Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should "The Source" be in canon?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #26
    Originally posted by Aleander View Post
    It'd be interesting if the Series movies, had they been worked on about by intelligent writers and developed properly, could've worked with that concept to make it work believeably... but it was never going to happen in a universe where Ahriman existed. So, a demon can exist but the Game is a lie? Sure.
    I always put Ahriman down to insanity. He didn't exist; he was a complete hallucination.
    But why should we have a conclusion? Yes, actors age, but their characters can be killed or walk out of the story lines or even replaced by another actor. We had a conclusion in the first film and that was a serious mistake.

    Comment


    • #27
      That was a mistake, because it prematurely ended the prospect of a series of movies. But that doesn't mean that there doesn't need to be an ending. I want to see Duncan's journey concluded one day.

      Comment


      • #28
        Well it's always these questions for me, when I hear "Oh the Game and Only One just isn't true!": Why do the Immortals--when they lose their heads--have their entire energy, memories, experience, etc, absorbed by the Immortal who took their head or, in the case of no Immortal having taken it, why does this all go to the nearest Immortal in range? Why is the receiving Immortal enhanced by all this? That whole business seems designed to pool everything into one, as since series-wise Immortals can't reproduce, where do Little Immortals comes from? They come from somewhere, and exiled criminals/rebels/etc from another place/planet/reality is a pretty decent answer, to me.

        The Source did seem to work well in the "When there are a few of us left we'll be drawn to a distant land to fight for the prize." After all, I like to think they were searching for the Source as part of being drawn now that there are a few of them left. And they certainly did fight. It turning them mortal also makes sense of Duncan and Anna having a child, as while in The Source, he's no longer Immortal. The movie did not handle Anna well, though. They needed much better story-telling. For instance, she shouldn't have been a mortal. This is a disservice to all Immortal ladies, presuming there are any left in that time.

        TAS' Immortals, able to give up their Quickenings to another Immortal and become mortal, that was actually the best way out of this trap, I think.

        Comment


        • #29
          HA, wouldn't that have been awkward when the last immortals would have found out they needed another immortal of the opposite sex to complete the Game.

          On the other hand why didn't the Game end when they all became mortal? The only explanation for would be that there are still other immortals around the globe imo.
          May flights of Demons guide you to your final rest...

          Comment


          • #30
            Originally posted by Nicholas Ward View Post
            HA, wouldn't that have been awkward when the last immortals would have found out they needed another immortal of the opposite sex to complete the Game.

            On the other hand why didn't the Game end when they all became mortal? The only explanation for would be that there are still other immortals around the globe imo.
            Heehee!

            Ah, but the Game didn't end. Giovanni lost his mind and would have continued it, and maybe Methos took off because, if he hadn't, he would have ended up fighting Duncan, compelled by their proximity to the Source. I wonder if the previous Guardian was a **** as the one in the movie was. We know that he fought, and became the new Guardian, while the coward fled, and was turned into rotting meat. WHAT happened to the mortal woman (Anna) who had apparently led them to the Source? They could always have chosen to stay in proximity and be mortal and have children. Except that apparently the Source would soon disappear, whereupon they would be Immortal again... and perhaps the Source would start generating new Immortals again ("going back to the source...")

            Comment


            • #31
              Giovanni died but was mortal at that moment if I recall correctly. Methos took off but also after it was established they were mortal. I think it's highly unlikely the Elder would prolong the Game (and his own curse) indefinitely by holing up on holy ground. Besides, if the party were the last immortals remaining, The Elder should have gotten the Prize.


              The mortal woman probably reincarnated. It's heavily implied that reincarnation is the mortal mechanic in the Highlander Universe in TSFV, the Path and the Source.

              The source starting a new Game with the Quickenings of the immortals that turned mortal is a possibility, and would provide the option of seeing a new protagonist in the franchise.
              May flights of Demons guide you to your final rest...

              Comment


              • #32
                Originally posted by Nicholas Ward View Post
                Giovanni died but was mortal at that moment if I recall correctly. Methos took off but also after it was established they were mortal. I think it's highly unlikely the Elder would prolong the Game (and his own curse) indefinitely by holing up on holy ground. Besides, if the party were the last immortals remaining, The Elder should have gotten the Prize.
                Ah, but he can't because he's not "PURE". I felt that the suggestion from the movie that:
                ONE) The Source or whomever created it gives a flaming flying that the kind of person the Immortal who reaches it is must be pure of heart, is directly contradicted by the bit that whatever is making Immortals generates them as newborn foundlings and only luck of the draw meaning they get raised by loving, caring people.

                Originally posted by Nicholas Ward View Post
                The mortal woman probably reincarnated. It's heavily implied that reincarnation is the mortal mechanic in the Highlander Universe in TSFV, the Path and the Source.
                TWO) Really, did it have to be a woman? Did it have to be ONE woman,even reincarnated? Because all this could so easily be derailed in George R.R. Martin style. Anna does seem to lead a charmed life, wandering about on her own and somehow never coming under attack. Perhaps a Source-Bubble protects her.

                Yes, but it's the Dalai Lama, in the Path. Not essentially a random person.


                Originally posted by Nicholas Ward View Post
                The source starting a new Game with the Quickenings of the immortals that turned mortal is a possibility, and would provide the option of seeing a new protagonist in the franchise.
                Oh yes! Yes, it would! Muahahahah. And again dumping helpless infants all over the planet.

                Comment


                • #33
                  Originally posted by Wilusa View Post
                  I don't think there can be any definition of Highlander canon, because there are such wild differences in quality among the various films/TV series. "The Source" is abysmal. But I recently looked at the original Highlander movie again, and realized I don't like it! So we'll all have our own ideas of canon - for me, HL:TS, Raven, and (with reservations) bits of that original film and Endgame. And if we choose, we can write our own continuations of the story in fan fiction - more comfortably than if the franchise's writers had given us a satisfactory ending!
                  One thing that I think should be pointed out here, in this particular thread:

                  "Canon" does not mean "true." That’s a common fan-myth. "Canon" simply means an original body of work, as distinguished from its derivative works, such as tie-ins and fanfiction. It's a term used for the entire collective work, rather than any individual part of it -- specifically, it was used to classify the Sherlock Holmes stories written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle as distinguished from those written by other writers.

                  Nobody "determines" canon. It's not an official seal of approval. It's not a label that some guy at Lucasfilm or Paramount goes around stamping onto things. It's a term of criticism. It's a description, a way that people talking about a fictional series refer to the original work as a way of differentiating it from derivative works like fanfiction, tie-ins, or pastiches. Nothing needs to be declared canonical; if it comes from the creators or owners, canon is simply what it *is*, by definition.

                  It's like, say, calling something a "hill," versus calling it a "mountain." Calling it that doesn't make it what it is; it's just a way of describing and classifying what it automatically intrinsically is, due to the forces of nature itself.
                  Last edited by Leto II; 06-27-2017, 03:54 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #34
                    The term canon derives from discussions of holy books, distinguishing the official ones from the apocryphal ones, which suggests that canon is determined.
                    __________________________________________________

                    "Really? We are trapped in a room with a machine that can cut off my head. Now that's a longshot."
                    --Connor MacLeod in Peter Bellwood's original Highlander II script

                    Comment


                    • #35
                      ^ In its original ecclesiastical definition, you're correct, it was used to describe accepted holy works from those that were considered unacceptable by the authorities. Starting in the mid-20th Century, however, the term became a literary one, applied strictly to the works of Sherlock Holmes written by Conan Doyle, and took on its modern form, in which "canon" is now just a shorthand way of saying "the media that comes from the source." It doesn't mean "facts" or "truth." It just means it's the stuff made up by the creators of a given property, rather than the stuff made up by other people.

                      It has never been a value judgment. Both categories have entries ranging in quality from sheer brilliance to utter stupidity. For example, the Star Trek canon includes both "The City on the Edge of Forever" and "And the Children Shall Lead," both "The Inner Light" and "Shades of Grey," both "The Visitor" and "Profit and Lace." It basically boils down to the creators' control over their own creation. "Canon" is just a pretentious word for the original creators' own ideas and decisions.

                      Comment


                      • #36
                        Originally posted by Nicholas Ward View Post
                        The mortal woman probably reincarnated. It's heavily implied that reincarnation is the mortal mechanic in the Highlander Universe in TSFV, the Path and the Source.
                        Wasn't it more than implied in the "Haunted" episode?
                        Highlander: Dark Places

                        Comment


                        • #37
                          Originally posted by Andrew NDB View Post
                          Wasn't it more than implied in the "Haunted" episode?
                          I have to watch that one again.

                          Comment


                          • #38
                            The movie isn't in canon and has been negate by TPTB. Even its main cast won't admit it as canonical. However, Giovanni, Zai Jie and Reggie Weller have potential as characters once removed from that dreadful movie. It takes imagination and rewriting. An archaeologist from Asia, a cardinal from Vatican and an astronomer. They do have potential.
                            Your point on what's canon is interesting, Leto. So those three immortals are "true" since they appeared in the movie, like MacLeod and Dawson. But we do not acknowledge the stupid death of Dawson or the existence of the Guardian.

                            The One isn't a mortal woman, it is the last Immortal to receive the sum of the Immortals' power and knowledge. That's canon as in true and aceeptable by us, the ageing fan community.

                            Comment


                            • #39
                              Originally posted by Gardner View Post
                              The movie isn't in canon and has been negate by TPTB.
                              Not exactly... Abramowitz said it's not canon at HLWW9 and Adrian and Elizabeth gave a performance there on stage, in-character where the events of the Source were relegated to a dream that Duncan had. But none of those people are really TPTB. I mean, Christopher Lambert can't come out and tell us that Endgame isn't canon, right? Gregory Widen can't tell us that certain episodes of the TV show aren't canon, right?

                              That said, the Peter Davis-produced "Reunion" short might be pretty damning to "The Source"'s place in Highlander canon. But it's a fairly obscure thing that can either be overlooked or even allowed to exist side-by-side with the Source (it doesn't necessarily contradict it).

                              Basically, after Endgame, you have a Highlander "Choose Your Own Adventure" ending path: One path is "The Source." The other path is "Reunion." But "Reunion" isn't an ending at all, and it doesn't even have Duncan in it.

                              However, Giovanni, Zai Jie and Reggie Weller have potential as characters once removed from that dreadful movie. It takes imagination and rewriting.
                              Giovanni might need the most work, but the rest, definitely.

                              The One isn't a mortal woman, it is the last Immortal to receive the sum of the Immortals' power and knowledge. That's canon as in true and aceeptable by us, the ageing fan community.
                              I don't think that's a given at all but we'll never get an answer.
                              Highlander: Dark Places

                              Comment


                              • Gardner
                                Gardner commented
                                Editing a comment
                                Truly pathetic the shape of this franchise! The damn Highlanderverse is way too inconsistent to my taste.
                                To me there should be :
                                - Highlander I with Connor and the Kurgan aware there are a lot more Immortals left living on Earth.
                                - NO Highlander II
                                - Highlander the series WITHOUT Ahriman and LESS immortals killed by Duncan
                                - Highlander III with better plotting (scratch Kane speaking English in 1994 after being entombed for four hundred years)
                                - No Highlander IV. Idiot plot story with Connor handing his head to Duncan, that's dumb.
                                - Highlander the Raven with a lower kill count for Amanda, because she is not a super-hero like Duncan
                                - Definetely NO Highlander the Source

                                How about that ?

                              • Andrew NDB
                                Andrew NDB commented
                                Editing a comment
                                I think that's fine, Gardner. I do think, though, that Endgame could be perfectly salvageable. I don't even really mind it at all now beyond it being retroactively (I saw it before I saw the series)... very unlike the show.

                            • #40
                              Thank you Andrew. Say, how did you perform the miracle of restoring the HL message board online ?
                              PS : Duncan and Connor do not make a fussin Endgame and Duncan simply chops Kell's head off since Connor won't do it. Scratch Sanctuary too (wink)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X