I've seen a lot of talking about what is or isn't canon as it pertains to the BTTF franchise lately (like for instance, is the game canon). The problem is, not everyone uses or defines the term in the same way, and it can get confusing. People can easily end up arguing with people who actually share their opinion, but a difference in how they apply the word causes a miscommunication.
I'm no expert, but I have my own theory on the different usages of the word, so I've boiled it down to what are (IMHO), the three basic definitions of canon (along with my own opinions about the pros and cons of each).
1) The Legal Copyright Definition
This definition states that the ability to declare something as canon or authentic lies solely with whoever holds the legal copyright. However, this one can be tricky, because contrary to popular belief, it's not always the original creator(s). Sometimes the legal copyright lies with a company rather than an individual. For instance, in a movie, often the studio holds the rights, rather than the writer, director, producer, etc.
George Lucas is one of the rare exceptions to this, as he actually paid money & signed a contract to make sure he retained all copyrights to Star Wars (if he hadn't, Fox would own the copyright). It's not unheard of for the original creator(s) to refuse to do a sequel for some reason (usually because they don't like what the studio has in mind), and for the studio to simply replace them and do the sequel anyway (happened with Superman II and on).
The problem with this definition is that the legal copyright owners do not always make the best decisions with regards to a franchise, and no one wants to accept a crappy entry as canon merely because the company says it is.
2)The Original Creator Definition
This one states that only the original creator(s) has/have any official say. I guess it's sort of like the spirit of the law versus the letter. This definition has value because, as I stated above, sometimes the legal copyright holder (the studio, etc) will make dumb decisions with a franchise, which the original creator (along with a large chunk of the fanbase) disowns. In such a case, the new stuff may be canon in a legal sense, most people would rather not acknowledge it.
Unfortunately, sometimes this creates an excessive attachment to one individual's view of the franchise, at the expense of something new that may actually be quite good. For instance, some Trek fans will say things like "only Gene Roddenberry can can make real Trek", or that "an MI game without Ron Gilbert is not a real MI game (even if Dave Grossman is involved, for example)", and in such cases they miss out on some good stuff due to their short-sightedness. Besides, with so many people having creative input on things like movies and games, identifying just one person can be hard. For instance, what if the writer & director have conflicting views on what is or isn't canon in a franchise? It's also worthy to note that the original creator(s) are not guaranteed to always make the best decisions for the franchise; in reality they are every bit as capable of messing things up as "those heartless bean-counters" at the company, at least in theory.
3)The Personal Opinion Definition
This one basically defines canon as being whatever you like. It's probably the simplest. It's also my favorite, simply because it means you can be flexible with it. The other two definitions can be problematic at times (at least, if applied rigidly), and anyway, they can split fanbases (and I personally HATE fanboy wars over what a "true" fan accepts as canon, with the other side being that you're not a real fan if you don't agree with them). Of course, the problem with this definition is that it rules out a single, hard definition for the term (since it's quite likely that no two fans would have the exact same definition), but I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing. Besides, this one also leaves it open for people who want to follow one of the other two definitions most of the time, but want the flexibility to tailor fit it to the situation, and/or people who have no wish to draw lines in the sand (did I mention I HATE "you're not a true fan" arguments?).
As far as the BTTF game, I'm not sure whether this game counts legally as canon. Bob Gale has stated that only the movies are canon, which would rule out this game. So, if he indeed owns the legal copyright (or some portion), then most likely the game is not legally canon (unless he issues another statement at a later time accepting the game into the canon). However, if Universal owns all the copyrights to BTTF, then they would be the ones to ask (assuming you hold to the legal definition).
Personally, I don't really care whether the game is "officially" canon or not. I just look forward to having fun playing it. For me, the fact that some of the original team is helping out is just icing on the cake (albeit some particularly delicious looking icing).
Either the Powers That Be declare what canon is (like ol' George does for "Star Wars") or they refuse to do so (like the BBC in re "Doctor Who"). I suspect that the attitude towards BTTF:TG might be "Who cares? Go and buy it" at this stage!
I don't think canonicity is written into the law! The Conan Doyle estate has authorised many of the vast load of Sherlock Holmes pastiches, but none of them are canon.
"Canon" only matters when making a new iteration of or sequel to a thing. For example, what is canon right now is the film series(and only the film series), and so the animated series doesn't count when making this new game. Likewise, if Universal was making a new Back to the Future film, if the video game isn't canon then it wouldn't be factored into any of the film's events.
Honestly, if you want what's canon? The main trilogy, first and foremost.
While the cartoon and the ride are fun little continuations (though... your mileage may vary on the cartoon), they are largely apocryphal at this point. Though there has been some generally accepted carry-over from the cartoon series, at least. Mostly Doc Brown's full name, but that's about it.
But I agree with Fitzoliver. Just because something is authorized by the official copyright holders (to use his example, George Lucas and the Star Wars Expanded Universe), doesn't mean that it's automatically canon. Ultimately the copyright holder has the final say, so while there'll be pro*fan fic published... it can and will at any time be overwritten by The Power(s) That Be. Just take one look at the massive steamrolling Lucasfilm has done to the Star Wars EU with the officially canon 'Clone Wars' cartoon if you want the IMHO Most Triumphant Example.
Based on the quality of the games I'll decide whether I'll consider them canon.
Normally, I am very strict about it. But because both directors have stated there will never be a 4th movie we might as well consider this the official continuation and canon.
It's not like it'll create problems and will be dismissed with future entries....since there probably won't be any.
There's no such thing as canon. No work of fiction is "canon," because none of them actually happened. If they did happen, they wouldn't be fiction. It's sort of pointless to argue over which fake events are less fake than the others.
In the end, it's all a matter of personal discretion. You can decide if this game will be canon or not. Is the cartoon canon? I don't think it makes sense with the rest of BttF, but if you want it to be, then sure. Hell, if you really want to you can decide the sequels are non-canon. Or that the sequels are canon but the first movie isn't.
BTTF is a dead licence, no more movies will be made out of it.
So as long as the game is the last "media" about the franchise, it has absolutely no matter whatsoever weither it's canon or not.
Moreover, people from the movies actually worked on the game so ...
The only importance of something being "canon" is if there is a whole universe around it, you have to know if it counts in this universe or not, because so many things depend on it.
The fun thing about BTTF is, it's a franchise with alternate timelines, so you could argue that ANYthing, no matter how contradictory, could be canon somewhere in the BTTF multiverse.
The fun thing about BTTF is, it's a franchise with alternate timelines, so you could argue that ANYthing, no matter how contradictory, could be canon somewhere in the BTTF multiverse.
Ah, touche.
Reminds me of the time I got into an argument with a friend of mine over the new Star Trek movie. He was complaining that the movie erased the previous timeline, when IIRC, the movie all but states it's split off into an alternate universe.
Honestly, if you want what's canon? The main trilogy, first and foremost.
While the cartoon and the ride are fun little continuations (though... your mileage may vary on the cartoon), they are largely apocryphal at this point. Though there has been some generally accepted carry-over from the cartoon series, at least. Mostly Doc Brown's full name, but that's about it.
But I agree with Fitzoliver. Just because something is authorized by the official copyright holders (to use his example, George Lucas and the Star Wars Expanded Universe), doesn't mean that it's automatically canon. Ultimately the copyright holder has the final say, so while there'll be pro*fan fic published... it can and will at any time be overwritten by The Power(s) That Be. Just take one look at the massive steamrolling Lucasfilm has done to the Star Wars EU with the officially canon 'Clone Wars' cartoon if you want the IMHO Most Triumphant Example.
(No, I'm not bitter about pro*fic, no siree...)
Without trying to derail the subject.. the Star Wars EU is just that.. Expanded material, it's not canon and isn't supposed to be taken as such. It just provides extra material that some people may enjoy but it's done so without any input from the original creator of the universe, which is why the Clone Wars TV show has overwritten certain things, like Grievous back story. George already had a backstory planned out but didn't tell it with any of the movies, this is why he doesn't care that some writer has made up their own past for him
And in his defence, many of the EU writers are bigger hacks than he is and some of the stories shouldn't only be ignored by completely destroyed. I think why the Clone Wars has been so successful is because we've had Lucas coming up with many of the ideas, but not actually writing the scripts. Although it got off to a bad start with the "movie", the show has already been better than the majority of the SW movies.
All that being said, many of TCW writters have gone to pains not to completely ignore the EU. Things like Mandalore being different has been explained away by the Mandalorians simply having different colonies and so forth.
In the case of BTTF though, where we have the original writers helping out with at least some of the aspects of the story and mythology, I think it can be considered canon. It's at least as close as we'll ever get.
In the case of BTTF though, where we have the original writers helping out with at least some of the aspects of the story and mythology, I think it can be considered canon. It's at least as close as we'll ever get.
and
BTTF is a dead licence, no more movies will be made out of it.
So as long as the game is the last "media" about the franchise, it has absolutely no matter whatsoever weither it's canon or not.
are exactly my two arguments why I will consider this game canon.
Beside the game there will be no official continuation and this is the 'closest we'll ever get.'
Still....wouldn't it be a great thank you by Bob Gale if he played it and was so impressed by it that he would think 'ah what the heck, I am going to consider this canon' and yeah...this game becoming officially canon?!
It might happen if he's really impressed with the end product and doesn't change anything that's previously been established.
Another prime example of a game that should be considered canon by fans is 'Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis'. It's the game I keep recommending to Indy fans that want a continuation.
It's at least hell of a lot better than the 'Kingdom of the Crystal Skull'
Another prime example of a game that should be considered canon by fans is 'Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis'. It's the game I keep recommending to Indy fans that want a continuation.
It's at least hell of a lot better than the 'Kingdom of the Crystal Skull'
You reminded me of how epic was Indy 4 (Atlantis).
And then you raped my mind by reminding me of the actual Indiana Jones 4 (crystal) ...
I thought there was a consensus among Indy fans. The spoon.. ahem, the crystal skull doesn't exist. It never happened.
Shia Labeouf is not just a horrible actor that is completely invading holywood and ruining so many franchise thanks to uncle Spielberg, no, he's just a fragment of our imagination.
^
If you're a big Indy fan I also recommend the Uncharted franchise on the PS3.
It's the closest you'll get to the Indiana Jones feel outside Indy games.
On the list of things that was wrong with Crystal Skull, I don't think The Beef is one of them. He actually did okay in that role.
Let's say that knowing he's a pretentious little brat with no talent that just happen to be friend with one of the most influent persons in Holywood, doesn't help.
And seriously, the monkeys scene ... ? I mean did you not want to just shoot yourself after that scene ?
If you're a big Indy fan I also recommend the Uncharted franchise on the PS3.
It's the closest you'll get to the Indiana Jones feel outside Indy games.
Those are cool games !
THOUGH, way too many action. I know it's needed to make the game longer but ...
How many people did Nathan killed ? Something like 1000 guys, and he used something like 35 000 bullets ...
It's a little too much, it's taking away the "movie" feeling. But the rest is epic, I admit ^^ .
There's no such thing as canon. No work of fiction is "canon," because none of them actually happened. If they did happen, they wouldn't be fiction. It's sort of pointless to argue over which fake events are less fake than the others.
I think it's natural to re-establish these fictional worlds in one's mind and to think about what fits into that world and what doesn't. The most logical authority of what fits into a given conglomerate of stories is, of course, the teller of the first story (Jace's definition 2), be it books, movies or games. If the storyteller states things to be canon that you can't accept as part of this world, or if he wants something out that you'd want in, it's pretty normal as well to kind of compose your own universe of stories from the available bits.
The legal rights owner of a story, if he's separate from the original creator, is the person I could not accept as someone who attributes or takes away the label "canon" to anything (Steve Purcell being the exception ). Or rather: I'd resort to method (3) before I'd accept (1).
THOUGH, way too many action. I know it's needed to make the game longer but ...
How many people did Nathan killed ? Something like 1000 guys, and he used something like 35 000 bullets ...
Maybe part 1.
But part 2 is definitely more balanced. Ofcourse it still contains a lot of action sequences but they're really varied. You get thrown into a new situation everytime. From carrying someone under your arm limiting yourself to the use of a handgun, to chasing over the rooftops fleeing for a helicopter, to moving forward on a moving train and much much more.
And killing so many bad guys, wasn't that one of Indian Jones' novelties?
Okay, so we're talking about Indiana Jones, Star Wars AND the BTTF triology. Where's my Drew Struzan thread? It's all his work.
Well guys, let me through another one on the 'What's cannon and what's not' fire...Ghostbusters.
Personally, I'm kinda looking at the BTTF game like I saw last year's Ghostbusters Game; a continuation after the last movie that may or may not be official. But, since this is the first new project in almost two decades (not counting 'Ghostbuster Extreme', which is also up for canon debate), that features the original actors and writers of the classic movies, its hard to tell if it is or isn't. Granted, it also just rehashed some moments from the 1st movie (Slimer at the Sedgwik Hotel, Gozer attacking the city as Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man, The Gray Lady ghost at the Library), but it also had some new fresh elements (like the Ghostworld version of the library & Walter Peck getting pozesed by a woman ).
I, personally, believe that the Ghostbusters game is, spirituality, like a 3rd movie (even if it isn't). That's kinda how I'm looking at the Back to the Future game; it's like a 4th movie (even if it isn't).
Also, likewise, I believe the two movies are cannon (even though some may wish 2 didn't happen.) and 'The Real' Ghostbusters / Ghostbusters Extreme is not. Again, you may agree or you may dissagree with me, but that it my personall opinion.
Personally, I think Rather Dashing is right, in that canon is important more when it comes to creating a new continuation (whether that continuation is considered canon or not), and is thus useful primarily (if not solely) to the creative minds behind that continuation. In the case of this game, TellTale had to make sure they sifted out what was canon from what wasn't for continuity's sake when writing it (because if there are conflicting plot points between variations, you kind of want to know which to go with if you're writing something that follows up).
As for fans, I personally don't see canon as being terribly important, other than maybe for trivia's sake. I think it would be neat (and certainly an honor for TellTale) if Bob ever ends up changing his mind and making an exception for the game by declaring it canon. However, I'm certainly not going to enjoy the game any less if that doesn't happen. None of that silly "I can't care about the characters if this didn't 'really' happen! The game is ruined for me!"
if Bob ever ends up changing his mind and making an exception for the game by declaring it canon. However, I'm certainly not going to enjoy the game any less if that doesn't happen. None of that silly "I can't care about the characters if this didn't 'really' happen! The game is ruined for me!"
True. Although I said that it would be awesome it's not like I will enjoy it any less if it didn't happen.
HOWEVER, it is like I said a beautiful way of saying thank and you nailed it.
Which would be nice for TellTale.
ALSO it is the ultimate promotion for the game. If Bob Gale announces it to be canonical the BttF fans will swarm to the game like flies to lampposts.
True, but I don't think Bob would ever do it for promotional reasons. He doesn't strike me as the sell-out type. If he ever does do it, it will be genuine respect. Which would make it even more of an honor for TT, and ironically might be even more profitable for them (but that's probably pretty much what you meant anyway).
^
Yeah, I meant it as in Bob Gale promoting the game for TellTale. So that they can see a larger success.
And I am sure Bob Gale also just simply wants to notify the fans of the 'BttFIV' everyone has been waiting for. It might stop the surge of request letters lol.
Comments
I'm no expert, but I have my own theory on the different usages of the word, so I've boiled it down to what are (IMHO), the three basic definitions of canon (along with my own opinions about the pros and cons of each).
1) The Legal Copyright Definition
This definition states that the ability to declare something as canon or authentic lies solely with whoever holds the legal copyright. However, this one can be tricky, because contrary to popular belief, it's not always the original creator(s). Sometimes the legal copyright lies with a company rather than an individual. For instance, in a movie, often the studio holds the rights, rather than the writer, director, producer, etc.
George Lucas is one of the rare exceptions to this, as he actually paid money & signed a contract to make sure he retained all copyrights to Star Wars (if he hadn't, Fox would own the copyright). It's not unheard of for the original creator(s) to refuse to do a sequel for some reason (usually because they don't like what the studio has in mind), and for the studio to simply replace them and do the sequel anyway (happened with Superman II and on).
The problem with this definition is that the legal copyright owners do not always make the best decisions with regards to a franchise, and no one wants to accept a crappy entry as canon merely because the company says it is.
2)The Original Creator Definition
This one states that only the original creator(s) has/have any official say. I guess it's sort of like the spirit of the law versus the letter. This definition has value because, as I stated above, sometimes the legal copyright holder (the studio, etc) will make dumb decisions with a franchise, which the original creator (along with a large chunk of the fanbase) disowns. In such a case, the new stuff may be canon in a legal sense, most people would rather not acknowledge it.
Unfortunately, sometimes this creates an excessive attachment to one individual's view of the franchise, at the expense of something new that may actually be quite good. For instance, some Trek fans will say things like "only Gene Roddenberry can can make real Trek", or that "an MI game without Ron Gilbert is not a real MI game (even if Dave Grossman is involved, for example)", and in such cases they miss out on some good stuff due to their short-sightedness. Besides, with so many people having creative input on things like movies and games, identifying just one person can be hard. For instance, what if the writer & director have conflicting views on what is or isn't canon in a franchise? It's also worthy to note that the original creator(s) are not guaranteed to always make the best decisions for the franchise; in reality they are every bit as capable of messing things up as "those heartless bean-counters" at the company, at least in theory.
3)The Personal Opinion Definition
This one basically defines canon as being whatever you like. It's probably the simplest. It's also my favorite, simply because it means you can be flexible with it. The other two definitions can be problematic at times (at least, if applied rigidly), and anyway, they can split fanbases (and I personally HATE fanboy wars over what a "true" fan accepts as canon, with the other side being that you're not a real fan if you don't agree with them). Of course, the problem with this definition is that it rules out a single, hard definition for the term (since it's quite likely that no two fans would have the exact same definition), but I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing. Besides, this one also leaves it open for people who want to follow one of the other two definitions most of the time, but want the flexibility to tailor fit it to the situation, and/or people who have no wish to draw lines in the sand (did I mention I HATE "you're not a true fan" arguments?).
As far as the BTTF game, I'm not sure whether this game counts legally as canon. Bob Gale has stated that only the movies are canon, which would rule out this game. So, if he indeed owns the legal copyright (or some portion), then most likely the game is not legally canon (unless he issues another statement at a later time accepting the game into the canon). However, if Universal owns all the copyrights to BTTF, then they would be the ones to ask (assuming you hold to the legal definition).
Personally, I don't really care whether the game is "officially" canon or not. I just look forward to having fun playing it. For me, the fact that some of the original team is helping out is just icing on the cake (albeit some particularly delicious looking icing).
Anyway, that's just my opinion. Any thoughts?
Also, sorry for the wall of text.
I don't think canonicity is written into the law! The Conan Doyle estate has authorised many of the vast load of Sherlock Holmes pastiches, but none of them are canon.
While the cartoon and the ride are fun little continuations (though... your mileage may vary on the cartoon), they are largely apocryphal at this point. Though there has been some generally accepted carry-over from the cartoon series, at least. Mostly Doc Brown's full name, but that's about it.
But I agree with Fitzoliver. Just because something is authorized by the official copyright holders (to use his example, George Lucas and the Star Wars Expanded Universe), doesn't mean that it's automatically canon. Ultimately the copyright holder has the final say, so while there'll be pro*fan fic published... it can and will at any time be overwritten by The Power(s) That Be. Just take one look at the massive steamrolling Lucasfilm has done to the Star Wars EU with the officially canon 'Clone Wars' cartoon if you want the IMHO Most Triumphant Example.
(No, I'm not bitter about pro*fic, no siree...)
Really? I don't care what happens then.
Normally, I am very strict about it. But because both directors have stated there will never be a 4th movie we might as well consider this the official continuation and canon.
It's not like it'll create problems and will be dismissed with future entries....since there probably won't be any.
In the end, it's all a matter of personal discretion. You can decide if this game will be canon or not. Is the cartoon canon? I don't think it makes sense with the rest of BttF, but if you want it to be, then sure. Hell, if you really want to you can decide the sequels are non-canon. Or that the sequels are canon but the first movie isn't.
BTTF is a dead licence, no more movies will be made out of it.
So as long as the game is the last "media" about the franchise, it has absolutely no matter whatsoever weither it's canon or not.
Moreover, people from the movies actually worked on the game so ...
The only importance of something being "canon" is if there is a whole universe around it, you have to know if it counts in this universe or not, because so many things depend on it.
It's not the case with BTTF.
Ah, touche.
Reminds me of the time I got into an argument with a friend of mine over the new Star Trek movie. He was complaining that the movie erased the previous timeline, when IIRC, the movie all but states it's split off into an alternate universe.
Time travel. Ain't it funny sometimes?
Without trying to derail the subject.. the Star Wars EU is just that.. Expanded material, it's not canon and isn't supposed to be taken as such. It just provides extra material that some people may enjoy but it's done so without any input from the original creator of the universe, which is why the Clone Wars TV show has overwritten certain things, like Grievous back story. George already had a backstory planned out but didn't tell it with any of the movies, this is why he doesn't care that some writer has made up their own past for him
And in his defence, many of the EU writers are bigger hacks than he is and some of the stories shouldn't only be ignored by completely destroyed. I think why the Clone Wars has been so successful is because we've had Lucas coming up with many of the ideas, but not actually writing the scripts. Although it got off to a bad start with the "movie", the show has already been better than the majority of the SW movies.
All that being said, many of TCW writters have gone to pains not to completely ignore the EU. Things like Mandalore being different has been explained away by the Mandalorians simply having different colonies and so forth.
In the case of BTTF though, where we have the original writers helping out with at least some of the aspects of the story and mythology, I think it can be considered canon. It's at least as close as we'll ever get.
and
are exactly my two arguments why I will consider this game canon.
Beside the game there will be no official continuation and this is the 'closest we'll ever get.'
Still....wouldn't it be a great thank you by Bob Gale if he played it and was so impressed by it that he would think 'ah what the heck, I am going to consider this canon' and yeah...this game becoming officially canon?!
It might happen if he's really impressed with the end product and doesn't change anything that's previously been established.
Another prime example of a game that should be considered canon by fans is 'Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis'. It's the game I keep recommending to Indy fans that want a continuation.
It's at least hell of a lot better than the 'Kingdom of the Crystal Skull'
You reminded me of how epic was Indy 4 (Atlantis).
And then you raped my mind by reminding me of the actual Indiana Jones 4 (crystal) ...
I thought there was a consensus among Indy fans. The spoon.. ahem, the crystal skull doesn't exist. It never happened.
Shia Labeouf is not just a horrible actor that is completely invading holywood and ruining so many franchise thanks to uncle Spielberg, no, he's just a fragment of our imagination.
What's the best?
However, you have to say "Raiders of the Lost Ark" by the great Lawrence Kasdan. You totally must!
Anyway, sorry for getting off topic, please continue...
I prefer The Last Crusade over Raiders of the Last Ark.
I do plan on checking out Fate of Atlantis now though (quick wiki check: unlockable in Staff of Kings? two games in one? Sounds like a good deal).
If you're a big Indy fan I also recommend the Uncharted franchise on the PS3.
It's the closest you'll get to the Indiana Jones feel outside Indy games.
EDIT: I am sure you will be sold after watching this trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUPAyGWKd6c
Let's say that knowing he's a pretentious little brat with no talent that just happen to be friend with one of the most influent persons in Holywood, doesn't help.
And seriously, the monkeys scene ... ? I mean did you not want to just shoot yourself after that scene ?
Those are cool games !
THOUGH, way too many action. I know it's needed to make the game longer but ...
How many people did Nathan killed ? Something like 1000 guys, and he used something like 35 000 bullets ...
It's a little too much, it's taking away the "movie" feeling. But the rest is epic, I admit ^^ .
You clearly never watched "Even Stevens".
Agreed, for many reasons. For one, the ending is far less of a (literal!) Deus Ex Machina.
I think it's natural to re-establish these fictional worlds in one's mind and to think about what fits into that world and what doesn't. The most logical authority of what fits into a given conglomerate of stories is, of course, the teller of the first story (Jace's definition 2), be it books, movies or games. If the storyteller states things to be canon that you can't accept as part of this world, or if he wants something out that you'd want in, it's pretty normal as well to kind of compose your own universe of stories from the available bits.
The legal rights owner of a story, if he's separate from the original creator, is the person I could not accept as someone who attributes or takes away the label "canon" to anything (Steve Purcell being the exception
Maybe part 1.
But part 2 is definitely more balanced. Ofcourse it still contains a lot of action sequences but they're really varied. You get thrown into a new situation everytime. From carrying someone under your arm limiting yourself to the use of a handgun, to chasing over the rooftops fleeing for a helicopter, to moving forward on a moving train and much much more.
And killing so many bad guys, wasn't that one of Indian Jones' novelties?
Well guys, let me through another one on the 'What's cannon and what's not' fire...Ghostbusters.
Personally, I'm kinda looking at the BTTF game like I saw last year's Ghostbusters Game; a continuation after the last movie that may or may not be official. But, since this is the first new project in almost two decades (not counting 'Ghostbuster Extreme', which is also up for canon debate), that features the original actors and writers of the classic movies, its hard to tell if it is or isn't. Granted, it also just rehashed some moments from the 1st movie (Slimer at the Sedgwik Hotel, Gozer attacking the city as Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man, The Gray Lady ghost at the Library), but it also had some new fresh elements (like the Ghostworld version of the library & Walter Peck getting pozesed by a woman
I, personally, believe that the Ghostbusters game is, spirituality, like a 3rd movie (even if it isn't). That's kinda how I'm looking at the Back to the Future game; it's like a 4th movie (even if it isn't).
Also, likewise, I believe the two movies are cannon (even though some may wish 2 didn't happen.) and 'The Real' Ghostbusters / Ghostbusters Extreme is not. Again, you may agree or you may dissagree with me, but that it my personall opinion.
As for fans, I personally don't see canon as being terribly important, other than maybe for trivia's sake. I think it would be neat (and certainly an honor for TellTale) if Bob ever ends up changing his mind and making an exception for the game by declaring it canon. However, I'm certainly not going to enjoy the game any less if that doesn't happen. None of that silly "I can't care about the characters if this didn't 'really' happen! The game is ruined for me!"
True. Although I said that it would be awesome it's not like I will enjoy it any less if it didn't happen.
HOWEVER, it is like I said a beautiful way of saying thank and you nailed it.
Which would be nice for TellTale.
ALSO it is the ultimate promotion for the game. If Bob Gale announces it to be canonical the BttF fans will swarm to the game like flies to lampposts.
Yeah, I meant it as in Bob Gale promoting the game for TellTale. So that they can see a larger success.
And I am sure Bob Gale also just simply wants to notify the fans of the 'BttFIV' everyone has been waiting for. It might stop the surge of request letters lol.