Welcome!

Welcome to our community forums, full of great people, ideas and excitement. Please register if you would like to take part.

This is extra text with a test link..

Register Now

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The DBS Manga is the TRUE canon

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The DBS Manga is the TRUE canon

    When it comes to DB:Super, there's discussion when it comes to establish what's canon and what's not, and that confusion is completely normal.

    We have the movies, the anime and the manga, and we know that Toriyama has worked closely with both the movies and the manga (and sends the general plot of the story to Toei) so that alone puts the anime at a disadvantage, but why the manga above the movies?


    Well, it's all due to the new movie, DB:Super Broly. The main discrepancy between the movies and the manga was that in the movies the God power was absorbed into the Base state, while in the manga while the God state was still absorbed by Goku it was integrated in the form of a new transformation: in other words, when Goku uses the godly powers he turns into SSJGod.

    Fastforward to DBS:Broly, and we can see how Toriyama retconned the first two movies when it comes to the SSJGod power depiction, only to make it exactly as in the manga, which is in fact the most sensible choice for the series: with the God power already available in the base state and the SSJBlue being a SSJ from someone that has the God powers absorbed, not only Goku and Vegeta would turn too strong even in his base states compared to any other Z-warrior, but there would be no need for the regular SSJ forms.

    Of course there's no doubt that the manga version of the U6, Black and ToP sagas were much, much better than their anime counterpart, but now there's also no doubt which one is the TRUE version of the story and the one that better represents what's on Toriyama's mind.

  • #2
    there is only one TRUE canon. the mind, mouth and pen of Toriyama.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yeah, it's really hard to tell what's canon and what's not. Because we know Toriyama gives notes to both Toei and Toyotarou, with key points, and they gets to fill in everything in between the way they see fit, which makes establishing what's canon and what's not a real pain.

      This is why I think going with the Multiverse theory would be very interesting, this way most of the entire franchise can in fact be canon but while being different timelines. For example, take the multiverse theory(which we know goes on infinitely), and have two columns A and B, in B God's of destruction, Angels, and Omni Kings do not exists with the highest form of Deity being the Grand Supreme Kaioshin. On that side of the multiverse, everything we see in DB, DBZ, GT including Movies and Specials happened as they were without the existence of Beerus, so he's not shoehorned into everything and it leaves all the events of DB and DBZ intact without having to alter any of it, and allows the writers to go back to those timelines if they ever wanted to.

      In column A God's of Destruction, Angels, and the Omni Kings do exist and all the events I just referenced in column B happens in A too, but with the established lore that's now been completely set up from Super. This way every single thing from Z doesn't have to get a retcon(because you can only use that word so many times before it comes off as an excuse, instead of justifying those changes), and this allows Super to to changes End of Z to be however they want, but still keeping the End of Z we all know completely intact and untouched.


      It is a little complicated, but worded just right and it's not that bad and it allows Super to be it's own thing without having to retcon anything from the DB and DBZ we know.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by highwaysaiyan View Post
        there is only one TRUE canon. the mind, mouth and pen of Toriyama.
        In that, I agree, but when it comes to what better represents what's on the mind of Toriyama between the anime and the manga, it's clearly the manga the one doing the best job (even if it's because Toyotarou sends his drafts to Toriyama and he revises and corrects them).

        Originally posted by highwaysaiyan
        Because we know Toriyama gives notes to both Toei and Toyotarou, with key points, and they gets to fill in everything in between the way they see fit, which makes establishing what's canon and what's not a real pain.
        Well, Toriyama also revises Toyotarou's drafts so besides the obvious difference in writting quality it can also be affirmed that the way those gaps are filled also have Toriyama's hand in the manga (but not in the anime).

        Originally posted by highwaysaiyan
        It is a little complicated, but worded just right and it's not that bad and it allows Super to be it's own thing without having to retcon anything from the DB and DBZ we know.
        In the original manga there were also big retconnings (Piccolo no longer a demon, just a Namek, Goku now is a Saiyan with zenkays -though he never had one when he was a kid despite Krilin "remembering" he did-) so no multiverse theories needed if the Super manga contradicts a few things of the ending of DBZ.

        Regards!

        Comment


        • #5
          I'm not ignoring that Z had it's fair share of retcons, but they way they're done and what's being retconned, takes Super's logic in such a different direction that at this point it kind of does need to be in a different timeline at this point. As much as Z did retcon from Ball, at least it was still consistent enough that you could get away with them. That's the problem with shoehorning characters like Beerus in everything, you end up having to change too much. This is why I now ask two questions when it comes to Super and those retcons.

          With all the changes in Super, how many times would you have to use the word retcon to justify those changes?

          Now with all of those changes, how many times can the word retcon be used, before it comes off as an excuse instead of justification for said question?

          Because if I point out a list of changes(let's say just ten changes), and on every single thing I point out I get retcon as an answer, now you're entering into excuses, because you should never have to use the retcon that many times to justify a writer being inconsistent.

          Comment

          Working...
          X