Are adaptions of source materials count as canon or canon adjacent?

All Discussions > Steam Forums > Off Topic > Topic Details

I.C.E agent 9 hours ago

There are a lot of the time adaptions are way different than source materials when the screen is directly from it. And adaptions from what I have seen are wish fulfilled rewrites from the people who adapted it. They either cut out things they dislike or straight up write their fantasy on the plot which makes it counts as glorified fanworks. If they can't do the job well then hired them?

I have a case that this woman who chose or hired to adapt a manga from a novel, and the fact that she was a huge fan of this work before she was hired to work inside. That alone gave her a power to fulfill her fangirl fanfiction days to the source materials. The manga adaption she did is very personal wishfullfiled when the source material, that story is just super bad. Not sure why she is allowed to sell it? does it matter in the long run as this series somehow always let freelancers make tons of spinoffs based on the source a lot of the time.

< >

Showing 1-11 of 11 comments

Lime 9 hours ago

What no?, from title alone. Canon is author intent. its the described events from its official source, nothing outside of that is canon unless acknowledged as such

oldirty` 9 hours ago

Adaptions are never canon as far as Im concerned.

oldirty` 9 hours ago

Im a big Lord of the Rings fan, the movies are amazing but not canon. Not even close, alot was changed.

I.C.E agent 9 hours ago

Originally posted by Lime:
What no?, from title alone. Canon is author intent. its the described events from its official source, nothing outside of that is canon unless acknowledged as such

Originally posted by oldirty`:
Adaptions are never canon as far as Im concerned.

But why in my case, the company allowed her to sell her own interpretation of the source materials? I found it is strange it already has an older version made by different artist that more aligns with the source than this? Or she approached the creators and asked if she can do his story in her own interpretation?

Lime 9 hours ago

Originally posted by ICE:
Originally posted by Lime:
What no?, from title alone. Canon is author intent. its the described events from its official source, nothing outside of that is canon unless acknowledged as such

Originally posted by oldirty`:
Adaptions are never canon as far as Im concerned.
But why in my case, the company allowed her to sell her own interpretation of the source materials? I found it is strange it already has an older version made by different artist that more aligns with the source than this? Or she approached the creators and asked if she can do his story in her own interpretation?

You can make spin-offs, nobody is diminishing any artistic integrity for something being derivative of another's creative property. But it's not from the "original timeline" if you catch my drift

I.C.E agent 9 hours ago

Originally posted by Lime:
Originally posted by ICE:

But why in my case, the company allowed her to sell her own interpretation of the source materials? I found it is strange it already has an older version made by different artist that more aligns with the source than this? Or she approached the creators and asked if she can do his story in her own interpretation?
You can make spin-offs, nobody is diminishing any artistic integrity for something being derivative of another's creative property. But it's not from the "original timeline" if you catch my drift

Not as spin off but her own interpretation of the original story which actually is very bad and poorly done in the source. She made it looks like it is somehow special and straight up like fanworks trying to fix what is wrong with the plot. Never understood why they allowed her to sell it as officially endorsed product. Packaging with her other works as collection bundle seems like she wants other to buy her glorified fanworks

I.C.E agent 9 hours ago

Originally posted by ICE:
Originally posted by Lime:
You can make spin-offs, nobody is diminishing any artistic integrity for something being derivative of another's creative property. But it's not from the "original timeline" if you catch my drift
Not as spin off but her own interpretation of the original story which actually is very bad and poorly done in the source. She made it looks like it is somehow special and straight up like fanworks trying to fix what is wrong with the plot. Never understood why they allowed her to sell it as officially endorsed product. Packaging with her other works as collection bundle seems like she wants other to buy her glorified fanworks

the older manga adaption is still on sale. Not sure why this is even needed as if she wanted to fulfill her life long fantasy

oldirty` 9 hours ago

Originally posted by ICE:
Originally posted by Lime:
What no?, from title alone. Canon is author intent. its the described events from its official source, nothing outside of that is canon unless acknowledged as such

Originally posted by oldirty`:
Adaptions are never canon as far as Im concerned.
But why in my case, the company allowed her to sell her own interpretation of the source materials? I found it is strange it already has an older version made by different artist that more aligns with the source than this? Or she approached the creators and asked if she can do his story in her own interpretation?

I dont know, hard to tell without knowing the source and the adaptation.
I used to think the best adaption is the most accurate. I dont think like this anymore, its far more important that the adaption is good on an artistic and entertaining level.

Thhe LotR trilogy hhad massive changes. Dialogue switches from one character to another. Events switches from the 3rd book into the first. Death of a character at a different pointi in thhe story and in a completly different way. And much much more and yet, the movies are absolutly amazing 9.9/10

I.C.E agent 8 hours ago

Originally posted by oldirty`:
Originally posted by ICE:

But why in my case, the company allowed her to sell her own interpretation of the source materials? I found it is strange it already has an older version made by different artist that more aligns with the source than this? Or she approached the creators and asked if she can do his story in her own interpretation?
I dont know, hard to tell without knowing the source and the adaptation.
I used to think the best adaption is the most accurate. I dont think like this anymore, its far more important that the adaption is good on an artistic and entertaining level.

Thhe LotR trilogy hhad massive changes. Dialogue switches from one character to another. Events switches from the 3rd book into the first. Death of a character at a different pointi in thhe story and in a completly different way. And much much more and yet, the movies are absolutly amazing 9.9/10

But like if it isn't accurate then it is a fanwork then. It derails away too much from source materials from adding too much out of the characters just to expand and drag the content to have something to talk to

oldirty` 8 hours ago

Originally posted by full of aura:
But like if it isn't accurate then it is a fanwork then.

And thats why its not canon. But maybe still fun?

#10

I.C.E agent 7 hours ago

Originally posted by oldirty`:
Originally posted by full of aura:
But like if it isn't accurate then it is a fanwork then.
And thats why its not canon. But maybe still fun?

My point is why creators still allowed it if it is bad? I have seen anime adaptions who did the entire source dirty then it gets released like nothing else

#11

< >

Showing 1-11 of 11 comments

Per page: 1530 50

All Discussions > Steam Forums > Off Topic > Topic Details

Date Posted: 28 Oct @ 4:25am

Posts: 11

Start a New Discussion