Official On-Going DBZ 2015 Movie Thread: "Resurrection 'F'"

[SSJGFrieza]

That's disappointing. I was hoping for a big fanservice book detailing just what Freeza is and stuff like that to give him his final hurrah. Just a little bit of a wasted opportunity, I think.

That pretty much sums up this whole movie.

Maybe Toriyama can't be bothered or he wants to leave Freeza's race and biology an enigma.

[ShadowWolf87]

Are we sure about that? If SSJ forms are a multiplier and Goku had already achieved SSJ3, implying even his base was likely higher than Vegeta's, and Goku and Vegeta had the same of said multiplier, then Goku would actually have been stronger than Vegeta and holding himself back to give Vegeta that close fight he wanted and try to end the obsession once and for all.

They were stated and implied to be pretty much equal as SSJ2s.

If anything I would think that a weapon would be far more believable than anything else. Gero built Cyborgs with the power to slaughter Freeza, after all. Bulma built a small gun with the power of a massive bomb as a child.

And I don't see how we can dismiss this as "some random laser ring". It's not like these are a common sight in the DB Universe to justify calling it a "random ring". It's the first we've seen. And it likely has drawbacks that would make overuse very difficult or impossible, likely a need to recharge based on the size.

Also don't forget all that energy and force being focused into a single, narrow point allows for a lot more damage to that small area of impact.

If we assume it's a special weapon (even though nothing points towards it), then the question becomes why don't more soldiers have rings like that? Why didn't they squash the rebellions with it? And so on.

On the one hand, we have a Goku trying very hard to placate Vegeta's ego saying they were dead even. On the other we have a Vegeta saying he knew good and well Goku held back on him and even achieved an even higher form.

As for the ring, if it's a special weapon, odds are they wouldn't have many of them, unless you can fire that off rapidly it's not going to do you much good in the event of an army attacking you. Odds are it had been taken by/made for/stolen by them as a means for Sorbet to have a last line of defense should his bodyguards fail.

And frankly, there's absolutely nothing to indicate otherwise, so why would that assumption not be valid? Unless and until Toriyama says otherwise, it's a pretty safe thing to assume.

[Lord Beerus]

That's disappointing. I was hoping for a big fanservice book detailing just what Freeza is and stuff like that to give him his final hurrah. Just a little bit of a wasted opportunity, I think.

That pretty much sums up this whole movie.

Maybe Toriyama can't be bothered or he wants to leave Freeza's race and biology an enigma.

Yeah, I would have really like Freeza's biology and race to have been explored a bit more. And RF certainly wasted that opportunity. I guess we'll just have to settle with the fact that Freeza was just a freak of nature.

[Herms]

Hmm. Not a big deal, but I do find that kind of curious though. If they're going out of their way to say that Kind Vegeta is from the TV special, it makes me wonder why they just didn't add the rest of the "various source" characters onto the chart and note where they came from as well.

For the record, for King Vegeta it really just says "Dragon Ball Z"; I specified "TV series" because I thought it might be confusing otherwise (but I guess that backfired). Of course, the movies would also fall under the DBZ umbrella, but he did appear in the TV series first. It's notable that Gine isn't labelled as being from DB Minus. Onio's missing as well, despite Kuriza's presence (probably just an oversight). It's definitely odd that (say) Tarble's in the box while King Vegeta isn't. Maybe they ran out of room, or just got lazy? They don't identify the specific sources for each "other sources" character, so I honestly wonder if it wasn't simply a matter of them not wanting to bother squeezing in the names for all those different movies and whatnot. Besides King Vegeta, only the RoF characters get a specific label for where they originate from, and like King Vegeta they're incorporated into the main chart.

Opinions vary drastically, the "there is no canon" is actually a preference of a person. But anyway.

It's simply a fact that Toriyama and the rest of the people making the series have never put forth any sort of organized canon detailing which material is supposed to "count" or be "real" or whatever. The guides always identify which things originate in the anime/spin-offs/etc, but that's all they do. There are various statements like Toriyama saying he considers the (pre-BoG) movies to be off in their own dimension, or calling GT a side-story, or things like that, but that's all they are: one-off statements rather than anything put forth as definitive, detailed, or organized. It's not like Star Wars or other franchises where the creators actively set up different canons. It's fine for people to have preferences, but many DB fans talk as if Funi were putting out GT DVDs with little stickers on the front saying "NON-CANON", or Viz were printing out manga volumes with "CANON" emblazoned on the back. For DB, "canon" is simply a concept fans came up with for their own personal fan needs, and doesn't map to how the people creating the series go about creating it.

[Galan007]

There are various statements like Toriyama saying he considers the (pre-BoG) movies to be off in their own dimension, or calling GT a side-story, or things like that, but that's all they are: one-off statements

Hate to be a bother, but do you have links to these quotes handy? I know where the aforementioned sources stand in terms of accepted canonicity--I just would like to see the actual quote(s), is all(never seen them firsthand.)

[Herms]

Hate to be a bother, but do you have links to these quotes handy? I know where the aforementioned sources stand in terms of accepted canonicity--I just would like to see the actual quote(s), is all(never seen them firsthand.)

The movie one is from his Daizenshuu 6 interview (Daizenshuu 6 is the one that covers the movies, for context):

What is your personal stance on Dragon Ball’s theatrical films, Sensei?
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.

The GT one is from his introduction to the GT Dragon Box (scroll down there for the complete translation):

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.

[lord turbo]

It's simply a fact that Toriyama and the rest of the people making the series have never put forth any sort of organized canon detailing which material is supposed to "count" or be "real" or whatever. The guides always identify which things originate in the anime/spin-offs/etc, but that's all they do. There are various statements like Toriyama saying he considers the (pre-BoG) movies to be off in their own dimension, or calling GT a side-story, or things like that, but that's all they are: one-off statements rather than anything put forth as definitive, detailed, or organized. It's not like Star Wars or other franchises where the creators actively set up different canons. It's fine for people to have preferences, but many DB fans talk as if Funi were putting out GT DVDs with little stickers on the front saying "NON-CANON", or Viz were printing out manga volumes with "CANON" emblazoned on the back. For DB, "canon" is simply a concept fans came up with for their own personal fan needs, and doesn't map to how the people creating the series go about creating it.

You are over complicating things, canon (Or better yet, I'll just say continuity) has been established so far to be whatever Toriyama creates as every time this subject somewhat comes up he only seems to acknowledge things he's personally created for his manga's storyline back then and now for current things. For the longest the Bardock Special was considered in continuity with Toriyama's manga, but then he makes Minus and kicks the Bardock Special out of continuity. Now you got two different versions. Toriyama's version and the Toei version people are more accustomed to and think of when they hear Bardock's name. Then Toriyama furthers this issue by stating "The old 13 are in an alternate universe/dimension from his main series (manga). The moment he said, whether intention or not, he created separate continuities for Dragon Ball as a whole.

In fact, a lot of stuff Toriyama does is called into question. is this still in the same continuity, is it is a retcon, or simply not valid anymore. Sometimes I wonder does the DBO stuff still hold any meaning giving the events of RoF... As more new material is published the question of continuity will always be brought up, kind of inevitable at this point.

[Polyphase Avatron]

Are we still arguing about the ring? Come on...

[Herms]

You are over complicating things

I'm simply saying that the people making the series aren't bothering to define any strict continuity, so as a result the series has no strictly-defined continuity.

[Cetra]

It's simply a fact that Toriyama and the rest of the people making the series have never put forth any sort of organized canon detailing which material is supposed to "count" or be "real" or whatever. The guides always identify which things originate in the anime/spin-offs/etc, but that's all they do. There are various statements like Toriyama saying he considers the (pre-BoG) movies to be off in their own dimension, or calling GT a side-story, or things like that, but that's all they are: one-off statements rather than anything put forth as definitive, detailed, or organized. It's not like Star Wars or other franchises where the creators actively set up different canons. It's fine for people to have preferences, but many DB fans talk as if Funi were putting out GT DVDs with little stickers on the front saying "NON-CANON", or Viz were printing out manga volumes with "CANON" emblazoned on the back. For DB, "canon" is simply a concept fans came up with for their own personal fan needs, and doesn't map to how the people creating the series go about creating it.

You are over complicating things, canon (Or better yet, I'll just say continuity) has been established so far to be whatever Toriyama creates as every time this subject somewhat comes up he only seems to acknowledge things he's personally created for his manga's storyline back then and now for current things. For the longest the Bardock Special was considered in continuity with Toriyama's manga, but then he makes Minus and kicks the Bardock Special out of continuity. Now you got two different versions. Toriyama's version and the Toei version people are more accustomed to and think of when they hear Bardock's name. Then Toriyama furthers this issue by stating "The old 13 are in an alternate universe/dimension from his main series (manga). The moment he said, whether intention or not, he created separate continuities for Dragon Ball as a whole.

In fact, a lot of stuff Toriyama does is called into question. is this still in the same continuity, is it is a retcon, or simply not valid anymore. Sometimes I wonder does the DBO stuff still hold any meaning giving the events of RoF... As more new material is published the question of continuity will always be brought up, kind of inevitable at this point.

He does not overcomplicate things, he just speaks the truth. If something happens in one and the same continuity (or what is nowadays redefined as "canonical" through the consensus of calling in-continuity "canonical" as well) has nothing to do with what just an author decided. If Toei Animation intends to make something that is like this and either states it or it is obvious then, yes, it is so. But, that is not all of it. Toei Animation also can do that. And as far as consistency goes, which is never a game breaking argument, that does not automatically mean, things are not part of each others as people either do not bother to look over everything or simply forget. In the end it all comes down to law. Own the brand, own the rights. Of course somehow something is a part of something but that is not all that simple.

[jda95]

So I just saw the movie today and want to give some of my thoughts of it.

I enjoyed it but certainly didn't love it. It was a total rush to watch Dragon Ball on the big screen for the first time but there were a lot of flaws I couldn't help feeling the whole time throughout.

The fighting scenes were definitely a strong point - which is a very good thing because that was basically 90% of what the movie consisted of. Battle of Gods gave us a whole, fun framing story around its main plot while here, the events are set into motion within five minutes, and end basically straight after the battle is done. There was also a lot less humor in this one too due to being more action centric - but the humor that was present was certainly hilarious.

The reveal of Super Saiyan God Super Saiyan (literally the worst name ever!) also seemed a little off pace - I was expecting Goku to turn SSJ, or God, or something but turned out this new transformation without much fanfare at all. The bit after this of the two fighting was the only part where I felt the pace dragging a bit so it makes me wonder even more why they didn't have him try to use another transformation before going all the way.

And apparently I've turned into some kind of weird Vegeta stan, because the conclusion of the fight really annoyed me. Everything was pointing to Vegeta being the hero this time - and he was to an extent - but it ended up being pretty inconsequential. Yeah yeah, I understand the whole "teaming up will let us win" moral but they could have done it in a way that didn't seem like Goku just stealing the spotlight again.

It really was a blast to watch, but I don't feel this one will stand the test of time quite as well as Battle of Gods will. As a Goku vs Freeza action scene it was top notch, but less so if you're viewing it as a film.

Jaco made the movie. Sorry Z warriors, y'all can go home.

[lord turbo]

Ki wasn't protecting his body yet he was still in his God form how the fuck does that even work

Nothing contradicts it?

Why wasn't Freeza killed when Piccolo came out of nowhere to kick him in the head?

Freeza certainly wasn't on guard at the moment

Stop defending bad writing DB is full of it.

Because when mastered the form doesn't waste unnecessary ki just like when SSJ are mastered.

Freeza was fighting Goku at the time and Freeza doesn't drop his guard down like Goku. Goku on the other hand was doing nothing and talking to a beaten up Freeza or are you going to ignore this.

Eh...ki has always protected x character's body whether you visually see an aura or not. DBZ has always been, if your power level is not close to my own your attack won't affect much if at all whether I'm aware of it or not. Case in point Vegeta surprise attacking second form Freeza when Vegeta was no less than half of Freeza's power. The way Goku gets surprise attack is similar to pretty much every failed surprise attack by weaker characters on stronger ones. The way BSSJ (Blue SSJ) Goku is critically injured in this movie just comes off jarring (Like really?) and forced just to get Vegeta in there.

You are over complicating things

I'm simply saying that the people making the series aren't bothering to define any strict continuity, so as a result the series has no strictly-defined continuity.

Strict continuity or not, there is still a main continuity. Hell, Toriyama even states the movies exist in an alternate continuity separate from the main comic's continuity (The only one he's seem to care or focus on). Bam, you instantly create different continuities set in different universe right there when you state things like that, whether intentionally or not. At this rate GT is also an alternate continuity as its not compatible with toriyama's recent developments with Dragon Ball.

He does not overcomplicate things, he just speaks the truth. If something happens in one and the same continuity (or what is nowadays redefined as "canonical" through the consensus of calling in-continuity "canonical" as well) has nothing to do with what just an author decided. If Toei Animation intends to make something that is like this and either states it or it is obvious then, yes, it is so. But, that is not all of it. Toei Animation also can do that. And as far as consistency goes, which is never a game breaking argument, that does not automatically mean, things are not part of each others as people either do not bother to look over everything or simply forget. In the end it all comes down to law. Own the brand, own the rights. Of course somehow something is a part of something but that is not all that simple.

I beg to differ, there's is clearly some form of main continuity here. Ergo there old 13 movies continuity are not set in the same universe as Toriyama's manga continuity. Hell, like I said to Herms at this point the continuity of Gt is set in alternate universe as it doesn't even match or is even compatible to current developments made by Toriyama. Case in point, the Bardock Special and Minus are two different continuities now. Last time I checked, Toriyama still owns the rights to DB and didn't sell off the IP like George Lucas for Star Wars to Disney so what he says still goes until he does such a thing.

[Cetra]

I beg to differ, there's is clearly some form of main continuity here. Ergo there old 13 movies continuity are not set in the same universe as Toriyama's manga continuity. Hell, like I said to Herms at this point the continuity of Gt is set in alternate universe as it doesn't even match or is even compatible to current developments made by Toriyama. Case in point, the Bardock Special and Minus are two different continuities now. Last time I checked, Toriyama still owns the rights to DB and didn't sell off the IP like George Lucas for Star Wars to Disney so what he says still goes until he does such a thing.

What you call "main continuity" is just a wrong idea. It is merely the base form of Dragon Ball that Akira Toriyama uses for the story and that "definitely" has to be included. It does not mean other things are actually excluded. Take the Detective Conan movies as example. Many people claim the Conan movies are not canonical as they are not in the manga, they are written by someone else, blahblablah. But that is not how things work. And Gosho Aoyama even mentioned he wanted to include important things in the movies. He also once said the movies are not related to the manga, which people use to claim the movies are not canonical. Still he wants important stuff to happen in the movies. But he also says he cannot do that because then it cannot appear in the manga (and yet some stuff still appears in movies). Why not? Not because it is not canonical. If that would be the case he would not even need to bother about repeating something like that at all, but simply because the story that happens in the manga is exactly what you mean, the "most basic form" which an author uses to continue his story and at least a fan should know. You cannot expect a fan to know movies and stuff as well because a fan then reads the manga and is all "huh? when did that happen?" Of course in case of Dragon Ball it is not exactly the same as the manga no longer continues but the thing of "we use the base form of the story and write the continuation based on that" also counts here. This and still making it possible for other things to happen in the same continuity are totally different things. Akira Toriyama has no problem with what his anime team makes (by the way even Ressurection F was another request of Toei to Akira Toriyama to bring back Freeza so it is not like he said "I am going to revive Freeza"), Gosho Aoyama has no problem with that and as far as fan comments go, fans don't own anything so they cannot decide. Using the manga and a few movies to continue something is way easier. That does not have anything to do with actually disregarding the rest. And I doubt that you have actually checked who owns brands. Especially when Toei Animation absolutely owns rights about Dragon Ball. So yes, Akira Toriyama does have the right to decide. But he is not the only one. Of course Toei Animation wants him to write stuff. They respect him as the original creator. That does not make their right non-existent.

And also - how is GT not compatible with the rest? Because Pilaf is young and Goku has blue hair? I hope that is really not a serious argument. As well as the 20 year old "different dimension" argument is so old it starts to smell already, He probably has even changed his mind by now. Or maybe it was not even meant like people think. People even think "side-story" means not-canonical.

[ShadowWolf87]

Hate to be a bother, but do you have links to these quotes handy? I know where the aforementioned sources stand in terms of accepted canonicity--I just would like to see the actual quote(s), is all(never seen them firsthand.)

The movie one is from his Daizenshuu 6 interview (Daizenshuu 6 is the one that covers the movies, for context):

What is your personal stance on Dragon Ball’s theatrical films, Sensei?
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.

The GT one is from his introduction to the GT Dragon Box (scroll down there for the complete translation):

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.

Call me crazy, but those sound very much like "not in the main Dragon Ball universe" to me.

Just seems some folk want there to not be a canon so that no toes get stepped on, or just think that because the word "canon" isn't specifically used then it doesn't exist.

[ShadowWolf87]

I beg to differ, there's is clearly some form of main continuity here. Ergo there old 13 movies continuity are not set in the same universe as Toriyama's manga continuity. Hell, like I said to Herms at this point the continuity of Gt is set in alternate universe as it doesn't even match or is even compatible to current developments made by Toriyama. Case in point, the Bardock Special and Minus are two different continuities now. Last time I checked, Toriyama still owns the rights to DB and didn't sell off the IP like George Lucas for Star Wars to Disney so what he says still goes until he does such a thing.

What you call "main continuity" is just a wrong idea. It is merely the base form of Dragon Ball that Akira Toriyama uses for the story and that "definitely" has to be included. It does not mean other things are actually excluded. Take the Detective Conan movies as example. Many people claim the Conan movies are not canonical as they are not in the manga, they are written by someone else, blahblablah. But that is not how things work. And Gosho Aoyama even mentioned he wanted to include important things in the movies. He also once said the movies are not related to the manga, which people use to claim the movies are not canonical. Still he wants important stuff to happen in the movies. But he also says he cannot do that because then it cannot appear in the manga (and yet some stuff still appears in movies). Why not? Not because it is not canonical. If that would be the case he would not even need to bother about repeating something like that at all, but simply because the story that happens in the manga is exactly what you mean, the "most basic form" which an author uses to continue his story and at least a fan should know. You cannot expect a fan to know movies and stuff as well because a fan then reads the manga and is all "huh? when did that happen?" Of course in case of Dragon Ball it is not exactly the same as the manga no longer continues but the thing of "we use the base form of the story and write the continuation based on that" also counts here. This and still making it possible for other things to happen in the same continuity are totally different things. Akira Toriyama has no problem with what his anime team makes (by the way even Ressurection F was another request of Toei to Akira Toriyama to bring back Freeza so it is not like he said "I am going to revive Freeza"), Gosho Aoyama has no problem with that and as far as fan comments go, fans don't own anything so they cannot decide. Using the manga and a few movies to continue something is way easier. That does not have anything to do with actually disregarding the rest. And I doubt that you have actually checked who owns brands. Especially when Toei Animation absolutely owns rights about Dragon Ball. So yes, Akira Toriyama does have the right to decide. But he is not the only one. Of course Toei Animation wants him to write stuff. They respect him as the original creator. That does not make their right non-existent.

And also - how is GT not compatible with the rest? Because Pilaf is young and Goku has blue hair? I hope that is really not a serious argument. As well as the 20 year old "different dimension" argument is so old it starts to smell already, He probably has even changed his mind by now. Or maybe it was not even meant like people think. People even think "side-story" means not-canonical.

To answer your claims here: why are you comparing a completely different series and their movies with which the creator seems to be involved to some degree with movies made completely independently from Toriyama? These are not even comparable scenarios, and even then that would still make the Case Closed movies non-canon. Unless the source material still brought them in or referenced them, it's safe to say that didn't happen in the main timeline.

Perhaps a better example would have been the Star Wars EU before the big change by Disney. For a long time the EU was the canon, the continuation, as it was sanctioned by the creator. (That later spiraled out of control but that's beside the point.) But there were other stories produced during that time that were "What If" stories, or set in alternate timelines or universes, and while those were said to be such, they were still very much considered not canon. This is also the case here. The creator (Toriyama) has said they do not exist in continuity with his Dragon Ball. Using this logic, one would have to consider even Dragonball Evolution as "potential 'canon'" because Toriyama had said it might help to just think of it as a completely different universe in his initial statement. It is not even a little complicated to understand what is and is not canon, tbh. Especially if one pays attention to what this material is and the descriptions of it when it comes out. (Episode of Bardock, for example, is directly stated to have been produced solely to give the presence of SSJ Bardock in DB Heroes some backstory.) This doesn't mean you can't still enjoy it because it's not canon. I still love the old Star Wars EU, but it's no longer canon.

That said, as to GT there... there's a lot that doesn't mesh up. the whole Baby scenario, for example, is based on anime filler, and even altered the anime filler so as to say Vegeta's father was leading the Saiyans at the time of the Tuffles' demise. There's also their ability to "build" another Android 17. And yeah, frankly, the lack of SSJG and god ki, as well as many anime filler callbacks since contradicted by the author's official works are good indicators that the series is not canon. Doesn't mesh with Toriyama's Dragon Ball.

I honestly don't know what to say to all this. Never really thought any of this would be an issue. But I'm also sure there's probably a proper thread for these discussions, and this isn't it.

[fexus]

Ki wasn't protecting his body yet he was still in his God form how the fuck does that even work

Nothing contradicts it?

Why wasn't Freeza killed when Piccolo came out of nowhere to kick him in the head?

Freeza certainly wasn't on guard at the moment

Stop defending bad writing DB is full of it.

Because when mastered the form doesn't waste unnecessary ki just like when SSJ are mastered.

Freeza was fighting Goku at the time and Freeza doesn't drop his guard down like Goku. Goku on the other hand was doing nothing and talking to a beaten up Freeza or are you going to ignore this.

Eh...ki has always protected x character's body whether you visually see an aura or not. DBZ has always been, if your power level is not close to my own your attack won't affect much if at all whether I'm aware of it or not. Case in point Vegeta surprise attacking second form Freeza when Vegeta was no less than half of Freeza's power. The way Goku gets surprise attack is similar to pretty much every failed surprise attack by weaker characters on stronger ones. The way BSSJ (Blue SSJ) Goku is critically injured in this movie just comes off jarring (Like really?) and forced just to get Vegeta in there.

It's not about the aura. It's just that at that specific time Goku has drop down his ki level so low that the ring laser worked on him. Piercing power in DB is always better than the blast type of attacks. This was shown in the manga and again in this movie. The points are already in the manga, the movie only use those points in a different way. People just don't like that because the level is too low. We are specifically talking about Goku. Not Vegeta, not Freeza. Goku was the one that did it. It's one of Goku's weakness. I'm not saying that this is good writing but people thinking this is a plot hole is just too much.

[Noah]

So if there was no ring and the laser beam came from his finger, we weren't having this debate?!
Tao Pai Pai isn't liking this.

No because he would still be very very very inferior to the power of a SSJGSSJ, still wouldn't make any sense.

Episode of Bardock and faff are both non-canon, if it helps any.

What a heck is "faff"?

[Marlowe89]

And also - how is GT not compatible with the rest? Because Pilaf is young and Goku has blue hair? I hope that is really not a serious argument.

Really? Because I hope it's not a serious argument that SSGSS replacing Goku's initial SS form, the introduction of God ki in general, Pilaf and his crew being children, Freeza obtaining a new form and not being the complete pushover portrayed in all filler material and Toriyama's completely different rendition of Hell is in the same continuity as an anime series that isn't consistent with any of these ideas and isn't even acknowledged anymore outside of video games.

Why is this even still debated after RoF? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that these two don't belong in the same timeline.

[White Oni]

Like others have said, simply because the word "canon" hasn't been said, it does not mean such a thing doesn't exist.

I feel the issue here is semantics. Most people know what someone means when they say "not canon" what they really mean is "not part of the author's main story line..."

For instance, you won't see people arguing over an anime filler scene that says something like "videl may be part Saiyan" (for A hypothetical example)

Yes, technically, such a thing is possible but because it wasn't the author's intentions, unless he adopts that idea into his personal story line, there is ALWAYS going to be hesitation from the fans, to adopt that idea into what they personally perceive as "official" or "canon", in other words, "part of the author's personal, intended, story."

It's weird to think about but stories like dbz are modern day epics and legends.

For instance, take for example the theatrical release of Beowulf, there were obviously some liberties taken in that movie that are not part of the author's intended tale, this extra content can still be appreciated but no matter how good or bad that content is, it's not canon/ part of the primary source.

The only difference here is that we have a living author.

If mr toriyama had tragically passed away immediately after Z's managa release, no one, and I mean, no one would ever consider GT to be part of his story our "canon" or "part of the main universe."

However, because the author was living and willing for GT's creation, it allows for debate and that fact alone should tell you that a canon exists, otherwise, people wouldn't care either way.

[White Oni]

So I guess, in light of the ring blast feat, this isn't really a feat worth mentioning anymore.

Spoiler: