Saur0n Posted September 30, 2007 Posted September 30, 2007 Says the guy who obviously has no idea what he's talking about.... Says the guy with no life. Grow up and learn some reading comprehension. Quote
azrael Posted September 30, 2007 Posted September 30, 2007 Says the guy with no life. Grow up and learn some reading comprehension. Don't start. Same goes for you Keith. Quote
VFTF1 Posted October 1, 2007 Posted October 1, 2007 Maybe I have a really fickle short-term memory - but I don't see ANY problems with Macross continuity. DYRL is a documentary realeased within the SDF universe - it's a kind of "Pearl Harbor" rendition of the story; and just like Pearl Harbor skewed some historical facts; DYRL does the same. SDF Macross 1-36 is the real universe; DYRL is a movie made within that universe. The SDF in Macross Plus is not "styled" on the basis of DYRL, but is a more detailed anime rendition of the SDF Macross mech which was clearly damaged and shorn of paint when it decended after destroying Boldoza and his Fleet. In fact - I think we need to take the details in the anime in SDF Macross with a grain of salt. Animation has its' limits --- Are we going to say that Roy Fokker from Macross Zero was not the same as from SDF Macross because the line art wasn't exact? It's an artistic interpretattion of a fictionalized account of reality - so you can't just be a "literalist" with the line art/animation. It has been stated that with each consecutive Macross series, Kwaki...kwa...sorry - the creative talent - takes what's aesthetically best from the past and uses it in the future. That's a really good stategy. Do you really want SDF Macross style animation rendered forever? Or do you prefer that with the progress of animation techniques, we finally get something as beautiful as Macross Zero? Just my two cents on all this VFTF1 Quote
Mr March Posted October 1, 2007 Posted October 1, 2007 Be careful not to confuse two very different subjects when dealing with canon. No one objects to fan reconciliation and supposition, as long as it's understood that fan speculation is all it is. You, as an individual, can certainly reconcile all things as artistic deviations if that works for you. However, if some fans choose to analyze Macross with a literal approach, that rationale is just as legitimate as your interpretive approach (some may even argue more so and they'd have the official canon policy to back them up). The problem, even with officially created artistic revisions, is the continuity. Once you make a Macross production and officially release it as Macross, even the creators are stuck with it and disregard it at their own cost. The SDF-1 Macross was not originally envisioned as the popular Film Version it is now, for better or worse. It's original state in the series is forever canon unless Big West/Studio Nue removes it or the show from continuity somehow (ie. Macross II). Even if the creator says; "This Film Version is how the SDF-1 Macross was to appear and will forever appear as such from this point onward", that does not invalidate the canon status of the SDF-1 Macross as it appeared in the canon SDFM television series. These two canon elements must be reconciled from within the fictional universe, not from without. This is the essence of unification of continuity, the attempt to reconcile all the disparate elements of a given franchise, discarding elements only when there is an irreconcilable contradiction that cannot be solved otherwise. This is why George Lucas went to such pains to alter the original Star Wars trilogy so changes between the prequels and sequels would jive without creating glaring continuity errors, right or wrong. Correspondingly, Macross fans cannont be blamed for trying to internally reconcile the SDF-1 Macross pre-and-post DYRL until the day that SDFM is officially released with all instances of the original SDF-1 Macross removed Quote
Keith Posted October 1, 2007 Posted October 1, 2007 Maybe I have a really fickle short-term memory - but I don't see ANY problems with Macross continuity. DYRL is a documentary realeased within the SDF universe - it's a kind of "Pearl Harbor" rendition of the story; and just like Pearl Harbor skewed some historical facts; DYRL does the same. SDF Macross 1-36 is the real universe; DYRL is a movie made within that universe. The SDF in Macross Plus is not "styled" on the basis of DYRL, but is a more detailed anime rendition of the SDF Macross mech which was clearly damaged and shorn of paint when it decended after destroying Boldoza and his Fleet. More accurately, its the refit design shown off for the Megaroad launch ceremony in FB 2012. Basically, it's how they fixed up the ship after Kamjin crashed into the Daedelus. Quote
Zinjo Posted October 1, 2007 Posted October 1, 2007 The design differences have all been explained in various official sources, so I am not sure what March is trying to convey with his comments as VFTF1 simply stated he saw no issues with the differences between SDFM and DYRL. How this relates to the SA I'll never know... Quote
Mr March Posted October 1, 2007 Posted October 1, 2007 (edited) The design differences have all been explained in various official sources, so I am not sure what March is trying to convey with his comments as VFTF1 simply stated he saw no issues with the differences between SDFM and DYRL. How this relates to the SA I'll never know... This is fixating upon another arguement totally unrelated to the question asked. VFTF1 has just written he sees no continuity problems in Macross and wonders why others can't reconcile the differing appearances of the SDF-1 Macross based on pure artistic interpretation in the sequels, as he does. I just responded saying that's good if it works for him, but isn't necessarily internally correct nor officially consistent. And then I went on to detail why. The canon explanation that the SDF-1 (Film Version) is actually just the SDF-1 (TV Version ) refitted never even entered into the discussion. Edited October 1, 2007 by Mr March Quote
Zinjo Posted October 1, 2007 Posted October 1, 2007 This is fixating upon another arguement totally unrelated to the question asked. VFTF1 has just written he sees no continuity problems in Macross and wonders why others can't reconcile the differing appearances of the SDF-1 Macross based on pure artistic interpretation in the sequels, as he does. I just responded saying that's good if it works for him, but isn't necessarily internally correct nor officially consistent. And then I went on to detail why. The canon explanation that the SDF-1 (Film Version) is actually just the SDF-1 (TV Version ) refitted never even entered into the discussion. I understand your point of view, however doesn't it convolude the issue when such a comprehensive explanation is given to a simple observation? Just a thought or maybe it's just me... Quote
Mr March Posted October 1, 2007 Posted October 1, 2007 I am assuming, perhaps mistakenly, that VFTF1 is already aware of this fact. I'm also not inclined to dismiss his artistic interpretive analysis, since it is valid in certain cases where there quite simply is no internally consistent explanation. His Roy Fokker example as a case in point. Quote
sketchley Posted October 2, 2007 Posted October 2, 2007 Could be that he was explaining it for everyone else, and not the person that he was specifically replying to and/or the only example he could come up with was one that required a long explanation? Quote
Mr March Posted October 2, 2007 Posted October 2, 2007 (edited) To be honest, I'm trying to err on the side of intelligence. The last time I provided the obvious answer, a member here thought I was flaming him for stating such a blatantly obvious fact. Luckily that situation was resolved calmly. Even so, I figured it can't hurt to assume the best (that people know) in future discussions rather than assuming the worst (that people don't know). Edited October 2, 2007 by Mr March Quote
VFTF1 Posted October 2, 2007 Posted October 2, 2007 Gee wiz I feel like Minmey at the Miss Macross concert - jus lil ol' me causin' so much commotion? VFTF1 Quote
sketchley Posted October 2, 2007 Posted October 2, 2007 Make's sense, and it was an interesting read, too. Sadly, we need more of it, as so much in these forums is drivel... Quote
s001 Posted October 2, 2007 Posted October 2, 2007 I have a theory that explain all this 'canon non canon' thing to me. SDFM is the historical SW1 reference for the later macross shows but DYRL is the visual reference, with some obvious and necessary exceptions like Miria's VF-1J valkyrie in M7. Quote
Zinjo Posted October 2, 2007 Posted October 2, 2007 (edited) I have a theory that explain all this 'canon non canon' thing to me. SDFM is the historical SW1 reference for the later macross shows but DYRL is the visual reference, with some obvious and necessary exceptions like Miria's VF-1J valkyrie in M7. The visuals of DYRL have been explained as simple "upgrades" to existing equipment, just as military equipment is upgraded several times over the duration of it's service in reality. With the film being explained as a dramatic film about the events of SW (like Hollywood's "The Longest Day") that was made in the 2030's (if I recall correctly) then all the available equipment of the day (including the VF-1's with the most advanced upgrades and the refitted SDF-1) were used in the film.. By the time DYRL was made in the Macross universe, the VF-4's, VF-9's and VF-5000's were the front line fighters of the day. Many of the VF-1's were probably decomissioned or being sold to colony worlds for defensive equipment (however that can be construed as speculation as no documented evidence supports that conclusion). Edited October 2, 2007 by Zinjo Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.