Easiest continuation of Films and TV shows to ignore as Un-Canon

[Immortal Weapon]

With Stargate it's very easy to ignore the movie. There's no need to watch for anyone who wants to get into the TV shows.

[Gaius]

Most Terminator films (including Sarah Connor Chronicles) because of how much recent sequels/continuations ignore or override previous installments either by just creative intent or time travel shenanigans.

[Valentis]

Harry Potter and The Cursed Child

Police Academy 5, 6, 7

There is only one Jurassic Park movie. The 1993 film.

[Immortal Weapon]

The Fast and Furious franchise had a hard time with this. Every movie from 4 to 7 were set before Tokyo Draft because how poorly received that movie was and killing off a fan favorite character. It's really hard to ignore it given how much it screwed with the series chronology

[AnakinFlair]

I think that the only really solid way to say a sequel or continuation is easy to ignore is if it’s eventually a non-factor in the franchise going forward - either because it’s box office take was underwhelming enough or long enough ago that it’s been rebooted or repackaged, or if the property moves on and just never references it again.

And that can go *both* ways; if you want to ignore one side of the Star Trek alternate reality split or the other, you now have a vehicle for that.

I’d say this can go from very clear, bitter, and insistent denunciations of previous entries - like the relationship the various Terminator films after T2 have to each other - to more subtle and ambiguously ignored entries - Iron Man 3, for instance.

IM3 is the one case where I’m curious what everyone else thinks - if it can be excepted as an example of an easy-to-skip movie, than we have one end of the scale vs the more clearly defined endpoint with hard continuity reboots and relaunches.

I mean, the most visible changes in that film that actually seem to have stuck would be what model of armor Tony’s on, and him not needing the arc reactor in his chest anymore. Everything else seems to be a total non-factor going forward - Pepper doesn’t have her Extremis powers, Killian’s not been mentioned again and his Mandarin ID is being taken away totally, and all the other events of the film are kind of unnecessary to know. Thor: The Dark World is more concretely tied to the MCU, thanks to Loki’s character arc and it’s importance to Endgame, even though TDW has a similarly poor reputation.

Unless Shang Chi’s new Mandarin references Killian, nothing major from this movie would ever be required watching for MCU audiences.

Thoughts?

Well, there was the short film 'Hail to the King' that brought back Trevor and appeared to set up a real Mandarin. But who knows if that will go anywhere.

[batnbreakfast]

Well, there was the short film 'Hail to the King' that brought back Trevor and appeared to set up a real Mandarin. But who knows if that will go anywhere.

This. Also Iron Man (2008) has the Ten Rings organization. If there's another Mandarin he can evolve from the very first MCU movie and keep ignoring IM3. I kinda like IM3, though. The ending with Tony standing in the ruins of his home confused me nonetheless.

[Immortal Weapon]

What sucks about Iron Man 3 is that it introduced AIM to the MCU and haven't been use since. I was hoping they would come back in the Ant Man films given Pym shaky history with Howard Stark and the government.

[Castle]

Pretty much what I expected, this is just "Which sequels do you wish hadn't been made?" the thread.

I don't wholly regret X3 was made. We got some cool casting of comic characters that had some importance with later films. Kesley Grammer playing Beast and Ellen Page playing Kitty Pryde.

I don't regret the Star Wars Prequels. It was worth it to see what the Anakin and Obiwan relationship was like not to mention finally seeing the woman Darth Vader fell in love with. The fall of the old republic and rise of the empire made everything worth it.

Some movies were disappointing entries to the series. X3, Attack of the Clones but I can't say they did not add anything to the series. Some don't deserve to exist as they added nothing. Dark Phoenix, Rise of Skywalker.

[Starter Set]

Harry Potter and The Cursed Child

Oh yes, that one lol.

I'm going to add "everything Rowling has said about HP since 2007" in the list.

[Cyke]

What you do with a sequel that introduced elements to a series that make it impossible to ignore? For the Star Wars fan who hated the prequel trilogy how you ignore things like Midi-chlorians and all the things that turned Anakin into Vader?

Please keep in mind that I say this as someone who thinks the prequels count as canon and should stay, but for a good chunk of them (and in my mind kind of a weakness), they're already referenced in the OT. The things that turned Anakin into Vader were alluded well enough (like Palpatine in ROTJ). The Midichlorians were mentioned just one time.

----

Now, to go in a different direction, about originals that can be ignored as "un-canon" compared to the rest of the franchise (Stargate was already mentioned, and it's a good example), I'd throw in Star Trek: TMP. Its biggest contribution is meta -- showing Trek can be on the big screen and the giving us what would be later known as the TNG score -- but most everything within can be handwaved away. The refit Enterprise is still supposed to be the same Enterprise from the TV show, V'Ger is never brought up again, the dialogue in future movies implies that leaves of absence or shore leave between movies is common, Spock's journey is never referenced ever, etc. Despite being on a much bigger scale than almost all its sequels, it also has arguably the least impact on them all. Only Star Trek V can challenge the claim to being the most inconsequential -- at least the Sona in Insurrection get name dropped elsewhere.

[AnakinFlair]

Please keep in mind that I say this as someone who thinks the prequels count as canon and should stay, but for a good chunk of them (and in my mind kind of a weakness), they're already referenced in the OT. The things that turned Anakin into Vader were alluded well enough (like Palpatine in ROTJ). The Midichlorians were mentioned just one time.

----

Now, to go in a different direction, about originals that can be ignored as "un-canon" compared to the rest of the franchise (Stargate was already mentioned, and it's a good example), I'd throw in Star Trek: TMP. Its biggest contribution is meta -- showing Trek can be on the big screen and the giving us what would be later known as the TNG score -- but most everything within can be handwaved away. The refit Enterprise is still supposed to be the same Enterprise from the TV show, V'Ger is never brought up again, the dialogue in future movies implies that leaves of absence or shore leave between movies is common, Spock's journey is never referenced ever, etc. Despite being on a much bigger scale than almost all its sequels, it also has arguably the least impact on them all. Only Star Trek V can challenge the claim to being the most inconsequential -- at least the Sona in Insurrection get name dropped elsewhere.

Can the Stargate movie be considered "un-cannon", though? Everything that happened in that movie is referenced in the show- mostly in the pilot. Daniel is on Abbydos with Sha're and the kid. Jack is in a better place, but his son's death is brought up in that first season. The creature designs stayed mostly the same, though they added new creatures and backstory to flesh out the story. So without that movie, there wouldn't have been a show.

I think Star Trek: TMP's biggest influence was that it showed that Roddenberry's vision did NOT work on the big screen. As a 1 hour weekly TV show, you can have these deeply intellectual plots that question existence. But as a movie, that doesn't ALWAYS work (I know, 2001. But even that took some time to catch on to audiences). But it's telling that TMP was pure Roddenberry, and starting with TWoK onwards, you get more military-esque drama with ship battles, fights, and fantasy (time travel).

[Cyke]

Can the Stargate movie be considered "un-cannon", though? Everything that happened in that movie is referenced in the show- mostly in the pilot. Daniel is on Abbydos with Sha're and the kid. Jack is in a better place, but his son's death is brought up in that first season. The creature designs stayed mostly the same, though they added new creatures and backstory to flesh out the story. So without that movie, there wouldn't have been a show.

I think Star Trek: TMP's biggest influence was that it showed that Roddenberry's vision did NOT work on the big screen. As a 1 hour weekly TV show, you can have these deeply intellectual plots that question existence. But as a movie, that doesn't ALWAYS work (I know, 2001. But even that took some time to catch on to audiences). But it's telling that TMP was pure Roddenberry, and starting with TWoK onwards, you get more military-esque drama with ship battles, fights, and fantasy (time travel).

I'm just taking "un-canon" as it can be ignored without detriment to the rest of the franchise, yet it's already been made (so "un-canon" being reactive to what's there, as opposed to "non-canon" as if it never existed or is completely separate). Stargate the movie started things out and it is canon with everything that followed it but also, I really think you can simply not watch that movie at all and still enjoy SG-1 -- the first episode already explains the events of the movie well enough.

[MichaelC]

The original Stargate is clearly non-canon to the show simply because the alien was so different. In the original movie, the alien is an individual whose true form is the standard abduction alien type. There is no suggestion that his entire species does this, and indeed his isolation implies he's some kind of freak. Maybe some mad scientist type who discovered the secret of immortality via possessing another species. In the show, the Goa'uld are an entire species of leeches who possess other species as a normal part of their life-cycle.

Now clearly fairly similar events happened in both continuities, perhaps even every event not specifically requiring a different alien, but still, it is simply not the same universe.

[Synestra]

I actually liked Return of Jafar. Never saw the third one, though.

Yeah, Return of Jafar was really just the pilot for the animated Aladdin TV series, which explained the drop in animation quality. Likewise King of Thieves is the ending of the series. The main negative was losing Robin Williams as Genie in Return of Jafar (he came back for the 3rd movie). Well, that and giving Iago a singing role.

I recognize the flaws in them, but enjoyed them more than most of the other direct to video Disney sequels of that era, along with the animated series. And that final battle with Jafar was pretty intense as a kid.

For me, I'd say Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. I can go with the Fantastic Beasts movies (though I am starting to wonder if they will actually continue them- between Rowling's recent comments about Trans people to the continuing controversy around Depp and the new controversy around Miller, on top of Covid delays, that series seems to be dead in the water). But everything I've read about Cursed Child makes if seem like poorly written fan fiction that never should have seen the light of day, let alone be turned into a play.

Harry Potter and The Cursed Child

Oh yes, that one lol.

I've become very conflicted about Cursed Child as I've seen it on Broadway. The plot is still a mess that I'm critical of, but from a theater-going experience, I've never seen anything quite like it. The effects were absolutely amazing and in some cases even enveloped the audience. There's also some character moments in it that are really satisfying.

In terms of narrative, it still greatly misuses the time turners, which Rowling herself used sparsely in the original series for good reason. The villain also doesn't make sense, and for some reason the script seems to stick with the movie version of Ron rather than book Ron, treating him as something of a fool. I now tend to think of of the original 7 as canon, and Cursed Child like a non-canon What If, while still enjoying what I did get out of the experience.

I'm going to add "everything Rowing has said about HP since 2007" in the list.

This I agree with 100% though, without any conflict lol.

[Starter Set]

Oh i'm sure it's a great play and i would love to watch it, expecially on Broadway you lucky bastard.

But an actual part of the HP canon? No, nope, nooooooooo, can't do.