STAR WARS Rebels new animated series!

I'm not insisting anything. The old novelizations are canon except where the contradict the movies. This is not hard to comprehend. I'm not making this up. This is fact. Argue with Lucasfilm, Disney and their liaisons with Del Ray if you want to. I can only comment on what they have confirmed.

"The novelizations of the seven films--including The Clone Wars--are canon."

"To clarify, movie novelizations are canon where they align with what is seen on screen in the 6 films and the Clone Wars animated movie."

I don't know how much more clear they can be.

That was before, now it's almost certainly no longer canon and in the same category as all of the other novels that have been previously released. Remember, they've recently announced that only what gets released going forward is canon and everything previously released not seen on TV or in the theaters is no longer canon no matter what its status was before.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2
 
That was before, now it's almost certainly no longer canon and in the same category as all of the other novels that have been previously released. Remember, they've recently announced that only what gets released going forward is canon and everything previously released not seen on TV or in the theaters is no longer canon no matter what its status was before.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

You're just wasting your breath. He's ignoring the official LFL/Disney press release and is basing his entire argument on a little blurb in a blog that Del Rey threw out to the web. In his mind, Del Rey trumphs Disney and LFL.

Of course Del Rey are going to try to say their old novelizations are canon, they still want people to buy them. And what they are trying to say is that everything is canon except for conflicting/contradictory info. That is stupid. If you can allow these novels to be hacked away at, then that is not true canon. In essence when you try to claim that, you are basically trying to sell fans that it is canon but a lesser level of canon. Which is insane because that is what Disney and LFL wanted to eliminate and true canon cannot be negated with new info.

:facepalm
 
This was released on April 30th, LAST WEEK, after the EU was swept away. It absolutely applies now. The fact you dismiss the official SW book group shows you are either absolutely clueless or just incredibly dense. Can you not comprehend that they are all interconnected? That "blurb" you mention is on the official Twitter account of SWBooks. Disney and Lucasfilm govern the SW book group with Del Ray. You look absolutely ridiculous sitting there arguing against official statements being made here. What do you want? George Lucas himself to tell you this?

Once again. We are not discussing the EU novels. We are discussing the OFFICIAL NOVELIZATIONS OF THE FILMS here. You do know what a film novelization is, right? It sure doesn't sound like it. Are you trying to argue Owen Lars is indeed Obi-wan's brother?
 
Last edited:
There are only 6 books which are currently considered cannon except where their content conflicts with the films, the film adaptations. The reason being is they were written based on GL's on screenplays.
 
There are only 6 books which are currently considered cannon except where their content conflicts with the films, the film adaptations. The reason being is they were written based on GL's on screenplays.

But as I stated earlier...

...if you insist on pursuing the old novelizations as canon except where contradictions exist. Let me point out that a contradiction is also defined as an inconsistency. Therefore any info in the novel that is not in the movie is an inconsistency and therefore a contradiction. Remember, the true opposite of "hot" is "not hot", therefore the opposite or contradiction of "a said detail" is "not that said detail".

However I still maintain that any item that is considered canon but can also be superseded later, is a contradiction in itself and cannot truly be canon.
 
But as I stated earlier...

I appreciate the logical fallacy and apparent contradiction you are pointing out, but take for instance the novelization of Revenge of the Sith. GL was very involved in helping Matt Stover fill in a lot of terrific details about Anakin's internal struggle that he wanted included in the story. I appreciate that and would tell anyone that they should read the novelizations to even better flesh out the story in the films. I think that is LucasFilms Story Groups intent by allowing the novels to remain a part of canon. In that same vein, I hep the Darth Plagueis novel is allowed to remain part of canon. It's unlikely Disney will create additional content about his character anytime soon.
 
I appreciate the logical fallacy and apparent contradiction you are pointing out, but take for instance the novelization of Revenge of the Sith. GL was very involved in helping Matt Stover fill in a lot of terrific details about Anakin's internal struggle that he wanted included in the story. I appreciate that and would tell anyone that they should read the novelizations to even better flesh out the story in the films. I think that is LucasFilms Story Groups intent by allowing the novels to remain a part of canon. In that same vein, I hep the Darth Plagueis novel is allowed to remain part of canon. It's unlikely Disney will create additional content about his character anytime soon.

I think when it comes to the various presentations of a story whether it be in books, movies, games, TV shows or comics, they should be looked at as their own thing and not dependent on one another. "Lucas involved" or not, the novelization is an adaptation, and adaptations do things differently from the source material. Usually the number one thing that critics comment about is what an adaptation adds, excludes, and whether those changes made the overall story better or worse. Movies are totally capable of doing exactly what you describe this "Revenge of the Sith" adaptation of doing. Giving us details on a character's internal struggle and fleshing out parts of the story. If the film doesn't do that, but the adaptation does, the film should not get a pass because of it.
 
I think when it comes to the various presentations of a story whether it be in books, movies, games, TV shows or comics, they should be looked at as their own thing and not dependent on one another. "Lucas involved" or not, the novelization is an adaptation, and adaptations do things differently from the source material. Usually the number one thing that critics comment about is what an adaptation adds, excludes, and whether those changes made the overall story better or worse. Movies are totally capable of doing exactly what you describe this "Revenge of the Sith" adaptation of doing. Giving us details on a character's internal struggle and fleshing out parts of the story. If the film doesn't do that, but the adaptation does, the film should not get a pass because of it.

I agree, I'm not suggesting it should give the movie a "pass" but people may find it interesting and it may inform their own personal opinions and feeling towards the characters.
 
And if you still can't comprehend something so simple and plainly spelled out, you never will.
[/QUOTE]

Lol! Well played. That is a rebuttal fitting of you. I'm just being trolled at this point.

- - - Updated - - -

If the film doesn't do that, but the adaptation does, the film should not get a pass because of it.



I agree, I'm not suggesting it should give the movie a "pass" but people may find it interesting and it may inform their own personal opinions and feeling towards the characters.

I agree with both of you. The films should be able to stand on their own but I got a lot more out of the PT novelizations than I did from the movies on their own. I thought the ROTS novelization was pretty good.
 
Lol! Well played. That is a rebuttal fitting of you. I'm just being trolled at this point.

Awww, you poor baby. Here you go...

5246.jpg.cf.jpg
 
Haha! I don't know what he is, but I'm calling it as I see it. His "clever" tactic of simply turning my own quotes around as his response suggests otherwise. Reminds me when a child is angry or losing an argument resorting to just repeating what the other person is saying. Personally I don't believe anyone can be as dense as he's acting.
 
Last edited:
Considering Fett got his start at the time this is going on I don't see HOW he'd not show up in a way,maybe a major way.
 
I would think it would be odd for them to use the ROTJ armor and not the ESB. Unless this is meant to tie in with the Special Edition (reclaimed ROTJ) suit worn in ANH (Special Edition). I would rather them not tie more stuff to the Special Editions but that is not my call. :rolleyes

I just like the ESB design better.
 
As far as the in-universe movies I don't really think there is a distinction actually made between ANH, ESB or ROTJ armor. Sure, those of us that have studied it can spot differences in armor like wings on a cat. But I don't think they really are different classifications between those three armors in the movies themselves.



This is the part where someone explains that they were differentiated between in some EU book.
 
Back
Top