Forum:Deleted Scenes and Rule 4 By Proxy: Difference between revisions

Forum:Deleted Scenes and Rule 4 By Proxy (view source)

Revision as of 06:06, 30 April 2023

1,941 bytes added , 30 April 2023

→‎Discussion

Najawin

Trusted

8,511

edits

@@ Line 204: / Line 204: @@
 ::Now, look, maybe we want to reject the R3 concerns here! But I think they were part of the reasoning presented in [[Forum:P.S.]], and I think Czech is right that showing people a glimpse behind the camera, into the storyboards, isn't necessarily the same as "officially releasing a scene". Maybe we want to say it is! But there's some daylight here. And it's reasonable to discuss, and it's simply not addressed in the OP, when it's part of the reason, it seems, deleted scenes are invalid. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:26, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
-::I think that we should change [[T:VS]] to make deleted scenes only partially break rule 3 (rectifiable by an explicit, rather than presumed, r4 pass), and to write in a '''special case''" that r4bp can make the deleted scene in question valid. However, I do think that a thread should be needed for every deleted scene validation.
+:::I think that we should change [[T:VS]] to make deleted scenes only partially break rule 3 (rectifiable by an explicit, rather than presumed, r4 pass), and to write in a '''special case''" that r4bp can make the deleted scene in question valid. However, I do think that a thread should be needed for every deleted scene validation.
-Additionally, I '''fully''' support the validation of the ''Journey's End deleted scene'' and that ha about the strongest authorial intent ever. I also support the ''Remembrance of the Daleks'' and ''P.S'' validations, and from the information provided here (which of course may not be fully accurate) agree with OS25 that ''P.S'' isn't even a deleted scene, instead it's an adaptation of a "really long deleted scene", a la [[Shada (webcast)|Shada]] / [[Shada (novelisation)|Shada]] / [[Shada (audio story)|Shada]].
+::Additionally, I '''fully''' support the validation of the ''Journey's End deleted scene'' and that ha about the strongest authorial intent ever. I also support the ''Remembrance of the Daleks'' and ''P.S'' validations, and from the information provided here (which of course may not be fully accurate) agree with OS25 that ''P.S'' isn't even a deleted scene, instead it's an adaptation of a "really long deleted scene", a la [[Shada (webcast)|Shada]] / [[Shada (novelisation)|Shada]] / [[Shada (audio story)|Shada]].
-However, I do '''not''' support validating [[The Pilot Episode]], because I believe the [[Unnatural History (novel)|Unnatural History]] reference isn't intended to unambiguously imply that the [[Original palmpset universe]] is ''The Pilot Episode'', but perhaps anything, as the "42nd century" was an idea that wasn't fully contradicted until much later. [[User:Cousin Ettolrhc|Cousin Ettolrahc]] [[User talk:Cousin Ettolrhc|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 05:30, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
+:::However, I do '''not''' support validating [[The Pilot Episode]], because I believe the [[Unnatural History (novel)|Unnatural History]] reference isn't intended to unambiguously imply that the [[Original palmpset universe]] is ''The Pilot Episode'', but perhaps anything, as the "42nd century" was an idea that wasn't fully contradicted until much later. [[User:Cousin Ettolrhc|Cousin Ettolrahc]] [[User talk:Cousin Ettolrhc|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 05:30, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
+::::[[P.S. (webcast)|P.S.]] is an "adaptation" insofar as the webcast is a bunch of storyboards cut together with music, and then Arthur Darvill speaks when it's the letter from him. (Okay, I'm being a bit reductive, there's a slight amount of animation put into like one or two of the shots, and there's some typography. But this is as close as you can get to Czech's criticism of substituting storyboard for story.) Like, all of this work was already for the scene, there's no adaptation, there's absolutely no similarities to the three Shada's. (I guess the only thing you can argue over is the typography, the splicing together of storyboards, and the minor, minor animation that exists in one or two scenes, but if that's an "adaptation", then any deleted scene compiled for public consumption is an adaptation and the term is meaningless, since you have to do ''some'' amount of editing to make them viewable.)
+::::(Let me note that I quite like P.S., but I think there's some issues here. It's definitely not an "adaptation" of the deleted scene in any way like we normally use the term. I think P.S., The Pilot Episode, and Journey's End/Remembrance are all different sorts of things from each other and each have interesting problems with their own sorts of R3 concerns. Fully willing to be talked around to supporting some or all of these! But I think there's some stuff we need to think about here.)
+::::On a more general note, Etty, what do you mean when you say "partially break R3" and the next comment about R4? I don't see how any of the other rules would impact their status on R3 - if we knew that someone absolutely, definitively intended their work to be in the DWU but it didn't pass R2, we still wouldn't consider it valid. Obviously the inverse is true as well. Authorial intent only applies to R4. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 06:06, 30 April 2023 (UTC)