Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Petrichor02 t1_j6fr0sj wrote

A retcon is any retroactive continuity regardless of whether it contradicts information that came before or not. If new information is treated as having always been true, it’s technically a retcon.

Though technically the Vader thing is kind of a retcon that contradicts previous information since the previous movie said Anakin was killed by Vader. (This is especially the case with that example since it wasn’t Lucas’s original plan for Vader to be Anakin.)

However OP is presumably asking about TV retcons, so it wouldn’t count on those grounds.


GuyKopski t1_j6fyyob wrote

That's what makes a good retcon. Obi-Wan's dialogue about Anakin and Vader in ANH was meant to be true when it was written, but it still works with the post-Empire story because it makes complete sense that Obi-Wan would want to hide the truth of Luke's heritage from him. Even the way it's acted fits perfectly, with Alec Guiness visibly hesitating before telling the lie. It's so smooth that it's completely believable that it was always the original intention, even though it wasn't.

Where retcons become problematic is when you just have to straight up ignore details that don't fit the later version because they don't make sense anymore.


RSquared t1_j6gecd9 wrote

"It was true, from a certain point of view." No, it fucking wasn't; Obi-wan just still had his blind spots regarding his apprentice. The Jedi are far more interesting when you see that they fail at their own Code repeatedly.


PerfectZeong t1_j6ig04x wrote

But it was true, from a certain point of view. The man who was his friend and brother is gone and he doesn't believe he can ever return.


Rubbersoulrevolver t1_j6g2tgo wrote

That doesn't seem to be true. From wikipedia: " Lucas has said that he knew Vader was Luke's father while writing the first film,[23]"


orangemaroon25 t1_j6g5jyn wrote

Lucas was lying when he said that then, because he wasn't even the writer who came up with it.