Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I know they were previously considered Canon, but I've heard recently that they're now Legends.

Can anyone confirm this?

Apparently, the parts that align with the films are, the parts that don't are not. mmm

Yes, I know that, but I've heard that the entire RotS novel is now Legends or something like that.

The only aspects of the novels that are Canon are that which is on screen:

http://i.imgur.com/B3ZZLAH.png

http://i.imgur.com/iYLRN6Z.png
Or in other words they are Legends.

Thanks! Good to know

Only what is on screen, though they also released a new set of movie novels...at least for the OT which I find to be really poor.

^ Aren't they children's novels though?

Originally posted by Darth Thor
^ Aren't they children's novels though?

Don't think so.

Essentially, the only thing that's Canon is what's on-screen.

They are releasing another retelling of the Original trilogy as paperbacks on May 4, 2017.

Does the same rule count for the novelization of The Force Awakens?

What does that mean the only thing on screen? Would RotS novel count if we see different dialogues between Dooku, Kenobi, and Anakin?

No.

Because it's not on screen.

So then basically novels are not canon?

You nailed it.

You people are retarded and care way too much about canon when the only thing that pertains to is the continuation of a story. If anything that happened in those novels is possible in the same setting as the movies, it's still valid in a debate when discussing the limits of a character.

OK.

It's still not Canon.

No, it's not. You may as well use fan fiction for one's arguments.

Originally posted by Kurk
So then basically novels are not canon?



Novels pre-Disney purchase are not Canon.

That said the parts of the movie novelisations that don't contradict canon, probably give greater insight into the films given how closely Lucas always worked with the authors.

Well I'm looking to be somewhat of a proficient disney-canon debater in the future so if no is the straight-up answer good.

Originally posted by ares834
No, it's not. You may as well use fan fiction for one's arguments.
Except one is officially licensed material. And the other is as valid as your argument in that it's not.

Originally posted by FreshestSlice
Except one is officially licensed material. And the other is as valid as your argument in that it's not.

That it's officially licensed material is irrelevant to it's use in a debate. It's simply non-canon, just like the rest of the EU.

As long as Vaders Homoerotic tendencies in the ROTJ novelization are still canon I'm good.

Originally posted by Kurk
Well I'm looking to be somewhat of a proficient disney-canon debater in the future so if no is the straight-up answer good.

You won't get a straight answer, because they are and are not Canon at the same time.

Example Sidious uses FL on Luke in the movie to torture him. The movie shows this, the script tells us this and the novel tells us this.

So it's all correct in what is shown, which is what was said about as long as they align with what is shown on screen it's ok.

Of course you don't really need to use the novels since aligning with what is seen on screen you may as well just watch the movies, at best they might just give a tad more information in the scene.

Originally posted by ares834
That it's officially licensed material is irrelevant to it's use in a debate. It's simply non-canon, just like the rest of the EU.


Well it's relevant in that Canon just copies and pastes a whole load of pages from it.

E.g. It's taken all the Lightsaber forms with just a few minor adjustments.

This is a bit complicated. I'll just show a video from YouTube of how novelizations of Star Wars movies can be used in debates.

jcLm8t7zBdk

The ROTS movie poorly portrayed the scene were Palpatine killed Jedis. The novelization however explains this in a way that would make sense to all.

I always laughed at people citing the novels. Another confirmation I was correct and the nerds quoting the books were not. Point Quan.