Forum:Are deleted scenes canon?

Index → Panopticon → Are deleted scenes canon?

Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.

Deleted Scenes

Are delted scenes canon.--Skittles the hog 06:57, July 20, 2008 (UTC)

No i don't think they are as they are not part of the aired product however i see no reason not to mention them in a behind the scenes section or a new section of there own Dark Lord Xander 11:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it depends on why the scene was deleted, which seems to be explained at the start of the clip on the DVDs. For example, some scenes are deleted/removed/altered for story reasons, and some are deleted for timing issues or emotional impact - the TARDIS coral scene at the end of Journey's End is an example of the latter.--TheOmnius 04:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

They're still not part of the original story, the story that was available to everyone upon broadcast in the original country ie the UK. The deleted scenes can be addressed in the story notes, or if they have a big impact on something in a behind the scenes section.

This goes for old stories as well as new ones, and also carries over to novels where a writer may have put a missing chapter up on the net or audio dramas with missing scenes. Same rules apply, the original is what is canon. The only exception I can think of is second edition of books where the material changes between editions (the only one I can currently think of) is Dead Romance, in its case if something is directly relating to the second edition it's just citied as (BNA: Dead Romance second edition), or something to that effect. --Tangerineduel 15:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

So what's the difference between a DVD release and a second printing of a book? Both basically show deleted content ( as in your example ) that is more or less legitimate - the only difference being that few books are trimmed down to fit into forty five minutes.--TheOmnius 15:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

The book in question was re-released with some wording and content altered to fit into the Faction Paradox range, making Dead Romance part of that new range as a second edition while the first is part of the Benny New Adventures range. I mentioned mainly as it's the exception that proves the rule. The difference being in Dead Romance's example it's integrated, in a deleted scenes example it's clearly shown outside of the story. --Tangerineduel 16:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

But it's not clearly shown to be outside the story - just the original broadcast. There are several instances where scenes or parts of scenes were removed for no reason other than time, and they say so in the introduction to the deleted scene.--TheOmnius 17:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

As I said that's the point. They are not part of the original story. The stories are 'as they were seen/heard/read' by the majority of those who consumed them, that means the deleted scenes aren't included, because they're outside the original story as it was originally broadcast/released.

There is however another exception I'd forgotten about that came up a while back, that is The Curse of Fenric and (now) Battlefield those two have the missing scenes re-edited back into the stories, as such when citing it put DW: The Curse of Fenric DVD special edition, or as ever something to that effect. This is the only instance where deleted scenes could could towards an article without being in the behind the scenes section as they're presented within the story, rather than out of context in a DVD menu of deleted scenes. --Tangerineduel 03:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

So by your logic it isn't canon that the Meta-Crisis Tenth Doctor told Rose he loved her or that the Tenth Doctor had intended to at Bad Wolf Bay the first time? Also, I reject that your concept of the original broadcast and original story are the same thing. There are many episodes where the story was changed significantly prior to broadcast, with multiple versions being made. The Pilot is one major example of this. Also, this would hold us to the original intention and revelation at the time of broadcast, without taking into account recent events/stories/what-have-you. Retcons happen through new releases and stories. There is no reason why this can't apply to at least some deleted scenes. --TheOmnius 03:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The 'I love you' note is in the Behind the Scenes section of the Meta-Crisis article.

Any new information in any releases further on from story X are incorporated as they come. Deleted scenes never were in the original.

The Pilot Episode isn't considered canon and therefore isn't a problem, see Tardis:Canon policy 'All Doctor Who television stories' are valid resources. Other than this and those stories I've mentioned what other significantly different stories are there that were altered prior to broadcast? --Tangerineduel 05:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Shada. The conclusion of Trial of a Time Lord. Also, documentaries count as secondary sources. A special feature including deleted scenes and the comments of the creators counts as a documentary, albeit very short. --TheOmnius 16:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Well...Shada was never broadcast so there's no actual difference between it and (well nothing actually), there's the video and the webcast/audio drama version (which are referred to independantly of one another). Remind me what is different between different version of the end of Trial? (I can only guess it's the not-death of Peri?), which was still broadcast and therefore canon.

Okay so if it's a secondary source, which still means it gets dealt with and "identified and treated as such in their relevant articles" (or section of an article ie the Behind the Scenes section). --Tangerineduel 16:28, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Shada WAS broadcast, just not on television. Is it just the tv broadcasts that count? And if so, is canon different in Canada? (Re: Journey's End) The script at the end of Trial was replaced without reference to the original script.

And why does a secondary source need to be relegated to another page or the behind the scenes section?--TheOmnius 16:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)