Star Wars Books Thread

[Set Harth]

I know I've said it like a million times before, but that tiered canon system was asinine.

The tiered canon system is merely an expression of the concept that movies take precedence over other products if there is a conflict.

his movies, which were always and still are the only entries that were canon.

Wrong on multiple levels. The EU was said by the franchise to be canon before it was decanonized. It stands to reason that it is the franchise owner itself which dictates what is or is not canon... as opposed to random people on the internet not employed by the franchise. The decanonization itself indicates that it was canon in the first place, otherwise there is nothing to decanonize and the transition is meaningless. And now, under the Disney regime, the Disney equivalent of the EU is again said to be canon.

So no, the novelizations were never canon

Actually, they were always canon, and even under the Disney regime they haven't been ruled non-canon. In fact, given that novelizations are still being released under Disney, it stands to reason that Disney's canon policy applies to them just like anything else.

 

[Tuskin38]

in regards to movie novelizations, while they are canon, the movies take precedence over them. So if a novel contridicts the movie, what happened in the movie is the canon event.

If a deleted scene from the movie is in the novel it’s in limbo until confirmed by another source.

I think someone from the story group once said that the novels are a history book, while the movies are the actual events.

 

[DarKush]

Obviously Disney felt otherwise, and since their decision is raking them in all kinds of money, that decision seems to be working for them.

Easter eggs are fine, but there is no way anyone who sits down to take over the Star Wars franchise with plans to do new movies is going to choose to adhere to continuity from twenty year old novels. Simply put, you need to bring in a new audience, and new Star Wars movies are going to excite people and bring them into theatres, telling them they're connected to novels from twenty years earlier is likely to scare them away, feeling they don't have time to catch up on all that backstory.

Then why did the LOTR franchise do so well? Or why do they continue making Sherlock Holmes movies, or any other films based on literary works? Basing something on established material doesn't mean-necessarily-that it will scare people away. Disney Star Wars is in the process now of building a new continuity with ancillary material from Marvel comics and novels, etc., but is that going to be a stumbling block for the people going to see Solo this weekend or who will be watching Episode IX and beyond?

 

[The Wormhole]

Then why did the LOTR franchise do so well?

Depending on how you look at it, that's based on three novels or one, not something that looks as daunting as a few dozen novels published over a twenty year period. Besides, the thing to remember with LOTR, The Hobbit, Sherlock Holmes, Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, Twilight, Fifty Shades of Grey, whatever is that those movie adaptations are made with the fact that there are those in the audience unfamiliar with the novels in attendance and are made accessible for anyone unfamiliar with the source material. That is not possible with movies that are consistent with tie-in continuity built up over twenty years. How do you explain Chewbacca's absence, to begin with? The tail should never wag the dog, and that's exactly what you're suggesting is the approach Star Wars should have taken.

 

[DarKush]

Depending on how you look at it, that's based on three novels or one, not something that looks as daunting as a few dozen novels published over a twenty year period. Besides, the thing to remember with LOTR, The Hobbit, Sherlock Holmes, Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, Twilight, Fifty Shades of Grey, whatever is that those movie adaptations are made with the fact that there are those in the audience unfamiliar with the novels in attendance and are made accessible for anyone unfamiliar with the source material. That is not possible with movies that are consistent with tie-in continuity built up over twenty years. How do you explain Chewbacca's absence, to begin with? The tail should never wag the dog, and that's exactly what you're suggesting is the approach Star Wars should have taken.

I'm not suggesting anything. I am laying out some ideas why I think the EU or adapting the EU for new films isn't a horrible or impossible thing. I might be wrong, but it feels like you are assuming that the majority of casual people who watch the films care so much about the novels, comics, or video games. The EU stuff before The Phantom Menace didn't stop tons of people from rushing out to watch those films, nor did all the stuff generated during the prequel era hang up people who hadn't read say the introduction of Grievous in comics, or even in the 2D Clone Wars cartoon. The very argument used to smack down the idea of adapting the EU, that minuscule numbers purchase it or know what it is, means that the 20-year-or so continuity will be new to the masses, fresh for them anyway. A 20-year history, for example, between ROTJ and TFA is being built up anyway.

Adapting the EU could mean just that-adapting, not taking it literally word by word, you change what works better for a film. Or if you wanted to say, keep Chewbacca's absence as part of a film, you write that into the dialogue and have the characters grapple with his loss.

The EU was, and remains, a great reservoir of source material, which I think Disney is still tapping, and despite how 'different' Disney's Star Wars is supposed to be, I've pointed out before (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) that they already have parallels to some of the EU in the sequels, so why not just use some of the sequel material more directly? Rebels is already bringing some in and like the canon Marvel comics and the novels are borrowing from the EU as well. It's a waste of time IMO to just make a new Sith home planet for example instead of using one that's already been created (if there's no real difference between the planets).

 

[The Wormhole]

I might be wrong, but it feels like you are assuming that the majority of casual people who watch the films care so much about the novels, comics, or video games.

It is a confirmed fact that only 1% of any given fandom even bothers with tie-in material, so no, the majority of casual people who see these films doesn't give a shit about novels, comics, and what not.

The EU stuff before The Phantom Menace didn't stop tons of people from rushing out to watch those films,

Because it wasn't necessary to understanding the film.

nor did all the stuff generated during the prequel era hang up people who hadn't read say the introduction of Grievous in comics, or even in the 2D Clone Wars cartoon.

Again, because that stuff was made as an optional sidestory to ROTS. One could easily skip that stuff and still follow ROTS perfectly.

The very argument used to smack down the idea of adapting the EU, that minuscule numbers purchase it or know what it is, means that the 20-year-or so continuity will be new to the masses, fresh for them anyway. A 20-year history, for example, between ROTJ and TFA is being built up anyway.

Look at it from a marketing perspective, what plants more butts in the theatre? "New Star Wars film, continuing on after ROTJ" "New Star Wars film, continuing on after ROTJ and incorporating stuff from tie-in material."

The EU was, and remains, a great reservoir of source material, which I think Disney is still tapping, and despite how 'different' Disney's Star Wars is supposed to be, I've pointed out before (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) that they already have parallels to some of the EU in the sequels, so why not just use some of the sequel material more directly?

They wanted to tell their own story, and they didn't want someone else's continuity to get in the way. And this is working for them. The movies are raking in money, so it was clearly the right play to make.

 

[thribs]

The Thrawn book is the only one I’m looking forward to. I wish they would release the Sword of the Jedi already.

 

[DarKush]

It is a confirmed fact that only 1% of any given fandom even bothers with tie-in material, so no, the majority of casual people who see these films doesn't give a shit about novels, comics, and what not.

Because it wasn't necessary to understanding the film.

Again, because that stuff was made as an optional sidestory to ROTS. One could easily skip that stuff and still follow ROTS perfectly.

Look at it from a marketing perspective, what plants more butts in the theatre? "New Star Wars film, continuing on after ROTJ" "New Star Wars film, continuing on after ROTJ and incorporating stuff from tie-in material."

They wanted to tell their own story, and they didn't want someone else's continuity to get in the way. And this is working for them. The movies are raking in money, so it was clearly the right play to make.

No movie should have to need supplemental material for the audience to get it, whether adapted or not. And none of the Star Wars films have had to do that, including the sequels. The tie-in stuff is icing on the cake. Once again, mass audiences have no problem with other adaptations. And I would argue that even most fans of tie-ins don't read or consume every tie-in, yet this doesn't stop them from enjoying the films.

Lucasfilm has never marketed their films the way, putting forward all the tie-in material as well as the films, so I don't get where you're coming from there.

The movies are making money, but who is to say that they wouldn't have made money if they were adapted from EU material? We don't know. Star Wars is a big event so it gets people's attention regardless.

Films and prose are two different mediums. I don't get why you feel that having the EU around would mean people wouldn't get or enjoy a film unless they first read the novels, comics, played the video games or whatever. Personally I just think you don't like the EU and/or think keeping it or adapting it is a stupid and/or unworkable idea and you're trying to create this kind of stumbling block to dismiss the idea of adapting it entirely. As I've said before, the EU is already being adapted, to some extent, by Disney, altered to fit the dictates of the new canon, but it still survives in some form or fashion nonetheless.

 

[Tuskin38]

Zahn has clarified that he isn’t signed on for two lore Thrawn books, just that he has two planned out already if given the go ahead.

 

[The Wormhole]

Okay, so what if they had done a movie consistent with the EU? Where do you start? Logically, at a point thirty years after the OT, given the actor's ages. So then, how do they go about explaining the thirty years of backstory? Okay, I suppose TFA didn't really do that anyway, but you know why they got away with that? Because the continuity between ROTJ and TFA is now a blank slate. If someone at down to see EU friendly Episode VII and asked where's Chewbacca, why is Coruscant so different and weird, and the explanations pointed to various novels and story arcs, the average moviegoer would glaze over and check out the next MCU movie or whatever.

 

[thribs]

Easy. You adapt the Legacy era with Cade Skywalker.
You could also do a story set after Crucible. As long as the story doesn’t directly relate to the material before hand it should work.

 

[Set Harth]

It's a waste of time IMO to just make a new Sith home planet for example instead of using one that's already been created (if there's no real difference between the planets).

Didn't they just change the name?

 

[thribs]

They changed it from Korriban to Morriband as Lucas thought Korriban sounded too similar to Coruscant.
They could easily just think that over the years, people started calling it Morriband. It’s not far fetched to think that a planet may have more than one name.

 

[DarKush]

Lucas didn't create a new planet, he just renamed it. And it's not far-fetched to have a planet with different names. In this era of Easter Eggs, nods to source/old material, etc., I don't think it hurts to make those nods.

 

[DarKush]

Okay, so what if they had done a movie consistent with the EU? Where do you start? Logically, at a point thirty years after the OT, given the actor's ages. So then, how do they go about explaining the thirty years of backstory? Okay, I suppose TFA didn't really do that anyway, but you know why they got away with that? Because the continuity between ROTJ and TFA is now a blank slate. If someone at down to see EU friendly Episode VII and asked where's Chewbacca, why is Coruscant so different and weird, and the explanations pointed to various novels and story arcs, the average moviegoer would glaze over and check out the next MCU movie or whatever.

I disagree. You start the story where you want to start it. And you explain through exposition or by action in various scenes what the current galactic situation is. How many movies start at zero and build up? Many start with characters midway, on some level, and we learn through dialogue, flashbacks, or even prequels, more of the backstory. Let's look at sci-fi films that take place in the future, for example. Rarely are they going through a detailed backstory to show you how things got to the point that the story starts. Some of that is handled in text before the film, a voice-over, or the most imaginative (IMO) was the opening in the Valerian film (and that took place in like 5 minutes or so at the start of the movie).

I don't see this much different than the new continuity being created now, which is filling up the space between ROTJ and TFA, or the side projects which fill in the backstory for characters. I think currently there is a Poe Dameron one with him talking with Rey and Finn post-TLJ. By the time Episode IX comes out, do you really think people who haven't read that comic will even know it exists, or think it has to be read to understand or enjoy the movie.

The MCU has like 19 films now plus several television shows and I think tie-in comics are at least quasi-canon. Do you think that's stopping the vast, vast majority of fans who haven't watched all of the previous films from enjoying each installment? Further, the MCU is based on decades of stories. The Infinity Gauntlet is over 20 years old. And even the more recent Infinity event is like three years old, but did the legion of moviegoers rush to the bookstore before going to see Avengers: Infinity War? No, they didn't. The film likely did increase business for the comics, and I think it will increase business for the comics after the film also, as fans might be looking to read the original source material to see how that story went or for clues for Avengers 5.

The sequels haven't even featured (or even mentioned) Coruscant, or included Lando for that matter, and while there are questions raised online about the absence of Lando, among others, these questions have not stopped the sequels from making massive box office. Star Wars does have now, as it did with the EU, more room to include/remove things, or hold things back because they do have a strong presence when it comes to other canon media, where we get Phasma's backstory in her own novel for example. And even with the new canon, it has not resulted in the world stopping as people feel they must read the Phasma novel before seeing TLJ. Or the prequel novel to Rogue One, or the current lead-in novel Last Shot for Solo.

 

[Tuskin38]

Didn't they just change the name?

They could easily just think that over the years, people started calling it Morriband. It’s not far fetched to think that a planet may have more than one name.

Yes, that official episode guide for that episode even says that.

I think a canon book even says out right that one point in time the planet was called Korriban

 

[The Wormhole]

I disagree. You start the story where you want to start it. And you explain through exposition or by action in various scenes what the current galactic situation is. How many movies start at zero and build up? Many start with characters midway, on some level, and we learn through dialogue, flashbacks, or even prequels, more of the backstory. Let's look at sci-fi films that take place in the future, for example. Rarely are they going through a detailed backstory to show you how things got to the point that the story starts. Some of that is handled in text before the film, a voice-over, or the most imaginative (IMO) was the opening in the Valerian film (and that took place in like 5 minutes or so at the start of the movie).

I don't see this much different than the new continuity being created now, which is filling up the space between ROTJ and TFA, or the side projects which fill in the backstory for characters. I think currently there is a Poe Dameron one with him talking with Rey and Finn post-TLJ. By the time Episode IX comes out, do you really think people who haven't read that comic will even know it exists, or think it has to be read to understand or enjoy the movie.

The MCU has like 19 films now plus several television shows and I think tie-in comics are at least quasi-canon. Do you think that's stopping the vast, vast majority of fans who haven't watched all of the previous films from enjoying each installment? Further, the MCU is based on decades of stories. The Infinity Gauntlet is over 20 years old. And even the more recent Infinity event is like three years old, but did the legion of moviegoers rush to the bookstore before going to see Avengers: Infinity War? No, they didn't. The film likely did increase business for the comics, and I think it will increase business for the comics after the film also, as fans might be looking to read the original source material to see how that story went or for clues for Avengers 5.

The sequels haven't even featured (or even mentioned) Coruscant, or included Lando for that matter, and while there are questions raised online about the absence of Lando, among others, these questions have not stopped the sequels from making massive box office. Star Wars does have now, as it did with the EU, more room to include/remove things, or hold things back because they do have a strong presence when it comes to other canon media, where we get Phasma's backstory in her own novel for example. And even with the new canon, it has not resulted in the world stopping as people feel they must read the Phasma novel before seeing TLJ. Or the prequel novel to Rogue One, or the current lead-in novel Last Shot for Solo.

In the end, the Disney bean counters obviously felt there was better money-making opportunities wiping the slate clean and abandoning the EU. This is not an uncommon thing, many times comic books end ongoing series or even go ahead and reboot their own continuity for the simple fact that Issue 1 is most often the best selling of any comic series because there's often no baggage attached to it, and that's what Disney wanted here: movies with no baggage.

Also, one has to consider the existence of the Anthology movies. If they kept the EU around, Rogue One is basically impossible since the EU already did its take on the Death Star and the retrieval of its schematics. Han Solo's background has also been explored in the EU, so what is there for Solo the movie to cover?

 

[Tuskin38]

The decision to wipe the EU had nothing to do with Disney

 

[JD]

Part of the problem with trying to use the EU as the background for new movies, is just that by the time we get to the point where the new movies have to start, things had developed so far away from where they started that it was almost unrecogizable as what we saw in the OT.
Now yes, TFA did introduce a lot of changes, but they were much less complex than what we would have had to go through if they tried to incorporate all of the EU books and comics.
Not to mention the fact that from a creative perspective, it would have really tied the movie makers' hands, and most creators are going to want a lot more freedom than that would allow.

 

[Tuskin38]

The only real way for them to have made new movies while keeping the EU, is either set them way in the past or way in the future, where they don't need to worry about it.