For those checking this out after November 16th 2024, I have retconned this video and corrected the mistakes in its follow up video: Every Retcon in Modern Dragon Ball
You don't fully understand what a retcon is. Almost all of these are just clumsily tacked on lore, a retcon is when they say (not imply) that the lore is one thing and then later say (again, say, not imply) another thing that contradicts the first, usually pretending the first thing wasn't ever said. For example, yes the dragon radar being able to detect precise locations is a retcon, but no Goku being an alien was not. Not unless it was specifically said that he was not an alien and later changed it.
19:34 But Freeza can, he can't renerate, but he can survive in this conditions, in my point of view this combine with Piccolo and the Zenkai, is what makes this possible. 69 Come, Grampa Gohan vs F*** SSJ3 Goku? hahahahahah, I think would take a wild to him tp get on the level necessary to limit his time ahahah
That can also be chalked up to his social isolation; Grandpa Gohan was a hermit, and he adopted an orphaned child he found in the forest/mountains. Once Gohan died, Goku was left to fend for himself with only the tools he'd been given; he never had reason to seek out other humans because he was never given the frame of reference that other humans existed - his world was nature, Gohan, Goku. He woke up, tended to the needs of daily life, and that was life; he knew how to cook, how to hunt, how to keep warm, how to appreciate the world around him, and how to honor Gohan's memory - that's it.
8:55 #15 is not a retcon. Radio waves ARE electromagnetic waves, they aren't "distinctly different." Radio waves are a subset of EMW, as EMW is a spectrum with frequency/wavelength as the defining factor. Radio waves are only a defined portion of the EMW spectrum. Visible light is also a portion of the EMW spectrum.
A lot of these aren't retcons, just reveals with very little if any foreshadowing. Unless one of characters literally said that Goku is not an alien, him being in an alien is definitionally not a retcon. Most of these are just pieces of lore that were added midway through, which is not, in fact, what a retcon is.
A retcon is retroactively changing something that was understood in the past as canonical, factual, or true. Filling in information that was never given or even relevant in the past is not a retcon.
Depends on what definition you go by. The strictest definition of a retcon, and the one Mark goes by, is the addition of a plot element that wasn’t properly planned beforehand. It’s basically suspension of disbelief.
@@UsernameUsername0000 But that's not the definition Mark is using -- a retcon HAS to change previously described events (per Mark's on-screen definition). The Power Pole is a prime example. It's initially described as a 'mysterious' gift from Goku's grandfather, that's it -- the Pole's origins are literally not given. So when we learn that the pole is the connector between Korin's Tower and Kami's Lookout, it's a REVEAL because we were not told/shown what the Pole's origin was prior.
@@afteri75 I didn’t pay attention to what’s on screen, but the examples he shows were consistent with the definition I also listed up, and use. If the definitions in the video contradict, then yeah that’s confusing. I’m not done with the video still, so I don’t want to rewind
And btw retcon doesn’t have to change previous events - that makes no sense since the events have already happened. Are you sure he didn’t say the **perception** of previous events, in hindsight? Because that’s what a retcon is - a re-contextualization that wasn’t planned by the writer and was birthed to satisfy a plot need or for shock value.
Most of these things are not retcons lol. Like Piccolo being able to clone himself? Mark acts like it was stated at some point he couldn't do that. By that logic literally anything is a retcon, like Gohan is a retcon because it was never stated if Goku was fertile or not 😂
Yeah I feel like Mark made it more complicated for himself by following the literal definition of a retcon. He should have used the traditional usage which is a continuity error. That video would have been more entertaining.
Lol, true. This was a reveal. Ironically, he should have known this because he highlighted the difference between a reveal and a retcon in this very video.
Radio waves are a part of the electromagnetic spectrum, Mark. She's not wrong. Also the term radar specifically means it is used to detect radio waves. That's what a radar is, it's in the name.
@eyeofthebeholder_ Yeah but saying the balls emit electromagnetic waves was incorrect. Radars emit EM waves to detect Radio waves, so saying you're using EM Waves to detect something that emits EM Waves is wrong no?
Several of these aren’t necessarily retcons - they just come off as introducing new information about characters or aspects of the world (which retcons also do, but every instance of that occurring isn’t a retcon). For example, why is King Piccolo being able to recreate himself a retcon? Is every power he has somehow a retcon? Is everything a character does a retcon unless it’s an immediately stated aspect of their character when they first appear? Goku & Piccolo being aliens is clearly a retcon. Kami and King Piccolo being linked are retcons. General Tao and Frieza surviving their supposed deaths by Goku are retcons.. I’m just saying a character unveiling a new power or ability isn’t necessarily a retcon.
Yeah, saying Baba having more magical powers than what she was originally stated to have is absolutely NOT a retcon. Of course she'd have more powers than just being able to find things.
That's exactly what retcon means. Retcon is *any* new piece of information that hasn't been explained before and was added later. Anything that wasn't planned by an author and is added *is* a retcon. That's literally a definition.
and the retcons mentioned aren't bad. they either have a logical continuation (cyborg tao and frieza) or further add to the story (Tien finally burying his sins and setting up Trunks). Saiyans and Namekians, while a bit "underwhelming" compared to the slightly supernatural implication of merely a monkey boy and demon, do set up a wider universe than merely the small scale of the OG series and in the long term improves the characters the racial retcons are applied to in hindsight. goku's saiyan qualities wonderfully tie into his potential of power as he surpasses even the humans and monsters native to earth.
I woke up, brushed my teeth, and am on youtube because I am bored. RETCON! I ate breakfast before turning on my PC RETCON! that breakfast involved potatoes RETCON! there was coffee served alongside the breakfast RETCON! The potatoes were hash browns RETCON! The hash browns were served with ketchup RETCON! Salt was also applied to the hash browns. RETCON! The coffee that was served, it was in a cup. RETCON! silverware was used in consuming the hash browns. This is what the video feels like, and almost none of it is retcons.
They feel more like nitpicks than anything else. It would be a retcon if in Dragon Ball it was written that Goku couldn’t grow his tail back after it got cut off, only for Raditz or Vegeta to mention that sayians have always had the ability to grow it back or something along those lines.
Thank you for this comment. My feelings exactly. I came in prepared to have a list of all the Dragon Ball story complaints I've made over the years, but forgotten, displayed in front of me. Instead I'm left wondering how the ALL-SEEING "cronie", as Mark puts it, being able to see the future is a retcon?
@@TravisSheflin It's surprising how many of these "retcons" can be described as "characters say what they know, but what they know isn't the totality of the truth - or they're just lying" Like the "planet vegeta was destroyed by a meteor I mean freeza" very well could be an actual retcon and it changed over time. I dunno I'm not that deep into the story. But because of this video, now I'm biased to believe the explanation never changed, and raditz either didn't know/guessed/was lied to OR he did know, but he wasn't going to add "then we all got bodied by one dude" in the middle of his constant saiyan superiority monologues.
@@571danu I think yall just don't know the difference between a retcon and a continuity error. Like I disagree with some of the things he said but most of them are retcons
@@SIGIDIOTin the broly movie there is a scene with vegeta and raditz (when they were kids off planet) getting a signal that a meteor destroyed planet vegeta, when we JUST saw frieza destroy it last scene. Frieza just lied to his crew to not cause any rebellions
I’m convinced Mark made so many mistakes in this video on purpose so he can remake the video later and we will all joke that the first video was retcon’d
How the fuck is Goku’s tail weakness a retcon when it’s grabbed by Chichi? That’s the very definition of introducing that mechanic. If his tail had been grabbed before that point with no consequences then yes it would be a retcon. Otherwise that’s just info given to the audience. Tf?
To an extent, I can see the tail being a weakness as weirdly inconsistent as Goku is able to swing his body with it in early DB, way more strenuous than a grab even unprepared and the fact that you can just train it to not be a weakness anymore makes its nature as a "weakness" turns Raditz into a lazy fighter by comparison to Goku. Something I'm sure Toriyama wasn't thinking about when he had Raditz fight Goku and Piccolo. Not a retcon obviously but weirdly inconsistent at times. Another one are the scouter readings and how the scouters blow up as the numbers rise up far too large and fast. I gotta ask, how exactly does Freeza know his power level is 530,000 when the scouters usually blow up at the 20,000 mark? Hell, Freeza's own scouter (one of the newer models then) blew up when he first fought Vegeta in his first form, which was at power level 530,000. Was Vegeta actually equal to Freeza at that stage and the scouter couldn't handle two people at similar levels in the same area or did it break because Vegeta's power flared up insanely fast? The scouters are just used to make fights more crazy and create fan speculation of who would win but the scouters are kinda weird in their function and exact breaking point. Not a retcon but weird.
Literally chapter 1 Goku is fishing with his tail. Just some basic logic should tell you that Toriyama obviously didn't think of the tail as being a weakness at this point, otherwise having a fish bite and pull on his tail with all it's force would weaken him the same way Chichi grabbing it normally would. Maybe you're thinking "well a fish isn't strong enough to weaken Goku by biting and pulling his tail". Guess what? That argument falls apart by chapter 2 as we have an example of Bulma pulling his tail in the bath and it causing him pain. You CAN NOT tell me that Bulma in OG dragonball is stronger than the giant monster fish that Goku was catching. Not to mention that the way Goku is hurt by having his tail pulled by Bulma isn't even consistent with the Chichi example, since in the Chichi example it literally saps him of his strength, whereas when Bulma does it, it just slightly hurts him. It 100% is a retcon.
I watched it and most of it didnt feel like retcons to me, a lot of it wasnt exactly changing information we had prior, it was mostly acting as some sort of expansion of previously established info
@@blacklisted756 I feel like so many people are misinterpreting what retcon actually means. Retroactive continuity, or retcon, is not necessarily to change information we had prior, but rather change the *interpretation* we would have. Goku being weak from his tail is a retcon, because we did not have the interpretation that his tail was a weakness when his tail was initially established and we had seen him in fights up to this point. This leads into another retcon where Gohan specifically abuses the fact that Goku has a weak tail in order to beat him, implying that he knew he had a weak tail the *entire* time before his untimely death (and ultimately decided not to train Goku to improve)
@@SHSLRuby then whats the difference between a retcon and a reveal by interpreting the definition that way? Many of the points set up in the video are just simply reveals, like the power poles origins. Or when he said ‘’there is no way someone like Bulma would know that the dragon balls scatter after use’’. Just because every little detail of something wasn’t revealed from the beginning, when it wasnt relevant, doesnt make it a retcon. Especially when you as a viewer could very much make the connection that if Bulma knows about the dragon balls in the first place and made a radar to track them down, then she probably knows a bit of they work too from wherever she learned about them. Mark makes a destinction between the Ape form being a ‘’reveal’’ and not a retcon, while also pointing out a big majority of the other reveals in the show to be a retcon. Which some of them are obviously retcons, but many are just simply a reveal or continuation of the story with added plot. I think a lot of people who argue that the definition is being used correctly in this video forget the part about ‘’ *impose* a different interpretation of previously *described* events.’’. A lot of things in dragon ball werent described on purpose in order to explore them later, like the Ape form, like the power pole, like how the dragon balls work or how they came to be. Which also reminds me, kami changing how the dragon balls work on screen is not a retcon. When it was revealed how the dragon balls were created, it is reasonable to think that the creator can change its limitations without ‘’imposing a different interpretation’’. It was also never described how the dragon balls came to be, so its not imposing a different interpretation on a previously described event when its revealed that Kami made them.
@@BumpkinsPatch "then whats the difference between a retcon and a reveal by interpreting the definition that way?" how long did it take you to figure out squares are also rectangles? edit: wrote that backwards the first time lmao
Hi, Chemist here. I just wanted to let you know that Radio waves are a type of wave on the electromagnetic spectrum, so Bulma's statement isn't incorrect.
Personally, just to dumb it down more since too many people think electromagnetic is something specific and special.. It's light. It's all light, just higher and lower frequency. Just like infrared and ultraviolent.
I don't think Mark understands what a retcon is. Most of these are new added information that doesn't change or affects previous information. But I do agree that Dragon Ball has a lot of retcons.
If I want continuity within the Dragon Ball manga, I have to interpret things in a way that I never would've before by imposing new ideas into old descriptions of events. That's retroactive continuity and the term "retcon" as the internet has come to use is very lightly more nuanced than a good old contradiction and imho couldn't make for an interesting video by itself unless it was a linguistics video about the definition itself trying to pin down what the limits of what counts as a retcon is and not a list of retcons based on it.
He's using the term correctly most people mean continuity error when they say retcon but the two aren't the same. He is just getting a lot of them objectively wrong though. Like I just re-read chapter 134 of Dragon Ball and Master Roshi foreshadows Piccolo creating demons from within himself a long time before we see him spit out an egg. So that definitely wasn't a retcon
@@noremac7216 retroactive continuity is what retcon comes from, and "changing established history" has always been what it meant. I literally think he has no idea what it is, and maybe thinks it's some kind of term for nitpicking when you PERCEIVE something to not be as it was previously displayed to be.
@@noremac7216 I recommend you google what Retcon means. It is quite literally just a shortened way to say retroactive continuity. It even has a dictionary definition nowadays.
@@GeorgeHale1984 yeah retroactive continuity isn't the same thing as a continuity error. He used a really good example at the beginning. Goku's great ape transformation was foreshadowed so whenever it showed up it was just a reveal, but you are high on all of the coke if you actually think Goku was always intended to be an alien. Goku was not an alien through the entirety of Dragon Ball that was an aspect of him that was changed. It doesn't contradict with any of the previously established Canon so it's not a continuity error but it is by definition a retcon. So what he was attempting to do he was doing it the right way, he was just wrong a lot
@@noremac7216 Its none of the above. Surely it was not intended for him to be an alien, but he wasn't said to be specifically human either. Nothing was changed per se because nothing was said. Again, nearly none of these are retcons and retcon means retroactive continuity, which was the core of what I was saying to begin with.
A retcon HAS to change a pre-established bit of information. Goku's heritage is never discussed in OGDB. There is never a scene that explicitly SHOWS us his origin (it's just assumed he's human), so Goku being a Saiyan is a not a retcon, it's just new information that does not challenge any pre-established lore. A good example of a retcon is Green Lantern Rebirth -- the pre-established narrative of Hal Jordan's fall from hero to super-villain is RETCONNED to have an entirely new context. Revealing that Goku is an alien is a not a retcon.
I argue it is a retcon because it retroactively changed the author's intent (was Goku originally intended to be Saiyan? But it's not a bad retcon, and it is also a reveal. It is not a bad retcon, because unlike what Mark says, NOTHING about the original narrative is suddenly made inconsistent by this information. It is a reveal, because we are receiving intentionally placed, new information.
@@chillin5703 The reason it's not a retcon is precisely BECAUSE it changes nothing about the original narrative -- the definition Mark uses explicitly states that a retcon MUST change previously-described (or shown) events. A majority of these are not retcons in the slightest. EDIT: must change our understanding of previous events. Goku being a Saiyan doesn't change what he did in OGDB, but the Giant Ape being inherent to all Saiyans IS INDEED a retcon. Just wanted to make that note.
No. You're objectively wrong. By definition, a retcon is a "new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events". Just because Goku's heritage is never spoken about, doesn't make this less of a retcon. Aliens were never a part of Dragon Ball, meaning that by any reasonable interpretation, neither of the character were one either. Akira DID NOT need to actively state "THESE ARE NOT ALIENS" every 3 chapters for us to interpret that they were from earth. This is an objectively bad take
9:08 I would like to correct you. Radio waves are electromagnetic waves. Electromagnetic waves is just a broad term that describes a range of waves, radio waves being one of them.
I disagree with counting each little thing in beginning Z as a separate retcon. Goku's original mission being to kill all humans and Goku being an alien Saiyan is the same change, that's what Saiyan's are. I'd argue raditz being his brother and Goku's birth name being kakarot are the same thing. It's all 1 thing.
Really most of the Saiyan saga stuff is reveal as much as it is retcon. None of that information contradicts the original DB story, and all of it is presented as new information. It's not like the author forgot the original lore and information given to audiences, he's added to it.
@@chillin5703 This is why I hate stupid people. He literally spent the beginning of the video explaining the definition of a retcon and you still don't get it. That's embarrassing
I dunno about the manga but when Goku faces General Metallion in the Muscle tower, if you pause quickly when the android is analyzing Goku, it says his race is “Alien” Meaning sometime around then, Akira had the idea of Goku being an alien
@@chillin5703If you want to take all of the Dragon Ball manga as one continuous whole, you HAVE to interpret the entirety of Goku's early life having information in view that, when it was being written, was not intended. This information "imposes a different interpretation on previously described events" just as Mark established in the beginning. A very meta case of this in action, and I may be wrong about the details: I recall Krillin or something in the series itself considering the whole "Saiyans get stronger every time they get badly hurt and recover" thing and rethinking through Goku's battle experiences and imposing that view back onto what he knew. The viewer is supposed to do the same despite the fact that no such concept was in evidence back in the day. That is the power and use of the retcon, and Goku being a Saiyan is not only a retcon, but a prime example of one. It completely recontextualizes those earlier experiences by imposing a shiny new lens that was non-existent at the time, unless we suspend continuity.
@@aceclover758 It doesn't say his race is an alien, it just says alien, which I think is more reasonably assumed to mean that he is somewhat out of place or even just that he's an outsider, not that he's an actual space alien and that Metalitron has a birth planet detector
The balls scattering is something that's said like, in chapter 2, no? When Bulma thinks to herself "it does't matter because they're gonna scatter, whoops" about playing him and him never getting his 4 star ball back?
As soon as he called that a retcon i paused the video and was about to make this comment. BUt I started reading others and realised that everything I wanted to say or was going to said has already been said
Yeah, Chapter 1. 2 pages after she stated she didn't know how they got scattered, she thinks to herself that Goku is dumb but will be the perfect bodyguard and that he doesn't need to know that the Dragon Balls scatter after a wish is made. I think Mark might started having fun with an idea for a video and got carried away.
A ton of what you say is a “retcon” is also just a reveal, goku being an alien and his whole race having oozaru forms is not a retcon, at no point was it established that goku was human or that his ability to transform was unique to him, you as a viewer assume these things but in order for it to be a retcon it would have to have been established fact that he was once human or the ability was unique. The announcer taking over the tournaments duties of rule call, not a retcon, during subsequent years the team responsible organising the event promoted those duties onto the announcer, it may be off screen but it’s not a retcon at all it’s just how things work even in the real world.
9:00 to be clear, “electromagnetic” waves refers to everything from microwaves to visible light to X-rays. Radio waves are just a specific range of wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation
14:18 This isn't a retcon, Kami and Mr. Popo actively acknowledge that Raditz should've been sent to limbo instead of the Otherworld and discuss how Piccolo is becoming more good thus not making him a demon like King Piccolo.
@@zaja2418he later even mentions how piccolo and kami got reconned to not be demons..so idk 💁♂️ Feels like he is just listing stuff that has been just added to the story. Vegeta being a Prinz, yes retcon Cell being grown in a secret lab? Nah
@@alexgaudette988 It's not a retcon because demons, purely evil beings, being able to send souls to limbo wasn't changed or interpreted differently its just that a new development occurred and Piccolo who is no longer purely evil doesn't have that demonic trait. Namekians actually being demons doesn't change anything since there are 2 types of demons, actual demons from the Demon Realm and Demon clansmen who are just so evil they can affect the soul like King Piccolo or the demon that killed Jiren's master.
@@darktigersharkmax4432 Yeah, Raditz passing onto the afterlife was a clear sign that Piccolo was not as evil as King Piccolo. You know, a progression of the story, so I don't know why Mark thinks this is a retcon. A true retcon would be saying all those killed by King Piccolo were actually fine, and that Korin was lying. I feel people are using the word retcon much too freely.
65. it's the opposite. In the series, they say he was created by Bibbidi. In a Toriyama interview years later, he says Boo has existed since time immemorial.
@@Mari_Izu I was talking about Mark. He said the bit about Buu being a being from time immemorial was the original version that Toriyama retconned to being created by Bibidi, when the opposite it's actually the case.
Because the planet itself is new information that was never mentioned before. And Vegeta never said he was royal until he did, he just called himself an elite warrior, which if akira knew he wanted to make him a prince, with his attitude and pride, that would've been the first thing he'd brag about. That's 100% a retcon
@@Eternaldarkness3166he literally never called himself prince of saiyans before that chapter, it’s pretty obviously a pseudo retcon attributing the name of the planet to his lineage while at the same time revealing he’s the prince.
@@Eternaldarkness3166my friend you are talking about the anime which while official dragon ball material, is not the canon everyine else is talking about around this video, we'retalking about the manga in the manga vegeta only calls himself a saiyan warrior, and it's implied that he is some kind of nobleman. It's not until the dodoria fight where he first calls himself the prince of all saiyans in the manga. Oh and on top of that, the bardock special is 100% not canon as good as it is
well, yes, because the dude completely misunderstood the definition. I half expected him to say that Goku wearing weighted clothing and then saying that he was, while taking it off is a retcon
@@DorkN313 No, he understands the definition of retcon. It literally means "retroactive continuity". It does not mean "contradiction" like many people incorrectly believe.
@@theking8347 Then all reveals, flashbacks, and prequels are retcons. A happened then B happened. I am not retconning if I say actually A then C then B happened. I retcon if I say B then A happened.
You're really forgetting the whole _"that imposes a different interpretation_ part of the definition of retcon. A reveal of new information is not imposing a different interpretation of past events.
i'd argue that's not even a good phrase to have in the definition of "retcon" because it applies just as well to normal story reveals that recontextualize earlier parts of the narrative. it needs to explicitly contradict something that was previously true. i do of course understand that the definition is taken as a whole and that i'm just nitpicking, lol
@@deterlanglytone Except as slippernickels said, "imposing a different interpretation of past events" is not necessarily changing how something in the past happened. If 2 characters both view a past situation in different ways you can get different interpretations of that past event and that doesn't break the logic of the narrative. It's more about changing some objective fact to serve a completely different purpose or function.
@@pacmonster066 I wasn't even responding to them. But no, they're wrong. Basically changing it so it only applies when it literally changes something about the past rather than how it's interpretation of those events happen and what they mean. Nothing about Goku being a alien changes the objective facts of Dragon Ball when it was made but it recontexualizes what some of those events mean.
@@deterlanglytone I wasn't saying you were responding to that person, I was saying what slipperynickels said counters the thing you were saying, which you haven't produced an argument for. Again, having some past event being reinterpreted based on new information is a story tool that doesn't necessarily mean a retcon has happened. *Any* story with an unreliable narrator has this happen constantly. Any court drama with multiple witnesses recounting a past crime will have this happen. Any crime scene investigation show will have this happen as they find out new facts about a crime they're investigating. What is implied when people talk about retcons is breaking established fact in such a way that a contradiction is created. Goku being an alien doesn't create a contradiction in any established fact of dragonball. The senzu beans going from filling you up for 10 days to healing all injuries and restoring all stamina/energy reserves *is* a contradiction as there have been times in Z when Goku will take a senzu bean and then not much later eat a lot of food, breaking the idea that the senzu bean negates the need to eat for like 10 days. Meaning its ability to heal *overwrote* the hunger ability completely.
A lot of these aren't retcons. If anything, many of them are lore expansions, elaborations, reveals, or just misunderstandings. Goku being an Alien named Kakarot isn't a retcon story wise. Nothing in the story is retroactively changed. Goku is still the same person. Cell being able to regenerate from a single cell is a retcon, but cells extensive regenerative ability isn't. Piccolo can't survive being torn to pieces, but Freeza can. Freeza survived being bisected, hit with a huge energy blast and the explosion of planet and floated in space. That's why cell can regenerate from such grievous wounds. The limitations of the Dragon Balls aren't retcons as much as they are further elaborations of the Dragon's power. The initial retcon of the origins of the balls is technically one giant retcon. The moment the Dragon is established as not being able to grant any wish, further limitations on the dragons power is just further elaborations on that retcon.
Everything with the gods are retcons though. Toriyama had a huge problem with having the most important person in the story at the time to descend from the sky and state something as an absolute fact only for a slightly bigger person to come after them and do the same, ad infinitum.
@@TehShef I totally agree with both ur points, if anything akira was trying to be the most careful with Goku's growth right? so.. homie kept pulling those rabbits outta the hat again and again xD
@@ZeroDividedByZeroThe dragon balls were a mystical thing that wasn't really common to see at the start of the story tho. It has sense that the characters don't know about the full extent of their capabilities.
"I've never met another human before" could very easily just be a "besides myself and grandpa" unspoken. A "its never been anyone but us here," not a "my grandpa wasn't human"
Toriyama didn’t have grand plans for dragon ball at the time so I think at first grandpa Gohan was gonna be a saiyan or something but he moved on with that with how popular the manga got hence him feeling the need to apologize for it.
@@hardliketissues7463he said “when you put it that way” meaning yeah if you think about it like that then yes it’s a mistake but Normal viewers think like OP
@@hardliketissues7463 Definitely not a saiyan but, yeah potentially something non-human. But, I think it is still possible that Toriyama could have just meant that he had never seen a human other than himself and his grandpa. I doubt that even Toriyama remembered. Lol.
It's funny because with that definition, almost anything that happens can be considered a retcon. Didn't know that was the actual definition before this
Anyone with a pattern recognition ability can tell what the writer's original intention and what ended up happening later on. If they're different, it's a retcon. Plain and simple. Like Frieza arc being the last arc of DBZ originally.
I feel like most of these arent what is typically considered a retcon. Revealing goku is an alien isnt a retcon, if they specifically confirmed hes human then it would be
That's the textbook definition of a retcon, undebatably. To disprove it you'd have to prove the author planned the reveal from chapter 1, which Toriyama admitted he didn't. A better example would be the reveal of Frieza destroying planet Vegeta instead of a meteorite, since it might have been simply something Toriyama wanted to keep a mystery and planned for the whole time since Raditz said it (unlikely imo)
What is clear is despite walking and sentient animals aka furrys that integrated into human society as clear as if they were human, Goku having a monkey tail was seen as odd.
The way people colloquially use "retcon", it's just a type of contradiction where the nuance is often about an inconsistently defined gap in type. The technical version of the term is usually, as shown in the video, about imposing a new interpretation into old facts through new information. It's not about contradictions. For the sake of continuity, you are invited by Toriyama to presuppose that Goku was getting stronger every time he got beat up and recovered despite the fact that that was never in consideration back in the day and there was no direct evidence of it in the series. One must do it to preserve continuity between the era where that was an established Saiyan fact and the era where Saiyans were seemingly not a thing and the era where they were a thing but that wasn't a known fact. That's the interesting thing about retcons as a tool. They're kinda fascinating and their colloquial use as "spicy contradictions" does not do the concept any service.
My headcanon for Cell's regenerative ability is that it's actually a synergy between Piccolo's healing factor and Freeza's insane durability. After all, Namekians can regenerate non-lethal damage, and Freeza has survived being cut in half, having half of his face exploded and being diced by a sword. It's insane that Toriyama didn't think of that explanation.
It's pretty clear that's the intent. Namekians can regenerate from anything that isn't fatal, Frieza and Cold can survive anything short of outright disintegration, the Saiyans get stronger from serious wounds. Therefore, unless Cell is disintegrated, he can regenerate and will become stronger in the process.
@@Iamyourpadisah Yeah, but from what I remember of the Saiyan saga, Piccolo also gets weaker every time he regenerates. So why does Cell specifically gain the Saiyan trait of Zenkai boost, but not Piccolo's weakening upon regneration trait?
@@amoh2513 The out of universe answer is that if cell got too weak after regenerating then there would be no tension when he came back because Gohan would've had an even easier time dealing with him. As for in-universe we can only speculate that because Cell had not shown signs of significantly weakening the other times he regenerated that either he doesn't have that weakness for whatever reason, or the boosts he gets after regeneration far compensate the ki he'd lose from the regeneration process. With Piccolo's example from the buu saga, where we see Piccolo not look very tired despite regenerating quite a lot of stuff, seems likely that if he's powerful enough offset the costs of a regeneration, he can do it without that big of a hit to his stamina.
Great video Mark but Bulma knowing that the Dragon Balls will scatter is in chapter 1 she just withheld the information from Goku so that he wouldn't worry about his DB, it's on Page 30 in the vizbigs or 24 in the singles if you want to check👍 Edit: I found another one, Raditz showing up at Enma's desk after being killed by Piccolo is addressed by Kami and is described as a sign of his lessened evil with his character growth, Mr Popo even says he is "no longer the Great Demon King of old", DBZ Vizbig 1 page 186 or DBZ single vol 2 page 40
Okay so like half of these are pretty ignorant. The Dragon Balls having a creator is not a retcon, everything has a creator, that's like saying Goku having parents at one point is a retcon, everyone has parents at one point in their life
I'm so confused? How is this not a retcon? Having Kami be the creator of the Dragon Ball changes our interpretation of the Dragon Balls (from we don't know the creator to the creator is Kami) and thus classifies as a retcon. Retcons do not necessarily have to contradict anything, any new info that changes are interpretation of things is a retcon.
The explanation for retcon vs reveal makes no sense, because a reveal can be a retcon, and many good reveals ARE retcons. For example, nothing in DB states that Goku is a regular person, therefore the saiyan reveal is entirely possible according to the original contents of the story. In Z, because we get confirmation that Goku is not regular person, it now makes perfect sense that other people like Goku can do the things we once thought only he could do. The reveal IS a "retcon", because Toriyama probably did not create Goku with the thought that Goku was a saiyan. Thus, the addition of this element serves to retroactively _re_ contextualize DB. But the retcon is entirely consistent with the previous story, it only serves to recontextualize it. We can watch Dragon Ball, with the information that Goku is a Saiyan, and nothing about the original story suddenly becomes inconsistent. Therefore, as the exact same story could have been told even if Toriyama always intended Goku to be saiyan, the retcon is not narratively inconsistent. We simply get more information that further contextualizes the story. _Bad_ retcons occur when the author unintentionally changes elements of the story's narrative to be internally _inconsistent_ , especially when because they simply did not consider or remember that original story.
14:16 didn’t kami specifically note in that chapter that BECAUSE Raditz soul was sent to the afterlife, it was likely that piccolo was no longer classified as a demon? Which you know, was the whole point of his character arc in the saga?
4:40 Actually this isn't a retcon because in the same chapter Bulma says as such after telling Goku she'll only borrow his Dragon Ball for a bit, "Mufufufufu... That went perfectly! After the wish is made, the Dragon Balls all scatter off in different directions, so it doesn't matter! This kid will be the perfect bodyguard!"
@@theking8347 but the origin of the dragon balls was never explained. Kami being introduced as the creator doesn't contradict or change established lore, it only adds to it.
@@theking8347 technically you're correct. but that's generally not how people use the term. The modern usage of a word is more important than the dictionary definition. I think that summarizes peoples overall problems with this video.
Although you're technically correct; retroactive continuity *can* just elaborate, adjust, or add information; the main definition everyone have of retcon is specifically retroactive continuity that contradicts the past. Retcons that are "well made" can be seen as fine by the audience because continuity is elaborated not broken. And people don't really care about those, hence why retcon only kept its "pejorative" definition, in people everyday's life. This is called semantic narrowing, apparently. Even though you bothered explaining what a retcon is, the "bias" is so strong people swiftly ignored the explanation. Cause they definitely know what a retcon is. The hate mostly comes from these retcons not being the one they expected. This strange dissonance between what you provided and what people expected you to provide I find fascinating.
Quick correction at 9:00 about radio waves, technically it isn't a retcon since radio waves are apart of the electromagnetic spectrum so technically radio waves are a type of electromagnetic wave.
"I’m convinced Mark made so many mistakes in this video on purpose so he can remake the video later and we will all joke that the first video was retcon’d" I second this
A LOT of retcons on this list do not contradict any older information, but just add new info, therefore a lot of this list is not even real retcons wtf
That's the more common yet wrong definition. Retcon (in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events.
@@AllMight6 The reason nobody talks about the actual definition is because nobody cares. Its completely unremarkable to make a video on "things that were revealed in dragon ball" or "characters who were wrong about something but gained new information later!" like, thats just a story lmao
@@AllMight6 even by that definition , nothing is imposed upon previous events/ info , they can coexist without issue. That aside, the video opens up with a definition of retcon that it implies to follow when deciding what is a retcon, but it disregards it completely in favor of making the list longer so the video can be longer.
Raditz and Goku making it to Enmas desk isnt a retcon, its a plot point for Piccolos character that Kami himself points out to Popo to suggest that Piccolos heart is softening up and therefore isnt considered a demon anymore
Yeah they said in super that potara fusion is only permanent for kais or something like that, godly beings maybe? But I mean if they just said buu's stomach fixed it from the beginning the distinction wouldn't be necessary
The thing is that, after learning new info from Gowasu, Shin outirght said that Goku and Vegeta didn't unfuse because of Buu, but because of the time limit. Doesn't make sense for Shin to discard Buu, when he definitely knows that Buu unfuses people according to Daima.
They don’t directly retcon each other. Mortal and Godly beings have different restrictions. Shin and Kibito might fuse again too, so them wishing to be defused later won’t be a complete plothole. Fuse Defuse via Buu Fuse again Defuse via Shenron Goku and Vegeta were Vegito for about as long as they were when facing Zamasu. Regardless of the accuracy of it or not, They either defused because of time or because of those “buu” gasses.
Radio waves _are_ a subset of electromagnetic radiation, so while that is a retcon it's only really increasing the specificity. Radio waves can be blocked by a faraday cage. Presumably that's what Pilaf's box is. Biological matter can also act as a faraday cage - water interferes with a lot of electromagnetic radiation (this is why long term nuclear waste is stored at the bottom of a pool) including many radio waves. Submarines have to do a lot to receive radio instructions.
Hi Mark if ever you are even reading this, I want to thank you for helping me and entertaining me when I was making my manga and my drawings. You helped me a lot with my own “Dragon Ball Style”😊😊😊
@@Netsuki That's ridiculous, that's not the definition. Adding new information is a retcon? That would make anything in a story as it goes on a retcon. Which would make the term meaningless.
I always assumed that Cell can regenerate his whole body because he got regeneration from Piccolo and survivability from Frieza. Meaning that Piccolo would die before his regeneration start, while Frieza can survive beings sliced into pieces, and if you combine that...
I think you're misunderstanding the Oxford dictionary definition of a retcon. It doesn't reshape our understanding of a continuity as you concluded, it *imposes* a different *interpretation* of that continuity. Those are 2 massively different things. Reshaping the understanding of a continuity can happen by just showing a different angle of something that used to happen to give it context, and doing that to bring new light to a narrative is a powerful and essential tool to many stories. But retconning a story is erasing what has happened before and *imposing* something else instead of it, which by and large you should never want to do to a story. That sayians able to become great apes is not a retcon in my view, it's just a reveal and an expansion of the original established narrative. You'd have to change something about the original story to have it be a retcon. Maybe for Toriyama and his understanding it was a retcon, but in terms of the story proper it is perfectly fine within continuity.
Pretty much agree. Nothing about the original story states that Goku is not an alien. Thus, nothing in the original story is contradicted by the original story.
The Nyoibo being a connection between the tower and the look out is also a Journey to the West reference as Son Wukong's Nyoibo was originally just a large pillar used to support an underwater palace that he unceremoniously made into a weapon by shrinking it with magic
I enjoyed the video, Mark. But... I feel like your definition of retcon is lacking. If a character hasn't been explicitly stated to not be able to do something, them revealing they can do it isn't a retcon, it's just a reveal... Case in point, King Piccolo cloning himself via mouth-egg isn't a retcon. Like, at all. It could be considered jumping the shark (I disagree but I get it) but it surely isn't a retcon. It was never stated he couldn't do it.
We do see (at least in the anime) that he births his children with the mouth-egg thing. Him doing it to create Piccolo Jr never bothered me? I just wondered how he did it with a massive Goku-shaped hole in his chest
Even diama already has a retcon. In Z shenron couldn't just teleport goku home from yardrat cause he was too strong he needed gokus permission. But in Daima shenron was able to turn goku into a kid against his will
Yeah that's been annoying me this whole time. Even if you want to say shenron could teleport goku but was just being nice since he knows him, then by that logic he should've asked him if he wanted to be a kid too
I took it as an effect of whatever the Elder Namekian did to prematurely activate the balls, allowing him to dictate any wish to Shenron even if normally violates his rules.
Physics nerd here, you've upset me deeply. Radio waves ARE electromagnetic waves. I notice the passage from Google you cite starts with "They both are electromagnetic waves" as if it was comparing radio waves to other electromagnetic waves of a different wavelength.
13:05 I almost felt like that was only stated out of their own ignorance of the reality of the situation, and by the end is when Goku figures it out and stops him.
4:41 Retcon #2 is not a retcon. Bulma lied about not knowing because Goku didnt want to lose the dragonball. A few pages after that in Chapter 1 she explains that the balls fly away after the wish. She was just tricking Goku.
Hot take: Goku been a alien is not a retcon, because even if Toryama didn't have Goku's origin in mind at the time, he purposely made it a mystery, been open to be used afterwards
I beleive Goku was referred to as an "alien" early on in Dragonball by one of his foes. It was just a throwaway line, but it worked with what eventually became canon in Z.
@@Jane-qh2yd and what was Goku's origin before? Do you see? Retcon is when you change a prestablished fact, we never knew why Goku has a tail, we just call it a retcon because it's a completely bizarre revelation that introduces aliens in a Chinese fantasy inspired setting
The bodies needing to be preserved in the Saiyan saga wasn't a retcon. They assumed the same thing when Krillin and Roshi were killed in the King Piccollo saga. It had also never been tested at that point, so I don't know if I'd even call it retcon when they found out that wasn't the case.
So many of these I would Not call retcons. Adding new info isn’t inherently a retcon. A retcon changes something in the past. It would be like if they said cell was Actually created by Dabura instead of Gero.
A Retcon doesn't necessarily need to change something in the past it just needs to be new Information that changes how you view things, like Goku and Piccolo being aliens
At that point can't we just call every sort of information we receive at any point a retcon? Not trying to be rude or anything but like even meeting Goku in the first chapter could be reduced to "oh who is this, we don't know, retcon" just seems kinda meh to me @@JackedUpEntertainment
@@JackedUpEntertainment No, Mark just misunderstood the Oxford definition. As taken from the dictionary, a retcon doesn't just reshape our understanding of a continuity, it *imposes* a different *interpretation* of that continuity. Those are 2 massively different things.
@@Yous0147 impose a different interpretation doesn't mean it has to contradict anything, it was never stated that Goku was absolutely human or anything but the Alien Retcon does impose a new interpretation, it changes nothing and just changes how you view something, it's literally just new information that changes how you view something
Most people commenting here have trouble understanding literary devices because their mind is poisoned by the "canon" discussions. A retcon refers to a change from a reader's point of view, not a literal change of previously declared events or a plot hole. Goku was definitively NOT an alien when the first episodes were released, and then in Z we got the new info that he was actually an alien all along. This doesn't contradict anything in the story, but obviously will change the way we perceive the previous content. It IS a retcon, and the same with most of the examples on this video: the tail weakness, the pole, kami-sama, the dragon balls limitations, the senzu beans. Toriyama was not breaking his own world adding these new changes, but they were retroactive continuity changes, "remember this thing? Well, actually it was this other way since the beginning, deal with it".
38 God Himself brings this up, that Piccolo must have gotten less demonic, since Raditz got sent to Hell. 42 This was implied way back when Kuririn and the others died the first time, at least in the Danish translation: "I've got an idea on how we bring the others back! Don't burn the corpses!" "What did he say?" "Something about corpses ...."
23:39 - Before Goten being shown that he can go SSj without any issue, it's shown *specifically* in the manga that Future Trunks was also a Super Saiyan as a child, before Future Gohan's death. You really could spin as it being a retcon with some setup behind it, because we don't know what led to Future Trunks transforming in the manga… but this could also be seen as Toriyama paying off the "Super Saiyan being a mixed Saiyan" concept well after he introduced it.
You also have to factor in that goku was alot stronger from original dragon ball compared to right before the cell games and your physical condition has alot to do with how a baby turns out. You also have to think that goku was literally SSJ while conceiving goten because he was doing the training to make SSJ not use up as much energy with the transformation.
There are so many things you got wrong its like you did it purposefully. Goku never said “i’ve never met a human” he says “i’ve never met a girl” which is what leads him to the next dialogue about treating women properly as was told by his grandfather, Goku for a long time couldn’t tell the difference and he’d have patted Bulma if he didnt know. Filling in the information about where the Nimbus came from is NOT a retcon, it was simply revealed. He did not fly to Kamis place with the Nimbus hell in the saiyan saga he jumps down to Korin tower to access the Nimbus. Anything to lengthen the vid i guess.
I think he’s playing by the other definition of Retcon. A piece of new information that adds a different interpretation of previous events. By that definition, all reveals are technically retcons.
@ Yes but most good stories build upon previous things to either fill in the holes or to make the reader more easily digest the information. For instance he mentioned how Kami could be brought back by the dragon balls but it was retconned that he couldn’t. No, it was a major reveal, Goku doesn’t realise it at first and is ready to kill Piccolo, a chapter or 5 later he tells Tien not to kill Kami. He confronts Kami and tells him to stop lying that their fates are conjoined. Kami couldn’t kill himself, Gods technically cannot do that, that’s why he tries to seal Piccolo, he was the 3rd strongest warrior at the time and could have easily killed himself but begged Tien to do it. To mention a few other instances In Harry Potter, Dumbledores death is a shock but Snape doing it for the reason he did once revealed doesn’t make it a retcon it just fills in the holes. Naruto being hated by the village and once he found out it was because of the 9 Tailed Fox would that also be a retcon since it was a reveal? Senzu beans being able to heal, yes that is a retcon. People dead for longer than a year being brought back is also a retcon. I usually agree with his videos and his takes but this one was just plain wrong.
the manga does say "Chikyu-jin" which is translated as human/earth person 🥹👌 but I also feel like this should not be considered a retcon because he is literally just referring to not seeing another person besides his grandpa
Mark made a lot of mistakes in this video, but he's not completely wrong on this point. Goku does say that he's never seen another human before in the original manga. But it's not a retcon, since in the same chapter he says that he lived with his Grandpa. It was just a mistake by Toriyama
I agree he messed a lot of stuff in this video up but "Goku never said “i’ve never met a human” he says “i’ve never met a girl” Are you just going to ignore the panel where Mark showed where he said he never met a human along with the interview of Toriyama admitting he had Goku misspeak?
2 corrections: radio waves are a specific range of frequencies in the electromagnetic wave spectrum. bulma just specified which type of electromagnetic wave the dragon balls emit. 2. assassin tao being the "younger brother" in chinese martial arts the honorary si-dai "little brother" refers to a younger student or a student of lower rank of your master. so they studied together, the sennin just was the higher ranked student amongst the two of them
13:32 retcon of retcon 35: goku wasn't sent to conquer earth, but to escape from planet vegeta's demise, what raditz told goku about his mission was just raditz assumption given the fact that was an habit of the saiyans
in db minus Gine apparently tells Raditz (via message?) that Kakkarot is being off planet. He assumes its to conquer a planet. Gine and Bardock both can't say the truth because Goku could have been caught and/or killed.
in the eng dub (at least) Goku says he is 12 and everyone gets confused. But he explains that by learning to count he found out that 12 came before 14. Also, to be fair, we don't know how old Goku was when GG died since Goku says that he "died a long time ago." I personally assume Goku was young enough (like 6 or 7 at most?) because he knows only very basic things. If it had only been a year or so, Goku would be more aware of things at the start of the story. It could be considered a retcon but it's also in line with Goku's character. A kid who lived alone for years and didn't get anything past a start at basic education before GG died.
14:50 thus one actually inflates the retcon count a little, since this was established much earlier, when the characters preserved the bodies of those who died to King Piccolo and his minions. Why does this inflate the count? Because Mark counted Piccolo's statement, that Goku couldn't be revived since he was reduced to ashes as a retcon, despite being already established. Essentially counting the same thing twice.
I personally think some of the inconsistencies behind super sayain kinda is a neat way to think of the legend itself from our unreliable narrator in vegeta. No matter who gets the form or how they do so it’s something awakened out of you. We can talk about back tingles, pure hearts, and S cells all day but clearly there’s something else to it.
So let me get this straight, a Ret-Con is new information (a reveal) that changes how we look at previous events, but Goku's great ape transformation reveal (see: new information) that changes how we looks at the death of grandpa Gohan, isn't a Ret-Con, but the new information that Goku's tail is his weakness, which hadn't come up before, is somehow a Ret-Con?
Because Goku transforming into a great ape is foreshadowed beforehand. We were told that Grandpa Gohan was killed by a giant monster on the night of the full moon and Goku isn't allowed to look at the full moon. So when Goku turns into a giant monster, all of the puzzle pieces fall into place. His tail being a weakness is a retcon because we saw Goku use his tail for a lot of stuff before that point and its never hinted to be a weakness. He uses it as bait to catch fish in the first chapter and Bulma even grabs it in chapter 2 and Goku doesn't react at all.
neither of these are retcons, neither is a contradiction or edit of previous information, mark just used the dictionary definition instead of the what the word is actually used to refer to and people who don't talk about fiction much are getting confused
Half of these are not retcons. It's new info that adds and explains why things are the way they are. Like Gokus love for fighting being attributed to him being a saiyan is a new info and not a retcon, it would have been a retcon if it was previously stated that his love for fighting was attributed to something else, like for example if it was said that Goku loves fighting because Grandpa Gohan raised him to love marital arts and challenges. No such explanation ever existed, no change or alteration of previous interpretation was done, so it's not a retcon.
You are misunderstanding what a retcon is. Retcons do not necessarily mean "contradictions", they mean they change the INTERPRETATION of facts. We knew Goku loved fighting and martial arts, and we were told later on that the reason for that is because of his saiyan heritage. That changes the interpretation of earlier scenes (now ultimately his love for fighting in og DB scenes can be attributed to his saiyan heritage kicking in), and is thus... a retcon.
@@SHSLRuby Retcon is not a contradiction, it's a change but Gokus example is not a change to anything as there was never any change, no interpretation of it ever existed, we were just shown that he likes fighting, duh. Next time try to make sense before you speak up.
@My_Master_Waves you are wrong again, it does not necessarily mean to "change" it means it's RETROACTIVE CONTINUITY, any new information that gives context to older things is a retcon, again it's in the name
We know that he liked fighting, but we later learned that his love for fighting could be attributed to his saiyan heritage, and thus is a retcon, it doesn't change, but it gives new context to older scenes, you should seriously do your research on the official definition of the word
Retroactive - taking effect from the past Continuity - consistency of the story Retroactive continuity - new information of story that affects the past Goku loved to fight = continuity Goku is a saiyan = retroactive Saiyans love to fight = continuity Goku loves to fight due to being a saiyan = retroactive continuity
I don't agree with a lot of those moments being retcons. Adding new information is not a retcon. A retcon is when this new information is in contradiction with pre-established lore or events. For instance, learning that the magic staff was originally made to link between Karin and Kami is not a retcon, because we didn't know what its origin was up to that point. It's adding new lore, not changing old lore. Or by your definition, it won't give a new interpretation of previously described events, because there was no events previously described.
Some of these are not retcons, but world building and plot and thematic progression. For example, Freeza destroying Planet Vegeta. All the remaining saiyans believed their planet was destroyed by a meteor, hence so did the viewer.
Some of these aren't retcons, it's just added lore. For example, Vegeta never said he wasn't the prince of all Saiyans so Dodoria mentioning that doesn't contradict anything.
@@zaja2418 I mean... it's still technically correct. His father is King Vegeta, who as the king named the planet after himself, and then gave his son the name Vegeta also. If his father wasn't also named Vegeta then it would seem weird.
This is one that I actually give Mark. Especially given what we know about Vegeta's character, it's actually weird that he didn't brag about being the Prince in the Saiyan ark. Especially when trying to explain to Goku why he, Vegeta, is superior. It's an easy illustration of the difference between their social standing. So the fact Vegeta DIDN'T say anything is proof of the retcon.
@@OozyGorilla What's funny is that some dubs (like the Latin American one) actually hint at Vegeta being a prince before the actual Japanese version. In the Latin American dub, Vegeta says: 'My royal blood has been spilled' just before he goes mad and tries to blow Earth with his Galick Gun. It's almost like the Japanese Anime not having Trunks call the Androids by number, thus avoiding the retcon.
17:48 my headcannon is that Goku was so strong at the time that his willpower was leagues over the Namekian Dragon and it physically could not will him to Earth.
![[MV] A leap of faith...ความเชื่อใจครั้งสุดท้าย (From "Petrichor the series")](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U1piZH2CNXA/mqdefault.jpg)
For those checking this out after November 16th 2024, I have retconned this video and corrected the mistakes in its follow up video: Every Retcon in Modern Dragon Ball
reveal ≠ retcon
Oh wow you planned that so well to fot the video's theme, hahahah.
You don't fully understand what a retcon is. Almost all of these are just clumsily tacked on lore, a retcon is when they say (not imply) that the lore is one thing and then later say (again, say, not imply) another thing that contradicts the first, usually pretending the first thing wasn't ever said.
For example, yes the dragon radar being able to detect precise locations is a retcon, but no Goku being an alien was not. Not unless it was specifically said that he was not an alien and later changed it.
Nope , you didnt retcon anything and you didnt plan this , you made mistakes and corrected them 😂😂😂
19:34 But Freeza can, he can't renerate, but he can survive in this conditions, in my point of view this combine with Piccolo and the Zenkai, is what makes this possible. 69 Come, Grampa Gohan vs F*** SSJ3 Goku? hahahahahah, I think would take a wild to him tp get on the level necessary to limit his time ahahah
I've always assumed when Goku said "I've never seen another human before" it implied "other my grandpa"
i agree. why would we assume gohan is anything but human.
That can also be chalked up to his social isolation; Grandpa Gohan was a hermit, and he adopted an orphaned child he found in the forest/mountains.
Once Gohan died, Goku was left to fend for himself with only the tools he'd been given; he never had reason to seek out other humans because he was never given the frame of reference that other humans existed - his world was nature, Gohan, Goku. He woke up, tended to the needs of daily life, and that was life; he knew how to cook, how to hunt, how to keep warm, how to appreciate the world around him, and how to honor Gohan's memory - that's it.
For once then the dub did it better because he says and I quote “besides my grandpa you’re the only human I’ve ever seen”
I thought he specifically said that unless I'm misremembering something
Also I thought he meant when he was living with his grandpa Gohan he was always talking about the 4 star Dragon Ball which he calls Grandpa.
Guys I'm starting to get the feeling this guy might be mark.
Totally not!
But his name is totally Not Mark. Why would someone lie on the Internet?
If Totally not Mark would indeed prove to be Mark, than that would be a serious retcon. I don't believe it!
Nuh uh!
@@Tuning3434he already retcon it in his Z review
8:55 #15 is not a retcon.
Radio waves ARE electromagnetic waves, they aren't "distinctly different."
Radio waves are a subset of EMW, as EMW is a spectrum with frequency/wavelength as the defining factor.
Radio waves are only a defined portion of the EMW spectrum.
Visible light is also a portion of the EMW spectrum.
Correct
@@DETahaX I like these legitimate Corrections a lot better than the people screaming because they don't know what a retcon is
@@noremac7216
..??... thank... you?..
scrolled to comments to find this xD
A lot of these aren't retcons, just reveals with very little if any foreshadowing. Unless one of characters literally said that Goku is not an alien, him being in an alien is definitionally not a retcon. Most of these are just pieces of lore that were added midway through, which is not, in fact, what a retcon is.
I'm going to wait for the follow-up video where Mark retcons some of the claims in this one
Hell yeah
You're a prophet, sir.
A retcon is retroactively changing something that was understood in the past as canonical, factual, or true. Filling in information that was never given or even relevant in the past is not a retcon.
exactly!
Depends on what definition you go by. The strictest definition of a retcon, and the one Mark goes by, is the addition of a plot element that wasn’t properly planned beforehand. It’s basically suspension of disbelief.
@@UsernameUsername0000 But that's not the definition Mark is using -- a retcon HAS to change previously described events (per Mark's on-screen definition). The Power Pole is a prime example. It's initially described as a 'mysterious' gift from Goku's grandfather, that's it -- the Pole's origins are literally not given. So when we learn that the pole is the connector between Korin's Tower and Kami's Lookout, it's a REVEAL because we were not told/shown what the Pole's origin was prior.
@@afteri75 I didn’t pay attention to what’s on screen, but the examples he shows were consistent with the definition I also listed up, and use. If the definitions in the video contradict, then yeah that’s confusing. I’m not done with the video still, so I don’t want to rewind
And btw retcon doesn’t have to change previous events - that makes no sense since the events have already happened. Are you sure he didn’t say the **perception** of previous events, in hindsight? Because that’s what a retcon is - a re-contextualization that wasn’t planned by the writer and was birthed to satisfy a plot need or for shock value.
Most of these things are not retcons lol.
Like Piccolo being able to clone himself? Mark acts like it was stated at some point he couldn't do that. By that logic literally anything is a retcon, like Gohan is a retcon because it was never stated if Goku was fertile or not 😂
Goten is a retcon bc it was never stated if goku had a vasectomy after gohan or not
@@WackassBirrB 😂😂😂that’s hilarious
Yeah I feel like Mark made it more complicated for himself by following the literal definition of a retcon. He should have used the traditional usage which is a continuity error. That video would have been more entertaining.
Lol, true. This was a reveal. Ironically, he should have known this because he highlighted the difference between a reveal and a retcon in this very video.
Radio waves are a part of the electromagnetic spectrum, Mark. She's not wrong.
Also the term radar specifically means it is used to detect radio waves. That's what a radar is, it's in the name.
Can confirm this is true
Beat me to it !
a part of me didnt want to say it but somebody said it so here's my like
Should've watched the Electromagnetic Waves song
@eyeofthebeholder_ Yeah but saying the balls emit electromagnetic waves was incorrect. Radars emit EM waves to detect Radio waves, so saying you're using EM Waves to detect something that emits EM Waves is wrong no?
Several of these aren’t necessarily retcons - they just come off as introducing new information about characters or aspects of the world (which retcons also do, but every instance of that occurring isn’t a retcon).
For example, why is King Piccolo being able to recreate himself a retcon? Is every power he has somehow a retcon? Is everything a character does a retcon unless it’s an immediately stated aspect of their character when they first appear?
Goku & Piccolo being aliens is clearly a retcon. Kami and King Piccolo being linked are retcons. General Tao and Frieza surviving their supposed deaths by Goku are retcons.. I’m just saying a character unveiling a new power or ability isn’t necessarily a retcon.
Yeah, saying Baba having more magical powers than what she was originally stated to have is absolutely NOT a retcon. Of course she'd have more powers than just being able to find things.
Nah retcon
Goku being an alien is not
That's exactly what retcon means. Retcon is *any* new piece of information that hasn't been explained before and was added later. Anything that wasn't planned by an author and is added *is* a retcon. That's literally a definition.
and the retcons mentioned aren't bad. they either have a logical continuation (cyborg tao and frieza) or further add to the story (Tien finally burying his sins and setting up Trunks). Saiyans and Namekians, while a bit "underwhelming" compared to the slightly supernatural implication of merely a monkey boy and demon, do set up a wider universe than merely the small scale of the OG series and in the long term improves the characters the racial retcons are applied to in hindsight. goku's saiyan qualities wonderfully tie into his potential of power as he surpasses even the humans and monsters native to earth.
I woke up, brushed my teeth, and am on youtube because I am bored.
RETCON! I ate breakfast before turning on my PC
RETCON! that breakfast involved potatoes
RETCON! there was coffee served alongside the breakfast
RETCON! The potatoes were hash browns
RETCON! The hash browns were served with ketchup
RETCON! Salt was also applied to the hash browns.
RETCON! The coffee that was served, it was in a cup.
RETCON! silverware was used in consuming the hash browns.
This is what the video feels like, and almost none of it is retcons.
Tbh I almost believe he used AI to make the video and just read the script.
I went into this video knowing there are many retcons in Dragonball. I left this video realizing there arent as many retcons as mark thinks there are.
They feel more like nitpicks than anything else. It would be a retcon if in Dragon Ball it was written that Goku couldn’t grow his tail back after it got cut off, only for Raditz or Vegeta to mention that sayians have always had the ability to grow it back or something along those lines.
Thank you for this comment. My feelings exactly. I came in prepared to have a list of all the Dragon Ball story complaints I've made over the years, but forgotten, displayed in front of me. Instead I'm left wondering how the ALL-SEEING "cronie", as Mark puts it, being able to see the future is a retcon?
@@TravisSheflin It's surprising how many of these "retcons" can be described as "characters say what they know, but what they know isn't the totality of the truth - or they're just lying"
Like the "planet vegeta was destroyed by a meteor I mean freeza" very well could be an actual retcon and it changed over time. I dunno I'm not that deep into the story. But because of this video, now I'm biased to believe the explanation never changed, and raditz either didn't know/guessed/was lied to OR he did know, but he wasn't going to add "then we all got bodied by one dude" in the middle of his constant saiyan superiority monologues.
@@571danu I think yall just don't know the difference between a retcon and a continuity error. Like I disagree with some of the things he said but most of them are retcons
@@SIGIDIOTin the broly movie there is a scene with vegeta and raditz (when they were kids off planet) getting a signal that a meteor destroyed planet vegeta, when we JUST saw frieza destroy it last scene. Frieza just lied to his crew to not cause any rebellions
I’m convinced Mark made so many mistakes in this video on purpose so he can remake the video later and we will all joke that the first video was retcon’d
I low-key hope this turns out to be the case 😆
Same i was shaking my head at half of these
BLUE COMMENT!,!
?
Dude, mistakes are just mistakes 👀
You need to retcon this whole video mark lmao
The whole video!!!
Cool Alita battle angel profile pic
How the fuck is Goku’s tail weakness a retcon when it’s grabbed by Chichi? That’s the very definition of introducing that mechanic. If his tail had been grabbed before that point with no consequences then yes it would be a retcon. Otherwise that’s just info given to the audience. Tf?
Literally. Or Piccolo cloning himself, he acts like it was established that he couldn't do that.
To an extent, I can see the tail being a weakness as weirdly inconsistent as Goku is able to swing his body with it in early DB, way more strenuous than a grab even unprepared and the fact that you can just train it to not be a weakness anymore makes its nature as a "weakness" turns Raditz into a lazy fighter by comparison to Goku. Something I'm sure Toriyama wasn't thinking about when he had Raditz fight Goku and Piccolo.
Not a retcon obviously but weirdly inconsistent at times. Another one are the scouter readings and how the scouters blow up as the numbers rise up far too large and fast. I gotta ask, how exactly does Freeza know his power level is 530,000 when the scouters usually blow up at the 20,000 mark?
Hell, Freeza's own scouter (one of the newer models then) blew up when he first fought Vegeta in his first form, which was at power level 530,000. Was Vegeta actually equal to Freeza at that stage and the scouter couldn't handle two people at similar levels in the same area or did it break because Vegeta's power flared up insanely fast? The scouters are just used to make fights more crazy and create fan speculation of who would win but the scouters are kinda weird in their function and exact breaking point. Not a retcon but weird.
Yeah it seems mark actually doesn’t understand what a retcon is, half of these are just reveals.
Literally chapter 1 Goku is fishing with his tail. Just some basic logic should tell you that Toriyama obviously didn't think of the tail as being a weakness at this point, otherwise having a fish bite and pull on his tail with all it's force would weaken him the same way Chichi grabbing it normally would.
Maybe you're thinking "well a fish isn't strong enough to weaken Goku by biting and pulling his tail". Guess what? That argument falls apart by chapter 2 as we have an example of Bulma pulling his tail in the bath and it causing him pain. You CAN NOT tell me that Bulma in OG dragonball is stronger than the giant monster fish that Goku was catching.
Not to mention that the way Goku is hurt by having his tail pulled by Bulma isn't even consistent with the Chichi example, since in the Chichi example it literally saps him of his strength, whereas when Bulma does it, it just slightly hurts him.
It 100% is a retcon.
@ alright sure everyone in this comment section will give that to you. doesnt explain the 50 other things that aren’t retcons in this video😂
>every retcon in DB
>first thing on the list isnt a retcon
EDIT: half of that stuff isn't retcons
I watched it and most of it didnt feel like retcons to me, a lot of it wasnt exactly changing information we had prior, it was mostly acting as some sort of expansion of previously established info
@@blacklisted756 I feel like so many people are misinterpreting what retcon actually means. Retroactive continuity, or retcon, is not necessarily to change information we had prior, but rather change the *interpretation* we would have. Goku being weak from his tail is a retcon, because we did not have the interpretation that his tail was a weakness when his tail was initially established and we had seen him in fights up to this point. This leads into another retcon where Gohan specifically abuses the fact that Goku has a weak tail in order to beat him, implying that he knew he had a weak tail the *entire* time before his untimely death (and ultimately decided not to train Goku to improve)
@@SHSLRuby then whats the difference between a retcon and a reveal by interpreting the definition that way? Many of the points set up in the video are just simply reveals, like the power poles origins. Or when he said ‘’there is no way someone like Bulma would know that the dragon balls scatter after use’’. Just because every little detail of something wasn’t revealed from the beginning, when it wasnt relevant, doesnt make it a retcon. Especially when you as a viewer could very much make the connection that if Bulma knows about the dragon balls in the first place and made a radar to track them down, then she probably knows a bit of they work too from wherever she learned about them.
Mark makes a destinction between the Ape form being a ‘’reveal’’ and not a retcon, while also pointing out a big majority of the other reveals in the show to be a retcon. Which some of them are obviously retcons, but many are just simply a reveal or continuation of the story with added plot.
I think a lot of people who argue that the definition is being used correctly in this video forget the part about ‘’ *impose* a different interpretation of previously *described* events.’’. A lot of things in dragon ball werent described on purpose in order to explore them later, like the Ape form, like the power pole, like how the dragon balls work or how they came to be. Which also reminds me, kami changing how the dragon balls work on screen is not a retcon. When it was revealed how the dragon balls were created, it is reasonable to think that the creator can change its limitations without ‘’imposing a different interpretation’’. It was also never described how the dragon balls came to be, so its not imposing a different interpretation on a previously described event when its revealed that Kami made them.
@@BumpkinsPatch "then whats the difference between a retcon and a reveal by interpreting the definition that way?" how long did it take you to figure out squares are also rectangles?
edit: wrote that backwards the first time lmao
@@kylegonewild good luck telling any writer that every reveal is a retcon with that anology lmao. Even Mark made a distinction.
Hi, Chemist here.
I just wanted to let you know that Radio waves are a type of wave on the electromagnetic spectrum, so Bulma's statement isn't incorrect.
You could even say that Bulma's statement is correct.
Knew that big brain guys like anime
What does being a chemist have to do with general knowledge regarding physics
Personally, just to dumb it down more since too many people think electromagnetic is something specific and special..
It's light. It's all light, just higher and lower frequency. Just like infrared and ultraviolent.
This is why Google's highlight answer feature is worse than useless.
I don't think Mark understands what a retcon is. Most of these are new added information that doesn't change or affects previous information. But I do agree that Dragon Ball has a lot of retcons.
He's not using the typical understood definition of retcon and is stuck on his dictionary definition.
If I want continuity within the Dragon Ball manga, I have to interpret things in a way that I never would've before by imposing new ideas into old descriptions of events. That's retroactive continuity and the term "retcon" as the internet has come to use is very lightly more nuanced than a good old contradiction and imho couldn't make for an interesting video by itself unless it was a linguistics video about the definition itself trying to pin down what the limits of what counts as a retcon is and not a list of retcons based on it.
Yeah I feel alot of these are reaching
Some are plot holes
Seriously. He's really garbage at "info" videos.
I don't think you know what a retcon is, Mark.
He's using the term correctly most people mean continuity error when they say retcon but the two aren't the same. He is just getting a lot of them objectively wrong though. Like I just re-read chapter 134 of Dragon Ball and Master Roshi foreshadows Piccolo creating demons from within himself a long time before we see him spit out an egg. So that definitely wasn't a retcon
@@noremac7216 retroactive continuity is what retcon comes from, and "changing established history" has always been what it meant. I literally think he has no idea what it is, and maybe thinks it's some kind of term for nitpicking when you PERCEIVE something to not be as it was previously displayed to be.
@@noremac7216 I recommend you google what Retcon means. It is quite literally just a shortened way to say retroactive continuity. It even has a dictionary definition nowadays.
@@GeorgeHale1984 yeah retroactive continuity isn't the same thing as a continuity error. He used a really good example at the beginning. Goku's great ape transformation was foreshadowed so whenever it showed up it was just a reveal, but you are high on all of the coke if you actually think Goku was always intended to be an alien. Goku was not an alien through the entirety of Dragon Ball that was an aspect of him that was changed. It doesn't contradict with any of the previously established Canon so it's not a continuity error but it is by definition a retcon. So what he was attempting to do he was doing it the right way, he was just wrong a lot
@@noremac7216 Its none of the above. Surely it was not intended for him to be an alien, but he wasn't said to be specifically human either. Nothing was changed per se because nothing was said. Again, nearly none of these are retcons and retcon means retroactive continuity, which was the core of what I was saying to begin with.
A retcon HAS to change a pre-established bit of information. Goku's heritage is never discussed in OGDB. There is never a scene that explicitly SHOWS us his origin (it's just assumed he's human), so Goku being a Saiyan is a not a retcon, it's just new information that does not challenge any pre-established lore.
A good example of a retcon is Green Lantern Rebirth -- the pre-established narrative of Hal Jordan's fall from hero to super-villain is RETCONNED to have an entirely new context. Revealing that Goku is an alien is a not a retcon.
100%! I swear this vid is mark testing the real fans of the show or not lol
I argue it is a retcon because it retroactively changed the author's intent (was Goku originally intended to be Saiyan? But it's not a bad retcon, and it is also a reveal. It is not a bad retcon, because unlike what Mark says, NOTHING about the original narrative is suddenly made inconsistent by this information. It is a reveal, because we are receiving intentionally placed, new information.
@@chillin5703 The reason it's not a retcon is precisely BECAUSE it changes nothing about the original narrative -- the definition Mark uses explicitly states that a retcon MUST change previously-described (or shown) events. A majority of these are not retcons in the slightest.
EDIT: must change our understanding of previous events. Goku being a Saiyan doesn't change what he did in OGDB, but the Giant Ape being inherent to all Saiyans IS INDEED a retcon. Just wanted to make that note.
@@afteri75yeah I agree with you, most of these are literally just the story forming/new information but not necessarily retcons.
No. You're objectively wrong. By definition, a retcon is a "new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events". Just because Goku's heritage is never spoken about, doesn't make this less of a retcon. Aliens were never a part of Dragon Ball, meaning that by any reasonable interpretation, neither of the character were one either. Akira DID NOT need to actively state "THESE ARE NOT ALIENS" every 3 chapters for us to interpret that they were from earth. This is an objectively bad take
9:08 I would like to correct you. Radio waves are electromagnetic waves. Electromagnetic waves is just a broad term that describes a range of waves, radio waves being one of them.
Smh, can't believe Mark just blindly trsuted the first google result
Radio waves is something very specific, bro; electromagnetic waves is something kind of specific.
@@baggelissonic Whatever you say, salty. lmao
@@IncognitoActivado salty? In what way?
@IncognitoActivado please look up electromagnetic wave spectrum. Look at the far left of any graph. You should see radio waves.
This video needs a retcon, half of these are not even retcons and I'm not even through the video yet. 😂😂
I disagree with counting each little thing in beginning Z as a separate retcon. Goku's original mission being to kill all humans and Goku being an alien Saiyan is the same change, that's what Saiyan's are. I'd argue raditz being his brother and Goku's birth name being kakarot are the same thing. It's all 1 thing.
Really most of the Saiyan saga stuff is reveal as much as it is retcon. None of that information contradicts the original DB story, and all of it is presented as new information. It's not like the author forgot the original lore and information given to audiences, he's added to it.
@@chillin5703 This is why I hate stupid people. He literally spent the beginning of the video explaining the definition of a retcon and you still don't get it. That's embarrassing
I dunno about the manga but when Goku faces General Metallion in the Muscle tower, if you pause quickly when the android is analyzing Goku, it says his race is “Alien”
Meaning sometime around then, Akira had the idea of Goku being an alien
@@chillin5703If you want to take all of the Dragon Ball manga as one continuous whole, you HAVE to interpret the entirety of Goku's early life having information in view that, when it was being written, was not intended. This information "imposes a different interpretation on previously described events" just as Mark established in the beginning.
A very meta case of this in action, and I may be wrong about the details: I recall Krillin or something in the series itself considering the whole "Saiyans get stronger every time they get badly hurt and recover" thing and rethinking through Goku's battle experiences and imposing that view back onto what he knew. The viewer is supposed to do the same despite the fact that no such concept was in evidence back in the day.
That is the power and use of the retcon, and Goku being a Saiyan is not only a retcon, but a prime example of one. It completely recontextualizes those earlier experiences by imposing a shiny new lens that was non-existent at the time, unless we suspend continuity.
@@aceclover758 It doesn't say his race is an alien, it just says alien, which I think is more reasonably assumed to mean that he is somewhat out of place or even just that he's an outsider, not that he's an actual space alien and that Metalitron has a birth planet detector
The balls scattering is something that's said like, in chapter 2, no? When Bulma thinks to herself "it does't matter because they're gonna scatter, whoops" about playing him and him never getting his 4 star ball back?
As soon as he called that a retcon i paused the video and was about to make this comment. BUt I started reading others and realised that everything I wanted to say or was going to said has already been said
Yeah, Chapter 1.
2 pages after she stated she didn't know how they got scattered, she thinks to herself that Goku is dumb but will be the perfect bodyguard and that he doesn't need to know that the Dragon Balls scatter after a wish is made. I think Mark might started having fun with an idea for a video and got carried away.
@@JustToConnect yeah I just watched it recently, Bulma didn't care at first and wouldn't tell him what would happen after the wish is fulfilled.
A ton of what you say is a “retcon” is also just a reveal, goku being an alien and his whole race having oozaru forms is not a retcon, at no point was it established that goku was human or that his ability to transform was unique to him, you as a viewer assume these things but in order for it to be a retcon it would have to have been established fact that he was once human or the ability was unique. The announcer taking over the tournaments duties of rule call, not a retcon, during subsequent years the team responsible organising the event promoted those duties onto the announcer, it may be off screen but it’s not a retcon at all it’s just how things work even in the real world.
9:00 to be clear, “electromagnetic” waves refers to everything from microwaves to visible light to X-rays. Radio waves are just a specific range of wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation
glad I'm not the only type of this kind of nerd
YES THIS! I was looking for this, I can't fault totally not mark for not knowing.
Shenron giving wishes to consistent user of the dragonball is the funniest retcon
bro just wants to save time at this point,bulma been working him to the bone
Special treatment for homies
It can also be kind of a take that to GT given the Shadow Dragon's origin.
Regulars only, no newbies.
Yeah I'm okay with that one because it's funny.
I think you missed the biggest retcon:
The arc where everyone could just fly now, for some reason.
14:18 This isn't a retcon, Kami and Mr. Popo actively acknowledge that Raditz should've been sent to limbo instead of the Otherworld and discuss how Piccolo is becoming more good thus not making him a demon like King Piccolo.
Yeah, I don't know what he was saying there. It's almost as if he didn't remember the story at all.
@@zaja2418he later even mentions how piccolo and kami got reconned to not be demons..so idk 💁♂️
Feels like he is just listing stuff that has been just added to the story.
Vegeta being a Prinz, yes retcon
Cell being grown in a secret lab? Nah
It can still be a retcon and the conversation is used to acknowledge and justify it.
Especially now that Namekians are demons again with Daima.
@@alexgaudette988 It's not a retcon because demons, purely evil beings, being able to send souls to limbo wasn't changed or interpreted differently its just that a new development occurred and Piccolo who is no longer purely evil doesn't have that demonic trait. Namekians actually being demons doesn't change anything since there are 2 types of demons, actual demons from the Demon Realm and Demon clansmen who are just so evil they can affect the soul like King Piccolo or the demon that killed Jiren's master.
@@darktigersharkmax4432 Yeah, Raditz passing onto the afterlife was a clear sign that Piccolo was not as evil as King Piccolo. You know, a progression of the story, so I don't know why Mark thinks this is a retcon.
A true retcon would be saying all those killed by King Piccolo were actually fine, and that Korin was lying.
I feel people are using the word retcon much too freely.
65. it's the opposite. In the series, they say he was created by Bibbidi. In a Toriyama interview years later, he says Boo has existed since time immemorial.
Thank you, I was wondering why no one else said anything about that
I'm wondering if he remembers the original story at all.
@@zaja2418 Toriyama claimed he reread the entire manga some years ago, because he forgot a ton of stuff
@@Mari_Izu I was talking about Mark. He said the bit about Buu being a being from time immemorial was the original version that Toriyama retconned to being created by Bibidi, when the opposite it's actually the case.
@@zaja2418 Yeah, dude misspoke in one of the many bullet points in one of many videos about this franchise. Has he even watched it??!?!
16:12 How is vegeta being royal family a retcon when his name is literally the name of the planet they’re from
Because the planet itself is new information that was never mentioned before. And Vegeta never said he was royal until he did, he just called himself an elite warrior, which if akira knew he wanted to make him a prince, with his attitude and pride, that would've been the first thing he'd brag about. That's 100% a retcon
@@OogBoogy thats not a retcon though, it doesnt change existing information for new information, it just adds information
@@Eternaldarkness3166he literally never called himself prince of saiyans before that chapter, it’s pretty obviously a pseudo retcon attributing the name of the planet to his lineage while at the same time revealing he’s the prince.
@@YeahSureLetsGoSeeYamchathat not a retcon Moron
@@Eternaldarkness3166my friend you are talking about the anime which while official dragon ball material, is not the canon everyine else is talking about around this video, we'retalking about the manga in the manga vegeta only calls himself a saiyan warrior, and it's implied that he is some kind of nobleman. It's not until the dodoria fight where he first calls himself the prince of all saiyans in the manga. Oh and on top of that, the bardock special is 100% not canon as good as it is
10:10 I would have read it as "Another human" meaning someone other than him and his grandpa lol
Same lol
Same here lol. I was confused when he mentioned this
Most of these feel less like Retcons and more Reveals
Agreed. A a lot of these are reaching
well, yes, because the dude completely misunderstood the definition. I half expected him to say that Goku wearing weighted clothing and then saying that he was, while taking it off is a retcon
@DorkN313 🤣😂🤣
@@DorkN313 No, he understands the definition of retcon. It literally means "retroactive continuity". It does not mean "contradiction" like many people incorrectly believe.
@@theking8347 Then all reveals, flashbacks, and prequels are retcons.
A happened then B happened. I am not retconning if I say actually A then C then B happened. I retcon if I say B then A happened.
Saiyan's being able to grow their tails back then all of a sudden they can never grow back is a retcon
You not knowing what radio and electromagnetic waves are hurt my soul, Mark.
You're really forgetting the whole _"that imposes a different interpretation_ part of the definition of retcon. A reveal of new information is not imposing a different interpretation of past events.
i'd argue that's not even a good phrase to have in the definition of "retcon" because it applies just as well to normal story reveals that recontextualize earlier parts of the narrative. it needs to explicitly contradict something that was previously true.
i do of course understand that the definition is taken as a whole and that i'm just nitpicking, lol
It's exactly imposing a different interpretation of past events.
@@deterlanglytone Except as slippernickels said, "imposing a different interpretation of past events" is not necessarily changing how something in the past happened. If 2 characters both view a past situation in different ways you can get different interpretations of that past event and that doesn't break the logic of the narrative. It's more about changing some objective fact to serve a completely different purpose or function.
@@pacmonster066 I wasn't even responding to them.
But no, they're wrong. Basically changing it so it only applies when it literally changes something about the past rather than how it's interpretation of those events happen and what they mean.
Nothing about Goku being a alien changes the objective facts of Dragon Ball when it was made but it recontexualizes what some of those events mean.
@@deterlanglytone I wasn't saying you were responding to that person, I was saying what slipperynickels said counters the thing you were saying, which you haven't produced an argument for.
Again, having some past event being reinterpreted based on new information is a story tool that doesn't necessarily mean a retcon has happened. *Any* story with an unreliable narrator has this happen constantly. Any court drama with multiple witnesses recounting a past crime will have this happen. Any crime scene investigation show will have this happen as they find out new facts about a crime they're investigating.
What is implied when people talk about retcons is breaking established fact in such a way that a contradiction is created. Goku being an alien doesn't create a contradiction in any established fact of dragonball. The senzu beans going from filling you up for 10 days to healing all injuries and restoring all stamina/energy reserves *is* a contradiction as there have been times in Z when Goku will take a senzu bean and then not much later eat a lot of food, breaking the idea that the senzu bean negates the need to eat for like 10 days. Meaning its ability to heal *overwrote* the hunger ability completely.
I'm not finishing this video.
this channel fell off
Nobody cares
A lot of these aren't retcons. If anything, many of them are lore expansions, elaborations, reveals, or just misunderstandings.
Goku being an Alien named Kakarot isn't a retcon story wise. Nothing in the story is retroactively changed. Goku is still the same person.
Cell being able to regenerate from a single cell is a retcon, but cells extensive regenerative ability isn't. Piccolo can't survive being torn to pieces, but Freeza can. Freeza survived being bisected, hit with a huge energy blast and the explosion of planet and floated in space. That's why cell can regenerate from such grievous wounds.
The limitations of the Dragon Balls aren't retcons as much as they are further elaborations of the Dragon's power. The initial retcon of the origins of the balls is technically one giant retcon. The moment the Dragon is established as not being able to grant any wish, further limitations on the dragons power is just further elaborations on that retcon.
Everything with the gods are retcons though. Toriyama had a huge problem with having the most important person in the story at the time to descend from the sky and state something as an absolute fact only for a slightly bigger person to come after them and do the same, ad infinitum.
@@TehShef I totally agree with both ur points, if anything akira was trying to be the most careful with Goku's growth right? so.. homie kept pulling those rabbits outta the hat again and again xD
Nah retcon
The Dragon Balls having limits contradicts the original intent, which was to be able to grant ANY wish.
@@ZeroDividedByZeroThe dragon balls were a mystical thing that wasn't really common to see at the start of the story tho. It has sense that the characters don't know about the full extent of their capabilities.
"I've never met another human before" could very easily just be a "besides myself and grandpa" unspoken. A "its never been anyone but us here," not a "my grandpa wasn't human"
Toriyama didn’t have grand plans for dragon ball at the time so I think at first grandpa Gohan was gonna be a saiyan or something but he moved on with that with how popular the manga got hence him feeling the need to apologize for it.
@@hardliketissues7463he said “when you put it that way” meaning yeah if you think about it like that then yes it’s a mistake but Normal viewers think like OP
@@hardliketissues7463 Definitely not a saiyan but, yeah potentially something non-human. But, I think it is still possible that Toriyama could have just meant that he had never seen a human other than himself and his grandpa. I doubt that even Toriyama remembered. Lol.
It's funny because with that definition, almost anything that happens can be considered a retcon. Didn't know that was the actual definition before this
Some of these are not recons, just progression of the story
Cute kid
@@RockyRZ ?
Not even some... it's most
Anyone with a pattern recognition ability can tell what the writer's original intention and what ended up happening later on.
If they're different, it's a retcon. Plain and simple. Like Frieza arc being the last arc of DBZ originally.
I feel like most of these arent what is typically considered a retcon. Revealing goku is an alien isnt a retcon, if they specifically confirmed hes human then it would be
Nah retcon
That's the textbook definition of a retcon, undebatably.
To disprove it you'd have to prove the author planned the reveal from chapter 1, which Toriyama admitted he didn't.
A better example would be the reveal of Frieza destroying planet Vegeta instead of a meteorite, since it might have been simply something Toriyama wanted to keep a mystery and planned for the whole time since Raditz said it (unlikely imo)
What is clear is despite walking and sentient animals aka furrys that integrated into human society as clear as if they were human, Goku having a monkey tail was seen as odd.
@@CorelUser I don't think it has to be planned it just has to work within the story to not be a retcon
The way people colloquially use "retcon", it's just a type of contradiction where the nuance is often about an inconsistently defined gap in type.
The technical version of the term is usually, as shown in the video, about imposing a new interpretation into old facts through new information. It's not about contradictions.
For the sake of continuity, you are invited by Toriyama to presuppose that Goku was getting stronger every time he got beat up and recovered despite the fact that that was never in consideration back in the day and there was no direct evidence of it in the series. One must do it to preserve continuity between the era where that was an established Saiyan fact and the era where Saiyans were seemingly not a thing and the era where they were a thing but that wasn't a known fact.
That's the interesting thing about retcons as a tool. They're kinda fascinating and their colloquial use as "spicy contradictions" does not do the concept any service.
My headcanon for Cell's regenerative ability is that it's actually a synergy between Piccolo's healing factor and Freeza's insane durability. After all, Namekians can regenerate non-lethal damage, and Freeza has survived being cut in half, having half of his face exploded and being diced by a sword.
It's insane that Toriyama didn't think of that explanation.
Dawg radio waves ARE electromagnetic waves 😭 that one isn’t a retcon it’s just being more specific
He’s just nitpicking atp
I have always seen cells crazy regeneration as a fusion of piccolo’s regeneration and Frieza’s durability.
I always had seen cells traits taken from others as improved from the original.
@zaja2418 except for that time he shattered into a bunch of pieces while turned to stone lol
It's pretty clear that's the intent. Namekians can regenerate from anything that isn't fatal, Frieza and Cold can survive anything short of outright disintegration, the Saiyans get stronger from serious wounds. Therefore, unless Cell is disintegrated, he can regenerate and will become stronger in the process.
@@Iamyourpadisah Yeah, but from what I remember of the Saiyan saga, Piccolo also gets weaker every time he regenerates. So why does Cell specifically gain the Saiyan trait of Zenkai boost, but not Piccolo's weakening upon regneration trait?
@@amoh2513 The out of universe answer is that if cell got too weak after regenerating then there would be no tension when he came back because Gohan would've had an even easier time dealing with him.
As for in-universe we can only speculate that because Cell had not shown signs of significantly weakening the other times he regenerated that either he doesn't have that weakness for whatever reason, or the boosts he gets after regeneration far compensate the ki he'd lose from the regeneration process.
With Piccolo's example from the buu saga, where we see Piccolo not look very tired despite regenerating quite a lot of stuff, seems likely that if he's powerful enough offset the costs of a regeneration, he can do it without that big of a hit to his stamina.
Replace retcon with revealed and this video makes perfect sense
Great video Mark but Bulma knowing that the Dragon Balls will scatter is in chapter 1 she just withheld the information from Goku so that he wouldn't worry about his DB, it's on Page 30 in the vizbigs or 24 in the singles if you want to check👍
Edit: I found another one, Raditz showing up at Enma's desk after being killed by Piccolo is addressed by Kami and is described as a sign of his lessened evil with his character growth, Mr Popo even says he is "no longer the Great Demon King of old", DBZ Vizbig 1 page 186 or DBZ single vol 2 page 40
came with citations and everything
@@slipperynickels Thank you, I'm just trying my best to help other DB fans stay informed
Okay so like half of these are pretty ignorant. The Dragon Balls having a creator is not a retcon, everything has a creator, that's like saying Goku having parents at one point is a retcon, everyone has parents at one point in their life
Yeah I think Mark doesn't understand what a retcon really is, which is strange since he had to google the definition...
@@Luxord5294 he also googled about radiowaves and was wrong anyways 💀
I'm so confused? How is this not a retcon? Having Kami be the creator of the Dragon Ball changes our interpretation of the Dragon Balls (from we don't know the creator to the creator is Kami) and thus classifies as a retcon. Retcons do not necessarily have to contradict anything, any new info that changes are interpretation of things is a retcon.
@@SHSLRuby "from we don't know the creator to the creator is Kami"
Therefore everyones parents are retcons
Does the moon have a creator?
Need a video with actually EVERY retcon fr including everything
The explanation for retcon vs reveal makes no sense, because a reveal can be a retcon, and many good reveals ARE retcons. For example, nothing in DB states that Goku is a regular person, therefore the saiyan reveal is entirely possible according to the original contents of the story. In Z, because we get confirmation that Goku is not regular person, it now makes perfect sense that other people like Goku can do the things we once thought only he could do. The reveal IS a "retcon", because Toriyama probably did not create Goku with the thought that Goku was a saiyan. Thus, the addition of this element serves to retroactively _re_ contextualize DB. But the retcon is entirely consistent with the previous story, it only serves to recontextualize it. We can watch Dragon Ball, with the information that Goku is a Saiyan, and nothing about the original story suddenly becomes inconsistent. Therefore, as the exact same story could have been told even if Toriyama always intended Goku to be saiyan, the retcon is not narratively inconsistent. We simply get more information that further contextualizes the story. _Bad_ retcons occur when the author unintentionally changes elements of the story's narrative to be internally _inconsistent_ , especially when because they simply did not consider or remember that original story.
Tbf Goku being a sayain isn’t a retcon since his origins were never described it just wasn’t planned and came out of nowhere
Radio waves are a type of electro magnetic wave. Its like calling a rectangle with 4 equal sides a square, you are just being more specific
14:16 didn’t kami specifically note in that chapter that BECAUSE Raditz soul was sent to the afterlife, it was likely that piccolo was no longer classified as a demon? Which you know, was the whole point of his character arc in the saga?
4:40 Actually this isn't a retcon because in the same chapter Bulma says as such after telling Goku she'll only borrow his Dragon Ball for a bit, "Mufufufufu... That went perfectly! After the wish is made, the Dragon Balls all scatter off in different directions, so it doesn't matter! This kid will be the perfect bodyguard!"
Kami being the creator of the dragon balls is a reveal, not a retcon
It's a retcon, Toriyama hadn't thought of Kami yet at the time of the King Piccolo arc.
@@theking8347 but the origin of the dragon balls was never explained. Kami being introduced as the creator doesn't contradict or change established lore, it only adds to it.
@@TruxtonTatsujin That's still a type of a retcon, an additive one. Retcons that don't change or contradict anything are still retcons.
@@theking8347 technically you're correct. but that's generally not how people use the term. The modern usage of a word is more important than the dictionary definition. I think that summarizes peoples overall problems with this video.
@@theking8347no that is not a retcon, its a reveal.
Although you're technically correct; retroactive continuity *can* just elaborate, adjust, or add information;
the main definition everyone have of retcon is specifically retroactive continuity that contradicts the past.
Retcons that are "well made" can be seen as fine by the audience because continuity is elaborated not broken.
And people don't really care about those, hence why retcon only kept its "pejorative" definition, in people everyday's life.
This is called semantic narrowing, apparently.
Even though you bothered explaining what a retcon is, the "bias" is so strong people swiftly ignored the explanation.
Cause they definitely know what a retcon is.
The hate mostly comes from these retcons not being the one they expected.
This strange dissonance between what you provided and what people expected you to provide I find fascinating.
Quick correction at 9:00 about radio waves, technically it isn't a retcon since radio waves are apart of the electromagnetic spectrum so technically radio waves are a type of electromagnetic wave.
Came here to say this. Classic google being misleading!
"I’m convinced Mark made so many mistakes in this video on purpose so he can remake the video later and we will all joke that the first video was retcon’d"
I second this
A LOT of retcons on this list do not contradict any older information, but just add new info, therefore a lot of this list is not even real retcons wtf
That's the more common yet wrong definition.
Retcon
(in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events.
@@AllMight6 The reason nobody talks about the actual definition is because nobody cares. Its completely unremarkable to make a video on "things that were revealed in dragon ball" or "characters who were wrong about something but gained new information later!" like, thats just a story lmao
@@AllMight6 even by that definition , nothing is imposed upon previous events/ info , they can coexist without issue.
That aside, the video opens up with a definition of retcon that it implies to follow when deciding what is a retcon, but it disregards it completely in favor of making the list longer so the video can be longer.
Raditz and Goku making it to Enmas desk isnt a retcon, its a plot point for Piccolos character that Kami himself points out to Popo to suggest that Piccolos heart is softening up and therefore isnt considered a demon anymore
I agree! lmao but I feel im just being picky with this dude mark now xD
Retcon #9 isn’t a retcon, the announcer simply received a promotion
which he rightly deserved
This video's counting feels like a practical joke that forces Mark to make a retcon video
Just wanna say Buu’s gas undoing the fusion doesn’t necessarily retcon Super’s 1 hour limit, both can exist without retconning each other.
Yeah they said in super that potara fusion is only permanent for kais or something like that, godly beings maybe? But I mean if they just said buu's stomach fixed it from the beginning the distinction wouldn't be necessary
The thing is that, after learning new info from Gowasu, Shin outirght said that Goku and Vegeta didn't unfuse because of Buu, but because of the time limit. Doesn't make sense for Shin to discard Buu, when he definitely knows that Buu unfuses people according to Daima.
They don’t directly retcon each other. Mortal and Godly beings have different restrictions. Shin and Kibito might fuse again too, so them wishing to be defused later won’t be a complete plothole.
Fuse
Defuse via Buu
Fuse again
Defuse via Shenron
Goku and Vegeta were Vegito for about as long as they were when facing Zamasu. Regardless of the accuracy of it or not, They either defused because of time or because of those “buu” gasses.
It does retcon the mangas explanation.
@@AnHonestPerspective godly beings specifically since fused zamasu is permanent and goku black is godly but not a kai (or immortal)
Radio waves _are_ a subset of electromagnetic radiation, so while that is a retcon it's only really increasing the specificity.
Radio waves can be blocked by a faraday cage. Presumably that's what Pilaf's box is. Biological matter can also act as a faraday cage - water interferes with a lot of electromagnetic radiation (this is why long term nuclear waste is stored at the bottom of a pool) including many radio waves. Submarines have to do a lot to receive radio instructions.
Hi Mark if ever you are even reading this, I want to thank you for helping me and entertaining me when I was making my manga and my drawings. You helped me a lot with my own “Dragon Ball Style”😊😊😊
I think this video is a retcon and this is actually Mark.
Mark, a reveal is not a retcon. You can't say every piece of new information or explanation is a retcon.
Ffs, definition of a retcon is adding new piece of information. Stop being ignorant and deny facts.
@@Netsuki take your own advice bud. Said new piece of information must impose a different interpretation of past events by definition.
@@Netsuki That's ridiculous, that's not the definition. Adding new information is a retcon? That would make anything in a story as it goes on a retcon. Which would make the term meaningless.
@@Netsuki Thats not the definition 💀
@@Netsuki That's just called telling a story lol
I always assumed that Cell can regenerate his whole body because he got regeneration from Piccolo and survivability from Frieza. Meaning that Piccolo would die before his regeneration start, while Frieza can survive beings sliced into pieces, and if you combine that...
I think you're misunderstanding the Oxford dictionary definition of a retcon. It doesn't reshape our understanding of a continuity as you concluded, it *imposes* a different *interpretation* of that continuity. Those are 2 massively different things.
Reshaping the understanding of a continuity can happen by just showing a different angle of something that used to happen to give it context, and doing that to bring new light to a narrative is a powerful and essential tool to many stories. But retconning a story is erasing what has happened before and *imposing* something else instead of it, which by and large you should never want to do to a story.
That sayians able to become great apes is not a retcon in my view, it's just a reveal and an expansion of the original established narrative. You'd have to change something about the original story to have it be a retcon. Maybe for Toriyama and his understanding it was a retcon, but in terms of the story proper it is perfectly fine within continuity.
Pretty much agree. Nothing about the original story states that Goku is not an alien. Thus, nothing in the original story is contradicted by the original story.
yep. Comment section littered with people that have no reading comprehension. But given the DBZ fanbase I guess that makes sense.
The Nimbus being part of a larger cloud is actually hilarious retconning, I love it as a gag!
The Nyoibo being a connection between the tower and the look out is also a Journey to the West reference as Son Wukong's Nyoibo was originally just a large pillar used to support an underwater palace that he unceremoniously made into a weapon by shrinking it with magic
I enjoyed the video, Mark. But... I feel like your definition of retcon is lacking. If a character hasn't been explicitly stated to not be able to do something, them revealing they can do it isn't a retcon, it's just a reveal... Case in point, King Piccolo cloning himself via mouth-egg isn't a retcon. Like, at all. It could be considered jumping the shark (I disagree but I get it) but it surely isn't a retcon. It was never stated he couldn't do it.
We do see (at least in the anime) that he births his children with the mouth-egg thing. Him doing it to create Piccolo Jr never bothered me? I just wondered how he did it with a massive Goku-shaped hole in his chest
Even diama already has a retcon. In Z shenron couldn't just teleport goku home from yardrat cause he was too strong he needed gokus permission. But in Daima shenron was able to turn goku into a kid against his will
Yeah that's been annoying me this whole time. Even if you want to say shenron could teleport goku but was just being nice since he knows him, then by that logic he should've asked him if he wanted to be a kid too
Wasn't that Porunga?
I took it as an effect of whatever the Elder Namekian did to prematurely activate the balls, allowing him to dictate any wish to Shenron even if normally violates his rules.
I mean, GT invented an entire other, more powerful and dangerous set of Dragon Balls just to turn Goku into a kid against his will.
@@KiTTtheKiDD In this very video, Dende's Shenron is unable to turn 17 and 18 back into ordinary humans against their well.
Physics nerd here, you've upset me deeply. Radio waves ARE electromagnetic waves. I notice the passage from Google you cite starts with "They both are electromagnetic waves" as if it was comparing radio waves to other electromagnetic waves of a different wavelength.
9:44
technically this might just be gokus stupidity thinking gohan was a grandpa not a human
lmao
13:05 I almost felt like that was only stated out of their own ignorance of the reality of the situation, and by the end is when Goku figures it out and stops him.
4:41
Retcon #2 is not a retcon. Bulma lied about not knowing because Goku didnt want to lose the dragonball. A few pages after that in Chapter 1 she explains that the balls fly away after the wish. She was just tricking Goku.
Hot take: Goku been a alien is not a retcon, because even if Toryama didn't have Goku's origin in mind at the time, he purposely made it a mystery, been open to be used afterwards
Too many people don't seem to understand the difference between retcon and 'newly revealed information'
@@afteri75 That's LITERALLY the definition though. "new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events"
@@Jane-qh2yd How does Goku being an alien impose a different interpretation of the events of OGDB?
I beleive Goku was referred to as an "alien" early on in Dragonball by one of his foes. It was just a throwaway line, but it worked with what eventually became canon in Z.
@@Jane-qh2yd and what was Goku's origin before? Do you see? Retcon is when you change a prestablished fact, we never knew why Goku has a tail, we just call it a retcon because it's a completely bizarre revelation that introduces aliens in a Chinese fantasy inspired setting
You can let the Goku age retcon slide when you realise Goku isn't the smartest tool in the shed and he probably miscounted
I mean he literally tells krillin the wrong age at first because of this very thing
Bardock being a good dad or broly and goku being friends is unforgivable
The bodies needing to be preserved in the Saiyan saga wasn't a retcon. They assumed the same thing when Krillin and Roshi were killed in the King Piccollo saga. It had also never been tested at that point, so I don't know if I'd even call it retcon when they found out that wasn't the case.
So many of these I would Not call retcons. Adding new info isn’t inherently a retcon. A retcon changes something in the past. It would be like if they said cell was Actually created by Dabura instead of Gero.
A Retcon doesn't necessarily need to change something in the past it just needs to be new Information that changes how you view things, like Goku and Piccolo being aliens
At that point can't we just call every sort of information we receive at any point a retcon? Not trying to be rude or anything but like even meeting Goku in the first chapter could be reduced to "oh who is this, we don't know, retcon" just seems kinda meh to me @@JackedUpEntertainment
@@JackedUpEntertainment No, Mark just misunderstood the Oxford definition. As taken from the dictionary, a retcon doesn't just reshape our understanding of a continuity, it *imposes* a different *interpretation* of that continuity. Those are 2 massively different things.
@@Yous0147 impose a different interpretation doesn't mean it has to contradict anything, it was never stated that Goku was absolutely human or anything but the Alien Retcon does impose a new interpretation, it changes nothing and just changes how you view something, it's literally just new information that changes how you view something
@@JackedUpEntertainment that’s like saying Bulma being rich is a retcon because we don’t learn about it until 2 arcs later.
Most people commenting here have trouble understanding literary devices because their mind is poisoned by the "canon" discussions. A retcon refers to a change from a reader's point of view, not a literal change of previously declared events or a plot hole.
Goku was definitively NOT an alien when the first episodes were released, and then in Z we got the new info that he was actually an alien all along. This doesn't contradict anything in the story, but obviously will change the way we perceive the previous content. It IS a retcon, and the same with most of the examples on this video: the tail weakness, the pole, kami-sama, the dragon balls limitations, the senzu beans. Toriyama was not breaking his own world adding these new changes, but they were retroactive continuity changes, "remember this thing? Well, actually it was this other way since the beginning, deal with it".
38 God Himself brings this up, that Piccolo must have gotten less demonic, since Raditz got sent to Hell.
42 This was implied way back when Kuririn and the others died the first time, at least in the Danish translation: "I've got an idea on how we bring the others back! Don't burn the corpses!" "What did he say?" "Something about corpses ...."
23:39 - Before Goten being shown that he can go SSj without any issue, it's shown *specifically* in the manga that Future Trunks was also a Super Saiyan as a child, before Future Gohan's death. You really could spin as it being a retcon with some setup behind it, because we don't know what led to Future Trunks transforming in the manga… but this could also be seen as Toriyama paying off the "Super Saiyan being a mixed Saiyan" concept well after he introduced it.
Yeah, it's the Anime that has Trunks turning SSJ by seeing Gohan's lifeless body. In the Manga, a 13-year-old Trunks is already a SSJ.
@@zaja2418
Anime: Heavy emotional storytelling
Manga:"Alright, we just ball"
You also have to factor in that goku was alot stronger from original dragon ball compared to right before the cell games and your physical condition has alot to do with how a baby turns out. You also have to think that goku was literally SSJ while conceiving goten because he was doing the training to make SSJ not use up as much energy with the transformation.
You’ve been making such excellent analysis for years, just wanted to say I appreciate you Mark
There are so many things you got wrong its like you did it purposefully.
Goku never said “i’ve never met a human” he says “i’ve never met a girl” which is what leads him to the next dialogue about treating women properly as was told by his grandfather, Goku for a long time couldn’t tell the difference and he’d have patted Bulma if he didnt know.
Filling in the information about where the Nimbus came from is NOT a retcon, it was simply revealed. He did not fly to Kamis place with the Nimbus hell in the saiyan saga he jumps down to Korin tower to access the Nimbus.
Anything to lengthen the vid i guess.
I think he’s playing by the other definition of Retcon. A piece of new information that adds a different interpretation of previous events. By that definition, all reveals are technically retcons.
@ Yes but most good stories build upon previous things to either fill in the holes or to make the reader more easily digest the information.
For instance he mentioned how Kami could be brought back by the dragon balls but it was retconned that he couldn’t. No, it was a major reveal, Goku doesn’t realise it at first and is ready to kill Piccolo, a chapter or 5 later he tells Tien not to kill Kami. He confronts Kami and tells him to stop lying that their fates are conjoined. Kami couldn’t kill himself, Gods technically cannot do that, that’s why he tries to seal Piccolo, he was the 3rd strongest warrior at the time and could have easily killed himself but begged Tien to do it.
To mention a few other instances
In Harry Potter, Dumbledores death is a shock but Snape doing it for the reason he did once revealed doesn’t make it a retcon it just fills in the holes.
Naruto being hated by the village and once he found out it was because of the 9 Tailed Fox would that also be a retcon since it was a reveal?
Senzu beans being able to heal, yes that is a retcon. People dead for longer than a year being brought back is also a retcon.
I usually agree with his videos and his takes but this one was just plain wrong.
the manga does say "Chikyu-jin" which is translated as human/earth person 🥹👌 but I also feel like this should not be considered a retcon because he is literally just referring to not seeing another person besides his grandpa
Mark made a lot of mistakes in this video, but he's not completely wrong on this point. Goku does say that he's never seen another human before in the original manga. But it's not a retcon, since in the same chapter he says that he lived with his Grandpa. It was just a mistake by Toriyama
I agree he messed a lot of stuff in this video up but "Goku never said “i’ve never met a human” he says “i’ve never met a girl”
Are you just going to ignore the panel where Mark showed where he said he never met a human along with the interview of Toriyama admitting he had Goku misspeak?
2 corrections:
radio waves are a specific range of frequencies in the electromagnetic wave spectrum. bulma just specified which type of electromagnetic wave the dragon balls emit.
2. assassin tao being the "younger brother" in chinese martial arts the honorary si-dai "little brother" refers to a younger student or a student of lower rank of your master. so they studied together, the sennin just was the higher ranked student amongst the two of them
What I do like is how Mark uses manga terms like 'Karin Tower' and 'Nyoi-Bo'. We need a dub with these
13:32 retcon of retcon 35: goku wasn't sent to conquer earth, but to escape from planet vegeta's demise, what raditz told goku about his mission was just raditz assumption given the fact that was an habit of the saiyans
in db minus Gine apparently tells Raditz (via message?) that Kakkarot is being off planet. He assumes its to conquer a planet. Gine and Bardock both can't say the truth because Goku could have been caught and/or killed.
@@edelette6529 exactly, raditz just asssumed what was normal for them
7:14 to be fair he was taught by roshi so he probably figured out what age he actually was. i mean how is dude supposed to know what a year he is in.
in the eng dub (at least) Goku says he is 12 and everyone gets confused. But he explains that by learning to count he found out that 12 came before 14. Also, to be fair, we don't know how old Goku was when GG died since Goku says that he "died a long time ago." I personally assume Goku was young enough (like 6 or 7 at most?) because he knows only very basic things. If it had only been a year or so, Goku would be more aware of things at the start of the story.
It could be considered a retcon but it's also in line with Goku's character. A kid who lived alone for years and didn't get anything past a start at basic education before GG died.
I love how I keep watching these videos despite never seeing a single episode of Dragon Ball :P
14:50 thus one actually inflates the retcon count a little, since this was established much earlier, when the characters preserved the bodies of those who died to King Piccolo and his minions.
Why does this inflate the count? Because Mark counted Piccolo's statement, that Goku couldn't be revived since he was reduced to ashes as a retcon, despite being already established. Essentially counting the same thing twice.
I personally think some of the inconsistencies behind super sayain kinda is a neat way to think of the legend itself from our unreliable narrator in vegeta. No matter who gets the form or how they do so it’s something awakened out of you. We can talk about back tingles, pure hearts, and S cells all day but clearly there’s something else to it.
If Tori retconned it, it counts.
So let me get this straight, a Ret-Con is new information (a reveal) that changes how we look at previous events, but Goku's great ape transformation reveal (see: new information) that changes how we looks at the death of grandpa Gohan, isn't a Ret-Con, but the new information that Goku's tail is his weakness, which hadn't come up before, is somehow a Ret-Con?
Don't ask questions and consume products
Because Goku transforming into a great ape is foreshadowed beforehand. We were told that Grandpa Gohan was killed by a giant monster on the night of the full moon and Goku isn't allowed to look at the full moon. So when Goku turns into a giant monster, all of the puzzle pieces fall into place.
His tail being a weakness is a retcon because we saw Goku use his tail for a lot of stuff before that point and its never hinted to be a weakness. He uses it as bait to catch fish in the first chapter and Bulma even grabs it in chapter 2 and Goku doesn't react at all.
neither of these are retcons, neither is a contradiction or edit of previous information, mark just used the dictionary definition instead of the what the word is actually used to refer to and people who don't talk about fiction much are getting confused
@@lunarazure9969 You know Gokus transformation was "foreshadowed" 10 seconds before it happened?
Half of these are not retcons. It's new info that adds and explains why things are the way they are.
Like Gokus love for fighting being attributed to him being a saiyan is a new info and not a retcon, it would have been a retcon if it was previously stated that his love for fighting was attributed to something else, like for example if it was said that Goku loves fighting because Grandpa Gohan raised him to love marital arts and challenges. No such explanation ever existed, no change or alteration of previous interpretation was done, so it's not a retcon.
You are misunderstanding what a retcon is. Retcons do not necessarily mean "contradictions", they mean they change the INTERPRETATION of facts. We knew Goku loved fighting and martial arts, and we were told later on that the reason for that is because of his saiyan heritage. That changes the interpretation of earlier scenes (now ultimately his love for fighting in og DB scenes can be attributed to his saiyan heritage kicking in), and is thus... a retcon.
@@SHSLRuby Retcon is not a contradiction, it's a change but Gokus example is not a change to anything as there was never any change, no interpretation of it ever existed, we were just shown that he likes fighting, duh. Next time try to make sense before you speak up.
@My_Master_Waves you are wrong again, it does not necessarily mean to "change" it means it's RETROACTIVE CONTINUITY, any new information that gives context to older things is a retcon, again it's in the name
We know that he liked fighting, but we later learned that his love for fighting could be attributed to his saiyan heritage, and thus is a retcon, it doesn't change, but it gives new context to older scenes, you should seriously do your research on the official definition of the word
Retroactive - taking effect from the past
Continuity - consistency of the story
Retroactive continuity - new information of story that affects the past
Goku loved to fight = continuity
Goku is a saiyan = retroactive
Saiyans love to fight = continuity
Goku loves to fight due to being a saiyan = retroactive continuity
I don't agree with a lot of those moments being retcons. Adding new information is not a retcon. A retcon is when this new information is in contradiction with pre-established lore or events.
For instance, learning that the magic staff was originally made to link between Karin and Kami is not a retcon, because we didn't know what its origin was up to that point. It's adding new lore, not changing old lore.
Or by your definition, it won't give a new interpretation of previously described events, because there was no events previously described.
Some of these are not retcons, but world building and plot and thematic progression. For example, Freeza destroying Planet Vegeta. All the remaining saiyans believed their planet was destroyed by a meteor, hence so did the viewer.
Nah retcon
Some of these aren't retcons, it's just added lore. For example, Vegeta never said he wasn't the prince of all Saiyans so Dodoria mentioning that doesn't contradict anything.
Although there is a line in the Japanese version that a has a weird claim: it says Vegeta was named after the Planet, not the Planet after Vegeta.
@@zaja2418 I mean... it's still technically correct. His father is King Vegeta, who as the king named the planet after himself, and then gave his son the name Vegeta also. If his father wasn't also named Vegeta then it would seem weird.
This is one that I actually give Mark. Especially given what we know about Vegeta's character, it's actually weird that he didn't brag about being the Prince in the Saiyan ark. Especially when trying to explain to Goku why he, Vegeta, is superior. It's an easy illustration of the difference between their social standing. So the fact Vegeta DIDN'T say anything is proof of the retcon.
@@OozyGorilla What's funny is that some dubs (like the Latin American one) actually hint at Vegeta being a prince before the actual Japanese version.
In the Latin American dub, Vegeta says: 'My royal blood has been spilled' just before he goes mad and tries to blow Earth with his Galick Gun.
It's almost like the Japanese Anime not having Trunks call the Androids by number, thus avoiding the retcon.
Radio waves are a type of electromagnetic wave broooooooooooo
17:48 my headcannon is that Goku was so strong at the time that his willpower was leagues over the Namekian Dragon and it physically could not will him to Earth.