thoughts?
re: scripts/deleted scenes and what is the word-of-God-canon material. If it was in the original draft, is it canon? What about later drafts? What about deleted scenes? Are the only things canon those we see onscreen as a part of the episode/movie itself? What about retconning; does it count if it's subtle and sensible, and not when it's whacky and odd? Or how about things stated during interviews/cons? Is it more canon if a writer says it vs. a producer vs. and actor(in this case, talking about a character)? What if the writers make a mistake early on and then fix it later in canon and interviews; is the original true, or is what they fixed it as the canon?
I've always been pretty liberal with what I consider canon, including deleted scenes and scenes that were in the filming drafts but got dropped for time or whatever, as well as stuff explicitly stated by writers/producers during interviews. Heck, I even consider most tie-ins canon. And I have no problem with tasteful retconning, most of the time. But I've noticed that a lot of fandom is very, very, very picky about what is canon and what isn't, to the point of discrediting and ignoring retcons and even things the writers themselves say was supposed to happen(I remember the crazy that went down when Joe Mallozzi stated that the writers had planned on a John and Teyla relationship, but hadn't gotten the chance to play it out).
So does most of this stem from fanatical fans who want to believe what they think is right, or are people too burned off trusting the people who create their shows?
IDK. Offer your thoughts. Is defining canon more of a show-by-show, fandom-by-fandom kinda thing?
*This post is brought to you by my wandering brain, How long Sam spent at Standford, and the script for Merlin 4x03. You're welcome.
I've always been pretty liberal with what I consider canon, including deleted scenes and scenes that were in the filming drafts but got dropped for time or whatever, as well as stuff explicitly stated by writers/producers during interviews. Heck, I even consider most tie-ins canon. And I have no problem with tasteful retconning, most of the time. But I've noticed that a lot of fandom is very, very, very picky about what is canon and what isn't, to the point of discrediting and ignoring retcons and even things the writers themselves say was supposed to happen(I remember the crazy that went down when Joe Mallozzi stated that the writers had planned on a John and Teyla relationship, but hadn't gotten the chance to play it out).
So does most of this stem from fanatical fans who want to believe what they think is right, or are people too burned off trusting the people who create their shows?
IDK. Offer your thoughts. Is defining canon more of a show-by-show, fandom-by-fandom kinda thing?
*This post is brought to you by my wandering brain, How long Sam spent at Standford, and the script for Merlin 4x03. You're welcome.