I dont think canon and non-canon is relevant, other than that it frequently introduces major plot hole contradictions. But a good story is a good story, and Rogue One was a good story (other than the cameo of Vader in the end that introduces a major contradiction with the first... I mean fourth... movie). But if someone think Dark Forces is a better story (haven't seen it) I say live and let live.
Edit: For instance, my get feeling is that Jane Austen would not have considered Pride, prejudice & Zombies to be canon, but it was a damn good movie none-the-less (if you like subtle humor, at least - it is not straight forward humor, so many people either dont get it or gets it but dont like it).
It used to be canon (Kyle Katarn crops up occasionally in other legends-EU sources). It isn't canon now, Rogue One is canon. Ergo Rogue One is a retcon. I don't have a problem with that, but trying to prove a thesis by frantically trying to rule out exceptions isn't good thinking. It's better to avoid thinking in a absolutes in the first instance.
I agree, but I think you missed the point of me having doubts about it being canonical. Because, if it wasn't, then Rouge One does not retcon how Death Star's plans were obtained. If it was canonical (and according to you, it was), then it is a retcon and I admit that. I don't care, though, whether it was retcon or not - I haven't touched EU/Legends thing in my whole life and I am pretty sure I will not do it in the future.
The old continuity did not simply divide things into canonical and noncanonical. As I already stated, it had four different levels of canon.
And no, it doesn't matter that it was a recon. Apart from to refute the original thesis: "ALL stories that retcon and connect plot points are bad". I'm pretty sure there are other examples too. 2nd edition of The Hobbit comes to mind.
But the real retcon in Rogue One was why the Death Star had a vulnerable thermal exhaust port. In the original movie and novelisation it is implied that it was accidental, but Rogue One retcons it to being deliberate. Maybe that is an improvement? But it's still a retcon.
The EU was at least a quasi-canon. Lucas used it or didn't as it suited him, but general events and characters were pretty equivalent throughout. Then DIsney came along and deliberately threw every bit of it in the dumpster. Its not remotely equivalent. Besides, who still took George Lucas seriously after the prequels?
I know it would be in my unkindly heart for the hate of retcon just to soar supreme!
But goodness me - I cannot think of many at the moment. Maybe because the difference is the quality of storytelling?
I never mind the Game of Thrones, because I was pretty quickly put off by the authors' zeal for underage, preferably virginal rape. I never mind the Star Wars, because after The Empire Strikes Back it has not been too well told a story.
An example of negative retcon might be introducing Christian lore to Kalevala, Finnish national epic. But all this is in the grander scheme of cultural imposition, making Finns become Christian from our native beliefs.
Besides that, I love how Nord lore interconnects between our countries - for example, overgod being associated with a deity of thunder. "Ukkonen" in Finnish and "torden" by Novegian seem to have that root - but whence comes "åska" in Swedish? Why is it not Thor or Ukko?
Swedes here in the fora, do tell!
Yet "Akka från Kebnekaise" in Selma Lagerlöf's story of Nils Holgersson refers to Finnish senior matron goddess (Akka) and Saami (Kebnekaise tunturi being named by them), besides being a morality story in praise of Sweden. I perso find it wonderful kind of interweaving - possibly the Saami might disagree coming from a culture that does not have a nation, and having suffered persecution.
When a story is well told, interweaving the threads only adds to it, in my opinion.
And when it is a lazy tool for lack of original storytelling, I hope us the consumers will punish it.
The old continuity did not simply divide things into canonical and noncanonical. As I already stated, it had four different levels of canon.
And no, it doesn't matter that it was a recon. Apart from to refute the original thesis: "ALL stories that retcon and connect plot points are bad". I'm pretty sure there are other examples too. 2nd edition of The Hobbit comes to mind.
But the real retcon in Rogue One was why the Death Star had a vulnerable thermal exhaust port. In the original movie and novelisation it is implied that it was accidental, but Rogue One retcons it to being deliberate. Maybe that is an improvement? But it's still a retcon.
Maybe my bad memory is trying to fill in the plot holes here, but isn't that because they had no reason to believe it wasn't accidental? Since everyone who knew about it died. Which also would explain how they were able to find that particular weakness so fast. Sure, still a retcon of what was implied in the original, but one that meshes better. Compared to the handwaved retcon of Qui-Gon training Obi-Wan instead of Yoda.
Besides that, I love how Nord lore interconnects between our countries - for example, overgod being associated with a deity of thunder. "Ukkonen" in Finnish and "torden" by Novegian seem to have that root - but whence comes "åska" in Swedish? Why is it not Thor or Ukko?
Swedes here in the fora, do tell!
Thunder is still synonymously "tordön" in Swedish alongside "åska", albeit less commonly. "Åska" is apparently believed to originally have meant something like "Thor-travels", ie being a reference to what folklorically was the cause of thunder - Thor travelling in his chariot across the skies. Over time the "Thor" part has been dropped from usage.
From what I know, that game isn't canon. Or at least, is not canon anymore.
Thats my big problem with the new Star Wars movies. They toss everything out that isn't the original movies or the prequels. Most of my favorite Star Wars moments and stories are from the old EU. So the new Disney stuff just feels like a big fat middle finger to me.
From what I know, that game isn't canon. Or at least, is not canon anymore.
Thats my big problem with the new Star Wars movies. They toss everything out that isn't the original movies or the prequels. Most of my favorite Star Wars moments and stories are from the old EU. So the new Disney stuff just feels like a big fat middle finger to me.
You can blame dropping a moon on Chewbacca's head for that.
The old continuity did not simply divide things into canonical and noncanonical. As I already stated, it had four different levels of canon.
And no, it doesn't matter that it was a recon. Apart from to refute the original thesis: "ALL stories that retcon and connect plot points are bad". I'm pretty sure there are other examples too. 2nd edition of The Hobbit comes to mind.
But the real retcon in Rogue One was why the Death Star had a vulnerable thermal exhaust port. In the original movie and novelisation it is implied that it was accidental, but Rogue One retcons it to being deliberate. Maybe that is an improvement? But it's still a retcon.
Maybe my bad memory is trying to fill in the plot holes here, but isn't that because they had no reason to believe it wasn't accidental? Since everyone who knew about it died. Which also would explain how they were able to find that particular weakness so fast. Sure, still a retcon of what was implied in the original, but one that meshes better. Compared to the handwaved retcon of Qui-Gon training Obi-Wan instead of Yoda.
Several ships escaped the battle of Scarif, including the Ghost. And Mon Mothma and General Dodonna (amongst others) knew about the weakness and weren't at Scarif.
Comments
But honestly what would be the odds
Edit: For instance, my get feeling is that Jane Austen would not have considered Pride, prejudice & Zombies to be canon, but it was a damn good movie none-the-less (if you like subtle humor, at least - it is not straight forward humor, so many people either dont get it or gets it but dont like it).
And no, it doesn't matter that it was a recon. Apart from to refute the original thesis: "ALL stories that retcon and connect plot points are bad". I'm pretty sure there are other examples too. 2nd edition of The Hobbit comes to mind.
But the real retcon in Rogue One was why the Death Star had a vulnerable thermal exhaust port. In the original movie and novelisation it is implied that it was accidental, but Rogue One retcons it to being deliberate. Maybe that is an improvement? But it's still a retcon.
But goodness me - I cannot think of many at the moment. Maybe because the difference is the quality of storytelling?
I never mind the Game of Thrones, because I was pretty quickly put off by the authors' zeal for underage, preferably virginal rape. I never mind the Star Wars, because after The Empire Strikes Back it has not been too well told a story.
An example of negative retcon might be introducing Christian lore to Kalevala, Finnish national epic. But all this is in the grander scheme of cultural imposition, making Finns become Christian from our native beliefs.
Besides that, I love how Nord lore interconnects between our countries - for example, overgod being associated with a deity of thunder. "Ukkonen" in Finnish and "torden" by Novegian seem to have that root - but whence comes "åska" in Swedish? Why is it not Thor or Ukko?
Swedes here in the fora, do tell!
Yet "Akka från Kebnekaise" in Selma Lagerlöf's story of Nils Holgersson refers to Finnish senior matron goddess (Akka) and Saami (Kebnekaise tunturi being named by them), besides being a morality story in praise of Sweden. I perso find it wonderful kind of interweaving - possibly the Saami might disagree coming from a culture that does not have a nation, and having suffered persecution.
When a story is well told, interweaving the threads only adds to it, in my opinion.
And when it is a lazy tool for lack of original storytelling, I hope us the consumers will punish it.
https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-expanded-universe-story-that-lead-to-lucasfilm-re-w-1822092518