Dragon Ball Without Its Creator

[Vegetto95]

What's more, I DO NOT remember seeing the whole "canon" discussion ANYWHERE NEEEEEEAAAAR as insanely fucking much pre-Super. I definitely saw it on RARE occasion even back to the early-mid 2000s due to the differences between the manga and anime and the weirdness of the DB and Z movies, but it just fuckin' SKYROCKETED like crazy a few years into Super's existence, which is just one more thing added to the already huge pile of "Reasons Why I Despise Dragon Ball Super" lol

You can't hate the SERIES for what its FANDOM does. The "Canon" debacle is a Community-generated debacle. Super by itself is harmless; while it cannot possibly be reconciled with GT in the exact same world (Unless everyone suddenly got amnesia and Beerus went back to sleep and whatnot), it doesn't go out of its way to erase GT from existence. In fact, through Xenoverse 2 (one of the most popular and mainstream Anime videogames of the 2010s), the Super and GT worlds are actually linked, with the GT characters (including GT Adult Trunks) giving their energy so that Super Future Trunks can defeat Super Fused Zamasu with the spirit sword; a videogame adaptation of Super's Zamasu arc, that nonetheless takes GT into account:

https://youtu.be/oAnG924WFq8?t=89


Super in itself is an harmless show. Toriyama shouldn't have been constrained by the boundaries set by GT back in 2013. You can't hate Super just because it introduced elements that are incompatible with GT, that is an inevitability. Nor would it be fair to argue that Super should have never existed because it contradicts GT's plot points.

At the same time, You can't hate Super for the fandom taking the Canon debacle to the extreme. The writers of Super clearly are not corroborating that debacle.

I think you are being way too unfair towards Super, almost hating it just for existing (and thus, GT no longer being the only "sequel" to DBZ). The Super series in itself is harmless and doesn't invalidate GT's existence and the GT nostalgia for those who are feeling nostalgic about it. This whole "Canon" debacle is a Community-generated debate.

You misunderstand. I don't hate Super because it "replaced" GT (which it didn't, it's its own thing)... GT has NOTHING whatsoever to do with my hatred of Super. I have NOTHING against a separate continuity that's incompatible with GT. That's FINE. That kind of thing happens AAAALL THE TIME in these gigantic, decades-long franchises.

And I CERTAINLY don't hate it for what the fandom does, you COMPLETELY misinterpreted what I was trying to say there. There are things I hate about Super ITSELF that have created the fandom behavior I find annoying, NOT the other way around.

No, I hate Super entirely on its own merits. I hate it because I think it's an INCREDIBLY poorly written series (across its TV anime, movie, AND manga aspects) that severely regressed multiple characters, focused on many of the worst aspects of the original series (hence the many streaks of horrendously long, boring fights with no substance whatsoever such as in the Tournament of Power, the Broli movie, and the Granolah arc, as well as the unending stream of nonsense new rainbow transformations that characters CONSTANTLY pull out of their asses with zero buildup or explanation as the plot demands), and stoops to using several annoying modern battle shōnen tropes like "THE POWER OF FRIENDSHIP!!" and "muh tragic backstory waaaaah". And I'm FAR from the only person who feels that way.

But here's the thing, here's the thing that I was getting at in my prior post: I also hate it for the COMPLETE lack of any real way to understand what the fuck is going on. With the original manga and the DB/Z/GT anime, it was SUPER easy to understand where everything stood: the manga stood on its own as the original source material, and the DB and Z anime were direct animated adaptations of it, with GT simply being an anime-exclusive direct sequel to them. And of course you had the movies which... just did their own weird little things by themselves lol

With Super, however... the anime was NOT a direct adaptation of the manga, and instead both separately adapted the same story arcs their own ways, which became OOOOH SOOO completely tangled up in nonsense because of the existence of the four movies (God and God/Battle of Gods, Revival of 'F', Broli, and Super Hero), which are all considered to be a part of the stories of the manga and TV anime (and, aside from Broli, have been adapted by them as well) in some confusingass way or another and criss-cross and intersect with them in ways that the creators have never bothered to explain.

This last decade of Dragon Ball has been an absolute MESS of continuity, and THAT'S what I hate about it that actually pertained to what I was talking about before. THAT'S the aspect of it that I feel has had an adverse effect on the fandom developing this ridiculous OBSESSION with "canon". You know when you have a necklace or a bunch of cords laying around that have somehow gotten ridiculously tangled up and basically become an infuriating puzzle to straighten out? THAT'S what Super as a whole feels like. That's the point I was trying to make that you apparently didn't understand (possibly because, at least judging by how you worded what you wrote, that you assumed that I was only referring to the Super TV anime and not everything under the Dragon Ball Super banner?)

[Grimlock]

The conversation will continue, no matter how futile, because what folks are arguing for is not what they claim. What they're aruging for their personal vision to be the definitive interpretation of Dragon Ball. And that's never going to happen for anyone through online arguments. But it's highly personal, and highly motivating for some. Just look at the thread you linked, it was posted a day after this one and is already on course to overtake this thread in terms of engagement. And the topic is hardly different from the topic of this thread. That word "canon" means a lot to some people, because if one weilds the "official canon" then they can effectively shut down discussions they dislike by evoking "that's not canon, therefore doesn't matter".

What is and isn't "canon" was never very important to the author of Dragon Ball in the first place. Toriyama never wrote manga because he wanted to tell a significant story where the details mattered to the overall plot and theme... He wanted to make money and express his creativity. This is not One Piece. This is not The Bible. This is Dragon Ball. A silly, martial arts/wuxia story that at its best, never takes itself seriously. The concept of canon is for conversations about stories that take themselves very seriously.

Canon is personal when it comes to Dragon Ball. There is no authoritative source for what does and doesn't matter in the myriad of stories set in the Dragon Ball universe. Everyone gets to decide for themselves. I like that better anyway.

I agree. No matter how many official sources are provided, the debate will never end. You can't logic someone out of a position they've arrived at through emotion. This debate mirrors many others that have to do with belief, like religion or politics. No amount of evidence to the contrary will persuade a true believer.

I'm just glad I have finally found someone with the exact same perception I have. I thought I was alone in that. Guess, after all, I'm not crazy for preferring to see things this way, not that I ever felt bothered by the thought of being the only one with this line of thought in the first place. The world would be a better place if we can simply act as if it doesn't exist at all. The Eastern people seem to live quite happily not knowing about it, so they prove Western people can also live just fine without even thinking about canon.

Can't really let this one slide. Regardless of what anyone thinks of the discussion.

There's nothing for you to "let slide" to begin with.

[sangofe]

I think at most we'll get is a miniseries or occasional anniversary movie without Toriyama. There was less content overall in the ten years of the revival compared to the original series run. It was successful for a legacy series but it's unlikely the movies would've grossed as much or manga sold as many copies without Toriyama's involvement. I don't mean necessarily quality and just that more fans would be invested when the original author is involved vs something deemed more as a spinoff or side story.

The series is close the ending of the original manga anyway and Toriyama made it clear he wasn't interested in going past it. I can't see another attempt at a sequel like GT being successful especially since it at least some minor contribution from Toriyama at the beginning. A few major Hollywood franchises have had some flops recently so I don't think any franchise is immune if enough fans get the impression that the studio is milking it and churning out anything they assume could make some money.

Where did he say he didn't want to go past the original ending? I seem to remember there having recently been hints they would. Unfortunately I don't have the link for that m

I sort of wonder if Toei might make a move, things go like Succession and there's back door politics and back stabbings, and they try to oust Toyotaro and input a mangaka who they trust. I would also wonder if Toriyama's wife and kids would back Toyotaro up and say he's the successor to the series, or alternatively if they would side with Toei. And of course there's Akio Iyoku, who has his own machinations.

The question that also should be posted is: will Toyotaro handle the roastings and pressure he'll get when people start lashing at him for not being good enough? Because that will happen as it's already happened before. It's just that he doesn't has the support and help of Toriyama anymore so he might crumble.

[GhostEmperorX]

There's nothing for you to "let slide" to begin with.

Point is, mentioning his recently announced departure in the exact same sentence as a hot topic issue... not the best of times to do it.
Like, sometime afterwards is ok. And it's not like no one would be willing to listen to what you have to say. Just not now (and that goes for any other argument of the sort).

Forgot to mention though, as you hadn't made a thread on the issue, you should probably do so if this is a hill you truly want to die on (and then you can link it in your sig or any subsequent posts for people to see).
The realization you said you came to accept is really no reason (or more appropriately, excuse) not to try, otherwise there wouldn't be database projects with accuracy standards above Fandom Wikias and even this site (or who knows what else, like... this very site). Even this site itself is practically geared towards framing things in proper context and providing rebuttals to most all the common pieces of misinformation out there.
It's not like the more rational people (aside just the like-minded) won't see the point you're trying to make, or think about the issue beyond just a surface level matter of convenience (because really, that's a huge chunk of what this is about at the end of the day). And if you provide suitable alternative terms to use, all the better (since the underlying differences won't just go away like that).

It's a lot better than giving the impression that you're talking down to people, or making assumptions about where they may be in one area or the other regarding a franchise.

[BootyCheeksJohnson]

I've been wondering about this too. While Dragon Ball has always had input from others (both good and bad) from editors, publishers, Toei animation, Toyotaro or most recently the Dragon Room, we can all agree that Toriyama was the heart and soul of the franchise. Every last person who has worked on a Dragon Ball project would probably agree with that sentiment. I imagine that it'll be extremely difficult to fully capture the spirit of the series without him. (Filler sagas, the non-canon movie franchise, and GT have already proved how hard his style is to crack.)

[BootyCheeksJohnson]

Just like Disney didn't end when Walt passed away, Dragon Ball will go on without Toriyama.

Big companies/franchises don't stop because their owner/creator passed away. Too much money on the table. As sad as it is life goes on and we have to keep moving forward.

Few franchises have their creator so involved even when they're not involved.

It would be one thing if like when Stan Lee stopped working on Spider-man, X-Men, Iron-man etc and those series evolved long past him well before he died. But short of Evolution the Dragon Ball franchise has never done anything without Toriyama contributing SOMETHING.

If you wanted to get even more specific some people stopped reading/considering those old Marvel comics canon after Steve Ditko (Spider-Man/Doc Strange co-creator) and Jack Kirby (Fantastic Four, the entire OG Avengers Team, and X-Men co-creator) quit working their respective tenures at Marvel.

[Dragon Ball Ireland]

Didn't Toriyama not want the series to go past the End of Z? I hope shueisha or whoever honors his wish.

More or less, yes. When Battle of Gods was being released Toriyama said this when asked about it taking place after Kid Boo's defeat but before Oob:

When I decided, “For this movie, let’s go with the whole cast!” I thought, “What era would be best?” If it’s a few years after the “Majin Boo arc”, then almost all the cast members are at MAX strength…. And also, you know, in the final chapter, where Oob appears, I made [characters like] Bulma and Kuririn pretty old, so honestly, I thought, “Maaaybe it’s a biiit difficult” [to make the time period any later. (laughs)

So it doesn't seem likely he would have wanted to go past the end of the manga. Toriyama did do that drawing of old man Goku for "The Anime and Me" comic from the Dragon Ball Z Anime Special guidebook in 1989 but that was clearly a gag because at that point he wasn't sure when he'd be able to end the manga with Shueshia constantly wanting it to continue.

[SupremeKai25]

You misunderstand. I don't hate Super because it "replaced" GT (which it didn't, it's its own thing)... GT has NOTHING whatsoever to do with my hatred of Super. I have NOTHING against a separate continuity that's incompatible with GT. That's FINE. That kind of thing happens AAAALL THE TIME in these gigantic, decades-long franchises.

I never said Super replaced GT. I said GT is no longer the only sequel to DBZ after Super. I wouldn't be surprised if some people hate Super just because GT is no longer the only sequel to DBZ.

No, I hate Super entirely on its own merits. I hate it because I think it's an INCREDIBLY poorly written series (across its TV anime, movie, AND manga aspects) that severely regressed multiple characters, focused on many of the worst aspects of the original series (hence the many streaks of horrendously long, boring fights with no substance whatsoever such as in the Tournament of Power, the Broli movie, and the Granolah arc, as well as the unending stream of nonsense new rainbow transformations that characters CONSTANTLY pull out of their asses with zero buildup or explanation as the plot demands), and stoops to using several annoying modern battle shōnen tropes like "THE POWER OF FRIENDSHIP!!" and "muh tragic backstory waaaaah". And I'm FAR from the only person who feels that way.

That's fine and all, but it's not what you said here:

What's more, I DO NOT remember seeing the whole "canon" discussion ANYWHERE NEEEEEEAAAAR as insanely fucking much pre-Super. I definitely saw it on RARE occasion even back to the early-mid 2000s due to the differences between the manga and anime and the weirdness of the DB and Z movies, but it just fuckin' SKYROCKETED like crazy a few years into Super's existence, which is just one more thing added to the already huge pile of "Reasons Why I Despise Dragon Ball Super" lol

Reading this, it feels like you hate Super just because people started talking about Canon in the Post-Super era, which is an unfair reason to hate Super. Super and its writers are not responsible for people obsessing with Canon, and Super itself is harmless when it comes to other series (i.e. it doesn't try to invalidate GT's existence in the overall franchise).

With Super, however... the anime was NOT a direct adaptation of the manga, and instead both separately adapted the same story arcs their own ways, which became OOOOH SOOO completely tangled up in nonsense because of the existence of the four movies (God and God/Battle of Gods, Revival of 'F', Broli, and Super Hero), which are all considered to be a part of the stories of the manga and TV anime (and, aside from Broli, have been adapted by them as well) in some confusingass way or another and criss-cross and intersect with them in ways that the creators have never bothered to explain.

If what's Canon or not doesn't matter to you and you hate those debates, why do you simultaneously hate that Super doesn't have a single-running all-encompassing product?

I much prefer that Super was a collaborative effort between Toriyama making the basic plot points and Toei and Toyotaro developing and giving their own unique spins from there.

Why do you NEED a single, all-encompassing medium? Can't you just enjoy and analyse them in isolation? Why does it matter that the Anime is not an adaptation of the Manga? Why does it matter that the Manga does not adapt Broly? Is it just a craving need to tidy up everything?

The inter-relationship of what's Canon and whatnot between the versions of Super is also irrespective of the relation between Super and GT, which the executives use for new content in videogames and side stuff like Heroes. Therefore, if people say that GT is no longer canon after Super, that is a community-generated problem that you can't blame Super for. Super doesn't try to invalidate GT's existence.

As far as Super alone is concerned, you can argue that it should have had a clearly-defined Canon besides Toriyama's notes, but that in itself doesn't make an Anime or Manga arc better or worse. If you hate an Anime arc, does it really become better if it's just an adaptation of the Manga instead of something the Toei created after reading Toriyama's notes? Does the Moro arc improve in quality if Toyotaro adapted the Broly movie?

[Vegetto95]

That's fine and all, but it's not what you said here:

What's more, I DO NOT remember seeing the whole "canon" discussion ANYWHERE NEEEEEEAAAAR as insanely fucking much pre-Super. I definitely saw it on RARE occasion even back to the early-mid 2000s due to the differences between the manga and anime and the weirdness of the DB and Z movies, but it just fuckin' SKYROCKETED like crazy a few years into Super's existence, which is just one more thing added to the already huge pile of "Reasons Why I Despise Dragon Ball Super" lol

That IS what I said there. What part of "one MORE thing added to the ALREADY HUGE PILE" did you not understand? I hated Super for being a terribly written shitshow from the very beginning, WELL before the whole mess of continuity and the resulting obsession with "canon" amongst the fandom became another annoyance. And what's more, I never STOPPED hating it for being terribly written because it never stopped being terribly written. That in and of itself is entirely separate from the pisspoor handling of continuity issue (although, I suppose it's not entirely unrelated, since that DOES technically have to do with poor writing, just not in the same way I described above).

And you keep bringing up that I shouldn't hate the series for stuff the fandom does. Yeah, I absolutely should and can and do. Again, as I've said several times before... the modern obsession with Dragon Ball's "canon" is largely a direct result of Tōei and Shūeisha's horrible handling of Super's continuity(ies). THEY are the main cause of that "canon" obsession, so I really don't understand why you can't understand the notion of hating the CAUSE of a negative effect.

If what's Canon or not doesn't matter to you and you hate those debates, why do you simultaneously hate that Super doesn't have a single-running all-encompassing product?

I much prefer that Super was a collaborative effort between Toriyama making the basic plot points and Toei and Toyotaro developing and giving their own unique spins from there.

Why do you NEED a single, all-encompassing medium? Can't you just enjoy and analyse them in isolation? Why does it matter that the Anime is not an adaptation of the Manga? Why does it matter that the Manga does not adapt Broly? Is it just a craving need to tidy up everything?
As far as Super alone is concerned, you can argue that it should have had a clearly-defined Canon besides Toriyama's notes, but that in itself doesn't make an Anime or Manga arc better or worse. If you hate an Anime arc, does it really become better if it's just an adaptation of the Manga instead of something the Toei created after reading Toriyama's notes? Does the Moro arc improve in quality if Toyotaro adapted the Broly movie?

Again... there's a DIFFERENCE between CANON and CONTINUITY. I've said that several times already. Multiple continuities very well CAN be canon to a franchise, and there are a great many franchises out there where that's the case... Mobile Suit Gundam, Godzilla, Transformers, DC, Marvel, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Digimon, Pokémon, Yu-Gi-Oh!, Eureka Seven, etc., etc., etc. Dragon Ball's many, many continuities may not exist together in-story as a multiverse the way that some of those do (though stupid pseudo-fanfictiony crap like Xenoverse and Heroes try SOOOO hard to have that be the case), but considering NOTHING in the entirety of the Dragon Ball franchise has EVER actually been stated to be "non-canon"... as far as we know, everything in the entire Dragon Ball franchise IS in fact "canon" as an IRL IP. But regardless of what status multiple continuities have in-story and in real life, those continuities still need to MAKE SENSE on their own.

The fact that the manga and the anime of Super, which started out as entirely separate but parallel products simultaneously adapting the same Toriyama outlines in their own drastically different ways, eventually became criss-crossed together, mangled up in tangled up knots, because of the latter movies (and one could certainly argue, as I do, the two earlier, pre-Super Super films as well) is incredibly messy and confusing. So the Broli movie, which served as a sequel to the TV anime, is said to have also happened in the manga continuity, but by way of completely skipping over it and just referencing it in a single page, whereas the Super Hero movie, which was a direct sequel to it, instead gets its own full manga adaptation replete with differences? Why? What's the fucking point? That just creates an unnecessary mess of continuity.

And again... that problem really existed almost from the very beginning... the manga just skipped right past the Revival of 'F' arc, and, like Broli, just referenced it happening in a single panel. Soooo... what do I fill in there? The movie? But the movie was a direct sequel to the God and God/Battle of Gods movie, which WAS separately adapted by the manga with LOADS of differences. The arc in the anime? That not only is irreconcilable with the manga, but itself ALSO directly follows the anime's own rendition of God and God arc. That leaves only Toyotarō's manga preview adaptation of the film, but that only covered the first two-thirds of its plot! (And I use the word "plot" VERY loosely for that PoS movie, as it barely HAD one lmao)

The crux of my problem is this: the original manga was a COMPLETE STORY. And as a direct adaptation of it, the DB and Z anime, and GT by extension, together formed a COMPLETE STORY. You could read/watch one without the other and miss nothing. And the exact OPPOSITE is true with Super. And if it was just one minor time and it was easy to reconcile its position and figure out what goes where, that'd be one thing. But Super for the last nearly ten fucking years has been a nigh-constant dance of the TV anime, movies, and manga all dropping in and out and in and out of being in continuity with each other in some random way, then not at all, then in continuity again, then not again, ad infinitum. And it just sucks to not really have a truly COMPLETE story, and rather a mishmash of a dozen random things that simultaneously do and do not fit together. Super's continuity at this point is basically the fucking DEFINITION of trying to fit a bunch of square pegs into a bunch of round holes, and I just don't like all the little smashed up wood chips lying around in the aftermath when it ABSOLUTELY could have been handled SOOOO much more neatly by the powers that be.

And hey... if that doesn't bother you the way it does me... awesome! That's great! More power to you. But it does me. You don't share my opinion? Cool. I honestly have NO problem with that. I am genuinely, sincerely not trying to ruin your enjoyment or change your views. I'm just describing what personally bothers ME (well, one of the MANY things at least) about the godawful way Tōei and Shūeisha have been handling this IP since 2015. That's all.

[sangofe]

Didn't Toriyama not want the series to go past the End of Z? I hope shueisha or whoever honors his wish.

More or less, yes. When Battle of Gods was being released Toriyama said this when asked about it taking place after Kid Boo's defeat but before Oob:

When I decided, “For this movie, let’s go with the whole cast!” I thought, “What era would be best?” If it’s a few years after the “Majin Boo arc”, then almost all the cast members are at MAX strength…. And also, you know, in the final chapter, where Oob appears, I made [characters like] Bulma and Kuririn pretty old, so honestly, I thought, “Maaaybe it’s a biiit difficult” [to make the time period any later. (laughs)

So it doesn't seem likely he would have wanted to go past the end of the manga. Toriyama did do that drawing of old man Goku for "The Anime and Me" comic from the Dragon Ball Z Anime Special guidebook in 1989 but that was clearly a gag because at that point he wasn't sure when he'd be able to end the manga with Shueshia constantly wanting it to continue.

Yeah okay but didn't Toyotarou put in little hints that the story might go beyond end of Z at some point?

[TonyTheTiger]

One thing to keep in mind is that Akira Toriyama was not a dictator even when he was actively working on the original manga. He seemed more than willing to pivot based on feedback from his editors and collaborators. He'd come up with designs based on ideas from other people. The tone changed during the original run as the series evolved. Dragon Ball can outlive Toriyama because he set it up to be able to.

[The Monkey King]

A dark thought that I had was about all of those fans complaining about not getting DBS season 2...

Well with Toriyama passing away an animated adaptation of the manga exclusive arcs are pretty much an inevitability and may happen sooner rather than later. Hell maybe they'll even make movies out of them. Toei probably want to adapt everything with Toriyama's finger prints on it ASAP.

So I guess they got what they wanted in the end, what a monkey's paw.

[sangofe]

A dark thought that I had was about all of those fans complaining about not getting DBS season 2...

Well with Toriyama passing away an animated adaptation of the manga exclusive arcs are pretty much an inevitability and may happen sooner rather than later. Hell maybe they'll even make movies out of them. Toei probably want to adapt everything with Toriyama's finger prints on it ASAP.

So I guess they got what they wanted in the end, what a monkey's paw.

I think Capsule Corp and Sasuke Toriyama will decide what Toei can do or not.

[Innagadadavida]

Whoever is the one who makes the choice whether a new series comes out has the burden of finding a balance between keeping the Dragon Ball franchise relevant in an ever-changing entertainment market vs profit-seeking corporations that will drive something into the ground if left unchecked. The easiest choice is neither and to just shut it all down. I could easily see that if I were in that position, the third choice would be tempting, especially if it feels like there is an attempt to profit off of the death of an artist. That's a grim thought.

[JulieYBM]

I definitely think that the production committee members are going to push for more Dragon Ball to be created, but I am doubtful that a central franchise figure will be chosen to replace Toriyama. I think that there will be some synergy on the part of the marketing a new animated series post-Daima, but I don't really foresee hiring a central creative mind, unless the production committee members are legally beholden to Toriyama's estate.

I think that there's room to create exciting new types of art, but I don't know when or where we'll see those works for the time being. Nevertheless, I'm looking forward to seeing how long this television broadcast of Daima lasts, and how it will change form post-March 2024.

[Kunzait_83]

keeping the Dragon Ball franchise relevant in an ever-changing entertainment market

See to me, this is basically just a different way of wording "profit-seeking corporations that will drive something into the ground if left unchecked". To me, these are both the same exact thing, just worded differently.

What defines "relevance"? Why is "relevance" (whatever that means in this case) something that a property as old and as time-tested as DB needs to have? According to whose standards? To what purpose and to what end?

This to me is just a "nicer" way for a corporate giant like Toei phrasing "we want to keep the money train going as long and as indefinitely as possible".

If "relevance" means "people/the general public still like and gravitate towards it", then DB has managed to retain that many, many times over: all the more when you consider that it produced absolutely no new content whatsoever for over 15 years (between GT and Battle of Gods: neither Kai nor the various FUNimation dubs count as "new content", they're just repackagings of the same old content) and the series managed to stay plenty fresh and relevant all that time regardless.

True classics don't need any added "help" to stay "relevant": they stand all on their own in people's minds. Either something holds up in the public eye, or it doesn't. And DB obviously achieved that with minimal outside help, and if anything, despite a lot of corporate bullshit holding it back: lesser series would've been easily DOA many, many times over from things like 15 year long dead spots and a mainstream English language adaptation as bereft of quality control or respect to the source material as Dragon Ball's was.

Beyond that though, a sentence like "keeping the Dragon Ball franchise relevant in an ever-changing entertainment market" also reminds me of the whole Orange Brick debacle from back in the day. Dragon Ball can't forever be "new hotness": NOTHING ever can be.

Nothing stays new, young, and fresh forever. Things (like people) get old. There's nothing the least bit wrong with that, and something/someone can either age gracefully, or embarrass itself trying to fight a losing battle against time.

I think if just left alone, Dragon Ball - at least its original run - has it plenty within itself to age very gracefully: indeed, it HAS aged pretty gracefully (overall anyways, a few cringy jokes notwithstanding), all things considered. Most of the various attempts at forcing it to stay "new" perpetually... not so much those.

[Koitsukai]

I don't think I want to see more Goku stories, not anymore. I'm willing to let Goku go, this goes for the entire main cast.
I hope there are some stories about them ready to be told (like Daima), written somewhere that will come to life soon enough, but I'd prefer Goku's journey, which was already over in 95, and should definitely be over once DBS ends, to be left alone. At least, that's how I feel right now.
I'm too afraid of Goku, down the line, being turned into something that he is not, we know Toei thinks of him as a Superman-esque being.

We have plenty of Goku as it is, and without Akira, I'd rather have the franchise tackle side stories within the Dragon World, like something about the U6 saiyagirls, Hit, other universes, Pride Troopers stuff, or with the next gen like Bra, Pan, Uub, Marron.

[Innagadadavida]

keeping the Dragon Ball franchise relevant in an ever-changing entertainment market

See to me, this is basically just a different way of wording "profit-seeking corporations that will drive something into the ground if left unchecked". To me, these are both the same exact thing, just worded differently.

What defines "relevance"? Why is "relevance" (whatever that means in this case) something that a property as old and as time-tested as DB needs to have? According to whose standards? To what purpose and to what end?

I think there are two conversations to be had about relevance and that is cultural relevance and market relevance.

Dragon Ball is, was, and will be for decades, culturally relevant. Worldwide. There's no need to produce new material to maintain that relevance. It's in the entertainment history books and wont change.

I was speaking strictly from the point of view of a rights holder, so the perspective I was sharing was hypothetical. I'm disconnected from the interested parties that face decisions about how to profit from intellectual property rights. And to be clear, I'm not using profit as a bad word. We live in a capitalist world, for better or for worse, and this is how we engage with artists and creatives in a market-driven environment. Everyone here understands Dragon Ball as a piece of entertainment and art, but also as a corporate franchise with all the brands and middlemen that entails. I only interface with the market relevance of Dragon Ball as a consumer, but I'd like that to continue.

I like going to the movie theater and seeing a new Dragon Ball movie. I like going to the store and seeing Dragon Ball toys on the shelves that I can get excited about with my young one. I like hearing about new transformations and wondering what's next. I like seeing new video game announcements and anticipating release dates. This stuff makes me happy and there is double the joy when you have someone to share it with. Isn't that what Dragon Ball was at its best? Clearly there is demand for it, and Toriyama himself wasn't shy about capitalizing of that. I'm personally, very glad that he did.

Is Dragon Ball as good as it used to be? No, not at all. Does it need to be as good as it used to be? Not for me.

To put it plainly, I have too much to worry about to be concerned at all about artistic integrity of comics and cartoons. I want to enjoy entertainment and not be cynical about it or the world around it. I'm willing to have an open mind about what comes next. So far, that's served me well.

This to me is just a "nicer" way for a corporate giant like Toei phrasing "we want to keep the money train going as long and as indefinitely as possible".

Does Dragon Ball need new media? No, it doesn't. But Intellectual Property Rights holders do actually have incentives to exercise their rights over their property, and why wouldn't they? Because the Golden Days are decades past? I don't think that's the way most people operate.

If "relevance" means "people/the general public still like and gravitate towards it", then DB has managed to retain that many, many times over: all the more when you consider that it produced absolutely no new content whatsoever for over 15 years (between GT and Battle of Gods: neither Kai nor the various FUNimation dubs count as "new content", they're just repackagings of the same old content) and the series managed to stay plenty fresh and relevant all that time regardless.

True classics don't need any added "help" to stay "relevant": they stand all on their own in people's minds. Either something holds up in the public eye, or it doesn't. And DB obviously achieved that with minimal outside help, and if anything, despite a lot of corporate bullshit holding it back: lesser series would've been easily DOA many, many times over from things like 15 year long dead spots and a mainstream English language adaptation as bereft of quality control or respect to the source material as Dragon Ball's was.

Beyond that though, a sentence like "keeping the Dragon Ball franchise relevant in an ever-changing entertainment market" also reminds me of the whole Orange Brick debacle from back in the day. Dragon Ball can't forever be "new hotness": NOTHING ever can be.

Nothing stays new, young, and fresh forever. Things (like people) get old. There's nothing the least bit wrong with that, and something/someone can either age gracefully, or embarrass itself trying to fight a losing battle against time.

I think if just left alone, Dragon Ball - at least its original run - has it plenty within itself to age very gracefully: indeed, it HAS aged pretty gracefully (overall anyways, a few cringy jokes notwithstanding), all things considered. Most of the various attempts at forcing it to stay "new" perpetually... not so much those.

That's certainly one way of putting it. And I can see from your perspective why you would rather have the future be free from content that could potentially poison the brand further.

That is, as you know, a matter of opinion. And my opinion is... there is no way to poison the original product.

It stands on its own, and it's not going anywhere. If something comes out that sucks... So what? Plenty of crap products have come out already. As with most things, the good comes with the bad. The idea that all future productions should just stop because they probably won't be up to the standards of longtime fans... That's never really been a mindset that persists for very long in a market-driven entertainment distribution network. I don't see that being a strong influence when it comes to the future of Dragon Ball as an IP.

[gokaiblue]

Dragon Ball without Toriyama will be interesting, to say the least. I do think that there's enough new content in whatever canon we have that there doesn't need to be any grand continuation past what Toriyama already planned out.

I think a good comparison to this would be what had been touted as the last Beatles song, "Now and Then." It's being touted as that due to it being the last track to feature involvement from John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr. Yet, the man behind the technology that made the infamously noisy tape even doable to complete, Peter Jackson, says that same technology could be used to create "new" Beatles songs from other demos. While that may be true, would it really be a Beatles song? The three post-breakup songs we got are already considered not true Beatles songs by some.

I think that's probably how Dragon Ball discourse is going to be with new material, as even if it's created from Toriyama's notes, Toriyama isn't there to give direct input. Yet, in a way, it would still be more an actual part of Toriyama's legacy than arguably "Free as a Bird," "Real Love," or "Now and Then" are part of The Beatles' legacy, as those songs are based on demos of John's that were meant for him and not the group.

As for me, I would still consider the posthumous work a true part of the legacy of the franchise and Toriyama just as I consider the three post-breakup Beatles tunes actual Beatles songs. Each has input from the people who were central to their style and success, even if they aren't here with us. After all, they're just "on holiday," and we have to finish these tracks for the new album!

Now, as for stuff created in the Dragon Ball universe not based on any notes Toriyama left behind, well, that's different, like completing a George Harrison song and calling it a Beatles song without John or vice verse.

[Skar]

Yeah okay but didn't Toyotarou put in little hints that the story might go beyond end of Z at some point?

I think the only time Toyotaro mentioned EoZ was when he said Super would eventually connect to the original ending. I imagine future volumes won't sell as much since it'll be all Toyotaro and no longer any supervision from Toriyama. That's assuming he wants to try going past EoZ but could be out of respect for Toriyama that he leaves the ending alone.