Fun Stuff > ENJOY
Ghostbusters, Frozen, and the strange entitlement of fan culture
Kugai:
Fanshipping has been around for years, Canon or not.
Trailing right back to the Granddaddy of all Fanships, Kirk/Spock, right through to M/M, M/F or F/F (and even combinations of such) in whatever Story/TV Show/Movie/Comic etc you follow. I don't think that that's ever going to change regardless of whether the Authors or Creators say this or that is Canon or not.
Tova:
This is a bit of a sidetrack, but I just got reminded of one of my favourite films. Possibly one of yours also. :)
Grandson: Y-you read that wrong. She doesn't marry Humperdinck, she marries Westley. I'm just sure of it. After all that Westley did for her, if she didn't marry him, it wouldn't be fair.
Grandfather: Well, who says life is fair? Where is that written? Life isn't always fair.
Grandson: I'm telling you, you're messing up the story, now get it right!
Grandfather: Do you want me to go on with this?
Grandson: Yes. Bows head.
Grandfather: All right, then. No more interruptions.
People get a bit upset when their wishes aren't fulfilled by fiction, I guess.
Jimor:
--- Quote from: Kugai on 07 Jun 2016, 15:07 ---Fanshipping has been around for years, Canon or not.
Trailing right back to the Granddaddy of all Fanships, Kirk/Spock, right through to M/M, M/F or F/F (and even combinations of such) in whatever Story/TV Show/Movie/Comic etc you follow. I don't think that that's ever going to change regardless of whether the Authors or Creators say this or that is Canon or not.
--- End quote ---
My pet theory is that a lot of the "alternate" stories of early Christianity that became essentially the Apocrypha make perfect sense when seen through the filter as fan fiction about the major story being spread throughout the region of Jesus and the Resurrection. Jesus hooking up with Mary Magdalene is the "first ship". And another fan-fiction trope of reforming the villain explains the stories of Judas as hero. And of course, just like modern days, the curators of the original story had a vested interest in burying and discrediting non-canon versions of the story. :police:
Akima:
--- Quote from: Kugai on 07 Jun 2016, 15:07 ---Trailing right back to the Granddaddy of all Fanships, Kirk/Spock
--- End quote ---
Granddaddy? What about the Lois Lane/Lana Lang thing in Superman comics?
Personally, I rather wish that creators wouldn't go around after the fact telling people what their work really meant, especially when it is years after the work was released, since the work itself should do that. Taking Blade Runner as an example, was Ridley Scott's inserting/emphasising, in the director's cut, the idea that Deckard is a replicant, any different from George Lucas' "Greedo shot first" thing*, except for being less clumsily executed? Both essentially involved telling a large proportion of their audience that they were wrong and stupid.
*I declare my interests: Han shot first. Deckard is human. ;)
Tova:
Sometimes when fans clamour for the answer to a question left unanswered by a story, I wonder whether the fans understood the story at all.
Blade Runner is a classic example. Was Deckard a replicant? The ambiguity is the whole point. It's good to wonder about it, and even to have an opinion on it, but the story shouldn't answer it.
At least in the case of Ridley Scott's director's cut, the question is still not answered definitively (though I admit that it makes the 'human' interpretation a lot harder to justify). Interpretations of Deckard's thought process in those last moments are interesting to think about in themselves.
I don't even want to talk about the Lucas example. It just annoys me to no end. Even though I do see what the two examples have in common.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version