

You are correct, but I think that's what Hellspawn was saying.

[Kamiccolo9]

This is the canon as far as I see it

DB- --> Jaco ---> Dragon Ball (The Manga)

And then, with in the confines of the main manga; Yo!, Battle of Gods, and FnF

Next, Toriyama is not the sole owner of the franchise. Why shouldn't we consider Toei's works equally as valid, since, as far as everything "official" is concerned, they are just as much "Dragon Ball" as anything Toriyama made?

What about when Toriyama's stuff and Toei's stuff start contradicting each other?

A "canon" consist of a set of works, not continuities. When you start discussing in-universe contradictions, you are talking about continuity, not a canon. A canon can easily consist of multiple continuities, as shown in both Marvel and DC.

[Dyno]

This is the canon as far as I see it

DB- --> Jaco ---> Dragon Ball (The Manga)

And then, with in the confines of the main manga; Yo!, Battle of Gods, and FnF

I think it is pretty much this the "real" canon of Dragon Ball. They all came from the author and whatever contradiction among them the responsibility is entirely of the author. Toei's works can't be considered if they came up with something that contradict your work.

I think the "key" is to put yourself in the author's place. Would you like another one to come up with an additional story that contradicts yours? Would you accept it?

[Kamiccolo9]

This is the canon as far as I see it

DB- --> Jaco ---> Dragon Ball (The Manga)

And then, with in the confines of the main manga; Yo!, Battle of Gods, and FnF

I think it is pretty much this the "real" canon of Dragon Ball. They all came from the author and whatever contradiction among them the responsibility is entirely of the author. Toei's works can't be considered if they came up with something that contradict your work.

I think the "key" is to put yourself in the author's place. Would you like another one to come up with an additional story that contradicts yours? Would you accept it?

Except Toriyama is no longer the sole author, and Toei's stuff is just as official as his is. Whether Toriyama accepts it or not is irrelevant.

[Hellspawn28]

If they the older movies take place in their own dimension then it sounds like that they are taken place in their own timeline and not apart of the main series. It feels like that they take place in their own world seeing that none of them fit and they are not reference again in the anime (expect for DBZ Movie 1) and manga. It explains why characters like Broli and Bojack are never seen or mention again. Broli wipe out the south galaxy and South Kai in the anime never thank Goku for defeating Broli since South Kai was most likely shitting his pants when the South Galaxy was destroyed. Not to mention when Kaioshin brought up Buu, Vegeta or Goku didn't brought up on they defeated Broli a while back and how he wiped out a galaxy as well. I find it hard to believe that someone who killed billions would go under the radar while past villains like Freeza and Cell are brought up at least once or mot.

There's also Icarus in the DBZ anime but you could say that Icarus in the anime is not the same character from the DBZ movies. Much like how Coola in GT could not be the same Coola that we saw in DBZ Movie 5.

[Cetra]

Of course it can be exactly the same Cooler. You are too focussed on some flaws possibly erasing the chance of him being included while those flaws exist all over the fictional universes and still do not erase their co-existence. As official as Studio Toei's parts are, as much can they happen in the same dimension no matter the errors or the taste of fans.

[Kamiccolo9]

If they the older movies take place in their own dimension then it sounds like that they are taken place in their own timeline and not apart of the main series.

Which is a totally different issue from whether or not a work is included in a canon. You are referring to continuities, which is a totally different thing. A canon is a collection of accepted works. Every officially produced piece of Dragon Ball material is canon. The manga, the anime, the video games, the blurbs on the back of action figure boxes, and the sports drink commercials are all "canon" (which is improper phrasing, by the way. The word "canon" is a noun, not an adjective.)

[Dyno]

I think we must all know the difference between "official" and "canon":

All materials that come from the author, Toei, even Bandai (video-games/cards, etc) are official. This is what separate all their works from the fans' "works".
For example: Dragon Ball GT is official, but it is not canon / Dragon Ball AF/Multiverse are unofficial.
Suppose: Baby Janemba in Multiverse in a fan thing, unofficial / Baby Janemba in Dragon Ball Heroes is official.

[Big Momma]

This is the canon as far as I see it

DB- --> Jaco ---> Dragon Ball (The Manga)

And then, with in the confines of the main manga; Yo!, Battle of Gods, and FnF

Next, Toriyama is not the sole owner of the franchise. Why shouldn't we consider Toei's works equally as valid, since, as far as everything "official" is concerned, they are just as much "Dragon Ball" as anything Toriyama made?

What about when Toriyama's stuff and Toei's stuff start contradicting each other?

A "canon" consist of a set of works, not continuities. When you start discussing in-universe contradictions, you are talking about continuity, not a canon. A canon can easily consist of multiple continuities, as shown in both Marvel and DC.

This isn't Marvel and DC, though. I won't say I'm well versed in a lot of Shounen series', but I'd imagine most of them have a singluar universe/story/continuity. I can only speak for myself, but I imagine that when most people, in the context of Dragon Ball discussion, talk about canon...they're talking about what the singular timeline/story is. I don't see Dragon Ball as something with multiple continuities.

I see it as a single story. Chapters 1 - 519 and things before/during/after that Toriyama has written. He may not be the sole creator of content, but he is the creator. It's his story. If I were to create a story/series and got picked up by a company, and they started creating stories/episodes/movies without my input; That's all fine and dandy. But if I, as the creator, saw things I didn't like or wanted done differently I have every right as a creator to dismiss them from my story. If people like those other things that's fine but, as the creator, I should have the final say on what is part of the "official" canonical story.

[Cetra]

If they the older movies take place in their own dimension then it sounds like that they are taken place in their own timeline and not apart of the main series.

Which is a totally different issue from whether or not a work is included in a canon. You are referring to continuities, which is a totally different thing. A canon is a collection of accepted works. Every officially produced piece of Dragon Ball material is canon. The manga, the anime, the video games, the blurbs on the back of action figure boxes, and the sports drink commercials are all "canon" (which is improper phrasing, by the way. The word "canon" is a noun, not an adjective.)

The adjective is "canonical". Anyway, yes, they are all official. But I guess it is safe to say that also talking about continuities Studio Toei can decide as well as the question "did it happen in this one?" is what people really are talking about and want to know, no matter the term used and that ultimately is also bound to legal owners.

I see it as a single story. Chapters 1 - 519 and things before/during/after that Toriyama has written. He may not be the sole creator of content, but he is the creator. It's his story. If I were to create a story/series and got picked up by a company, and they started creating stories/episodes/movies without my input; That's all fine and dandy. But if I, as the creator, saw things I didn't like or wanted done differently I have every right as a creator to dismiss them from my story. If people like those other things that's fine but, as the creator, I should have the final say on what is part of the "official" canonical story.

That really does not matter at all and if you were an important owner of a brand you would probably understand better. Imagine spending a lot of money for right to create and now someone tells you "you own the brand for 50% but you cannot decide that your own creation added to it counts". That is not how things work. You share the rights and so the original creator also has to share the decision. It is not like Studio Toei does not wait for his decisions anyway. But Akira Toriyama also very much respects what the others do. Imagine people would say they don't care about Disney's decision and wait for George Lucas to say something. That does not work. He does not legally own the right anymore.

[Kamiccolo9]

I think we must all know the difference between "official" and "canon":

All materials that come from the author, Toei, even Bandai (video-games/cards, etc) are official. This is what separate all their works from the fans' "works".
For example: Dragon Ball GT is official, but it is not canon / Dragon Ball AF/Multiverse are unofficial.
Suppose: Baby Janemba in Multiverse in a fan thing, unofficial / Baby Janemba in Dragon Ball Heroes is official.

A "canon," is a collection of official works.
You are referring to continuities.

If you are going to start correcting people, at least know what the words mean first.

This isn't Marvel and DC, though. I won't say I'm well versed in a lot of Shounen series', but I'd imagine most of them have a singluar universe/story/continuity. I can only speak for myself, but I imagine that when most people, in the context of Dragon Ball discussion, talk about canon...they're talking about what the singular timeline/story is. I don't see Dragon Ball as something with multiple continuities.

I see it as a single story. Chapters 1 - 519 and things before/during/after that Toriyama has written. He may not be the sole creator of content, but he is the creator. It's his story. If I were to create a story/series and got picked up by a company, and they started creating stories/episodes/movies without my input; That's all fine and dandy. But if I, as the creator, saw things I didn't like or wanted done differently I have every right as a creator to dismiss them from my story. If people like those other things that's fine but, as the creator, I should have the final say on what is part of the "official" canonical story.

That's because most Dragon Ball fans that talk about this stuff don't know what they are talking about. Look at the definition of canon, it is literally just a collection of accepted works. Anything produced legitimately with the Dragon Ball logo is "accepted" by the people with the power to make that distinction.

When people refer to a Dragon Ball canon, they are incorrectly ascribing the word to what they perceive as the main Dragon Ball continuity. As far as continuities are concerned, the manga itself as at least 3 outright mentioned.

And no, the creator doesn't have any special rights to dismiss anything, if he doesn't own the series. Stan Lee cannot just declare everything Marvel has done since 1961 to be out of continuity. George Lucas has no input in what goes on in Star Wars anymore. The creator can dislike them, if he wants, and can say as much, but as far as the official work is concerned, it doesn't really matter unless he has total creative control over the work.

[Cetra]

I think we must all know the difference between "official" and "canon":

All materials that come from the author, Toei, even Bandai (video-games/cards, etc) are official. This is what separate all their works from the fans' "works".
For example: Dragon Ball GT is official, but it is not canon / Dragon Ball AF/Multiverse are unofficial.
Suppose: Baby Janemba in Multiverse in a fan thing, unofficial / Baby Janemba in Dragon Ball Heroes is official.

A "canon," is a collection of official works.
You are referring to continuities.

If you are going to start correcting people, at least know what the words mean first.

This isn't Marvel and DC, though. I won't say I'm well versed in a lot of Shounen series', but I'd imagine most of them have a singluar universe/story/continuity. I can only speak for myself, but I imagine that when most people, in the context of Dragon Ball discussion, talk about canon...they're talking about what the singular timeline/story is. I don't see Dragon Ball as something with multiple continuities.

I see it as a single story. Chapters 1 - 519 and things before/during/after that Toriyama has written. He may not be the sole creator of content, but he is the creator. It's his story. If I were to create a story/series and got picked up by a company, and they started creating stories/episodes/movies without my input; That's all fine and dandy. But if I, as the creator, saw things I didn't like or wanted done differently I have every right as a creator to dismiss them from my story. If people like those other things that's fine but, as the creator, I should have the final say on what is part of the "official" canonical story.

That's because most Dragon Ball fans that talk about this stuff don't know what they are talking about. Look at the definition of canon, it is literally just a collection of accepted works. Anything produced legitimately with the Dragon Ball logo is "accepted" by the people with the power to make that distinction.

When people refer to a Dragon Ball canon, they are incorrectly ascribing the word to what they perceive as the main Dragon Ball continuity. As far as continuities are concerned, the manga itself as at least 3 outright mentioned.

And no, the creator doesn't have any special rights to dismiss anything, if he doesn't own the series. Stan Lee cannot just declare everything Marvel has done since 1961 to be out of continuity. George Lucas has no input in what goes on in Star Wars anymore. The creator can dislike them, if he wants, and can say as much, but as far as the official work is concerned, it doesn't really matter unless he has total creative control over the work.

The thing is in fiction you really could say by now that the term of canonicity has been re-defined and set similiar to "being part of the continuity". If that is the consensus for a words definition in some context then I see no problem with it as people here also do not mean "it is not official". Really fantasizing is when people say "only made by author, don't like it so doesn't count, not part of the manga", do not accept logic and lawor something like that.

Anyway, yes. For both the official thing and the continuity thing every bigger legal owner with some significant role playing for it can decide.

[Kamiccolo9]

The thing is in fiction you really could say by now that the term of canonicity has been re-defined and set similiar to "being part of the continuity". If that is the consensus for a words definition in some context then I see no problem with it as people here also do not mean "it is not official". Really fantasizing is when people say "only made by author, don't like it so doesn't count, not part of the manga" or something like that.

Anyway, yes. For both the official thing and the continuity thing every bigger legal owner with some significant role playing for it can decide.

Except no accepted definition of "canon" is remotely like what people are using it as. If that changes in the future, so be it, but for now, it is incorrect usage.

For what it's worth, I'm extremely active in numerous other franchises that have similar "issues" to Dragon Ball, and the term "canon" is hardly ever used in the way it is by this fanbase. It's almost always either "in-continuity" or "out of continuity."

[Cetra]

The thing is in fiction you really could say by now that the term of canonicity has been re-defined and set similiar to "being part of the continuity". If that is the consensus for a words definition in some context then I see no problem with it as people here also do not mean "it is not official". Really fantasizing is when people say "only made by author, don't like it so doesn't count, not part of the manga" or something like that.

Anyway, yes. For both the official thing and the continuity thing every bigger legal owner with some significant role playing for it can decide.

Except no accepted definition of "canon" is remotely like what people are using it as. If that changes in the future, so be it, but for now, it is incorrect usage.

For what it's worth, I'm extremely active in numerous other franchises that have similar "issues" to Dragon Ball, and the term "canon" is hardly ever used in the way it is by this fanbase. It's almost always either "in-continuity" or "out of continuity."

You know, I am active in FF (people not accepting Ultimanias and spin-offs), KH (KH Chi's canonicity being debatable), Detective Conan (people insisting the movies are not canonical), Star Wars and everything and everyone uses "canonical" to describe part of continuity, sometimes simply for the official part to state if something is an actual explanation (like the Ultimanias). And if people know that they talk about the same thing I am perfectly fine with that. I couldn't care less if they use the word pineapple for it if they just talk about the same thing. What is not okay is saying only person a can decide or only something being in the mainstory means it did happen or we didn't like it or it was full of errors so it did not happen. That is going against logic and how law works. But really, if someone uses "canonical" for "in-continuity" is no problem as long as we talk about the same thing. Often "official" and "in-continuity" goes together.

[fadeddreams5]

Dragon Ball: Yo!! Son Goku and His Friends Returned! is not confirmed canon. BoG just confirmed that Vegeta does indeed have a brother named Tarble. That's it. This is similar to how the original manga confirmed Bardock's existence through a flashback scene. Does not mean the special involving Bardock was canon. And now, we know, it's not. Minus is, unfortunately. Likewise, Episode of Bardock is not canon, but follows the first special.

The History of Trunks special is only partially canon. The part that is not canon is, you guessed it, him turning SSJ for the first time after witnessing Gohan's death (i.e. the best part). In the manga, he was already a SSJ. And, again, in the manga, Present Trunks has been a SSJ since childhood; it came naturally to him with no prerequisites needed. Put two and two together. Present and Future Trunks are the same character, but from different timelines. Makes no sense one would be a SSJ before the other.

And note, when I say "canon," I mean in regards to the original manga. The movies, OVAs, GT, and specials can still be canon, but confirmed to take place in alternate timelines or realities where certain events occurred differently, similarly to the Zelda timeline. It can branch out, as convoluted as that is.