Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Fallenangel

How do you feel about fanon creations?

58 posts in this topic

gallery_101_23_908.jpg

I mentioned Jon Palmer's M-wing in a thread the other day, and StoutFiles offered an interesting stance:

The M-wing is not a Star Wars ship, just a random ship that FBTB has a unhealthy obsession with. It has as much to to do with Star Wars as a rock in my front yard.

Sure there isn't a definite connection, but I think it depends on how you look at fanon creations in general... after all, what is a LEGO TIE MOC but a non-canon representation of a TIE? There's certainly quite a bit of artistic license employed in the making.

I always liked this fanon MOC, by our very own kost u grlu:

5694568855_d9ea882c6c_z.jpg

A determining factor is definitely how well an MOC could fit into the 'canon' universe. I think kost u grlu's ship could very well represent a legitimate 'ugly'. I also think this MOC by Rook could be a legitimate podracer. What do you all think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, I don't consider the posted MOC to be fanon; just an Ugly with some creative license taken. I only consider Uglies to be fanon if it's very unlikely that they'd appear in canon. (like the Slave I - TIE/ln combo of the same contest)

But anyways, I rather like fanon creations. I'm no good at them myself, but I do like seeing what people can come up with. Besides, there are some canon vehicles that are worse than some fanon ones. (a lot of those being found in the CW show) Mainly what I like to see in a fanon creation is for it to look like it could fit into Star Wars. The M-wing, unfortunately, doesn't really look like it fits in to me. However, it is rather cleverly built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fanon is a chance to expand the Starwars universe through your own imagination so it is very interesting to see what others come up with :sweet:

By the way fallenangel, how art thou a Duke? *huh*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the Star Wars universe is so huge and broad, that fanon's and ugly's can fit in this world....thanks to the Lucas Law which is anything can be changed to make money, oops sorry.....a good story ! :laugh:

Though I do see the issue of craft like the M-wing, it could be just considered a typical sci-fi craft and it only becomes SW when you include a SW minifig and weapons which means even a city police car could be a SW creation by adding a clone or Jedi to it...MEH ! :wink:

Oh, yeah....'fallenangel' dude, you a DUKE at under 2000 posts ? :look:

Edited by lightningtiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But anyways, I rather like fanon creations. I'm no good at them myself, but I do like seeing what people can come up with. Besides, there are some canon vehicles that are worse than some fanon ones. (a lot of those being found in the CW show) Mainly what I like to see in a fanon creation is for it to look like it could fit into Star Wars. The M-wing, unfortunately, doesn't really look like it fits in to me. However, it is rather cleverly built.

I agree, a fanon vehicle needs to have some association with other "official" vehicles, be it color scheme, shape, or just certain design elements.

As for the M-Wing, I don't really get FBTB's obsession with it either. It has some NPU, and it sorta looks like an M from above, but aside from that it's really not that great IMO. :sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fanon vehicles are fine, I just don't consider them Star Wars. Given that SW exists in a galaxy where CW/EU introduce a new planet whenever they feel like it, pretty much anything could be something from SW. Referring to my front yard rock, I could pick it up and say it's a rock ship used in the city Rocktopia of Rockia VII. It is now just as much SW as the M-wing. The M-wing is a nicely built ship, but it's just a ship. Declaring it as something from SW is personal opinion only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fanon vehicles are fine, I just don't consider them Star Wars. Given that SW exists in a galaxy where CW/EU introduce a new planet whenever they feel like it, pretty much anything could be something from SW. Referring to my front yard rock, I could pick it up and say it's a rock ship used in the city Rocktopia of Rockia VII. It is now just as much SW as the M-wing. The M-wing is a nicely built ship, but it's just a ship. Declaring it as something from SW is personal opinion only.

I'm afraid you've already been beaten to building ships out of rock-like material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the key thing to Lego is being creative. Star Wars Universe implies near limitless possibilities. Therefore mixing SWU & Lego should result in virtually endless possibilities of creativity limited only by the imagination and the technologies set for by its creators, authors, designers, cinematographers, markup artists, fans, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. :wink:

Could/Should they be spilt in subforums? Probably. Canon and Fan Fiction, a process that is already under way in other forums. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with 'Rook', splitting Canon and Fan Fiction into subforms to keep everyone having.....for those who like both or just Canon designs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I like some of the creations that people make but I do agree with lightning tiger that someone could just chuck a Jedi or Clone in a city police car and add weapons and think that's 'Star Wars'.

By the way, ted @ndes' M-wing is way better then Jon Palmer's M-wing IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I welcome any creations with open arms. It shows that people are using their imaginations or their attention to detail. So either way your both helping yourself learn, and sharing with the community. And if something isn't star wars-y enough for you, then just ask a Mod to move it to the sci-fi forum and get on with your day :sweet:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer to this is Rook :grin:. Rook builds amazing MOCs that aren't strictly SW MOCs but can fit right in the universe with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer to this is Rook :grin:. Rook builds amazing MOCs that aren't strictly SW MOCs but can fit right in the universe with them.

And so can my rock from Rockia VII. Both fit right into SW.

All I'm saying is while we can applaud a good MOC, we should not acknowledge it as an actual SW vehicle. That's how this topic began, a fanon MOC was suggested to someone who wanted to build a SW ship. Sure, it can fit into SW, but then again anything can. The only SW ships are the canon ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree that 'Anything Goes' - I see a lot of SW MOCs that would look more at home in "Buck Rogers" than Star Wars.

People complained that the new Hoth base set looked like a space police set, it was only the figures that made it Star Wars. A lot of fanon MOCs are the same, only they don't have the figures to redeem them...

Having said all that, don't ask me to define SW style, I can't :tongue::classic: But I know it when I see it :laugh: As I'm sure we all do, if we are honest!

Kaitan

P.S. Splitting the forum to Canon And Fanon wouldn't work - Define Canon? Everything that appears in the films/TV series? What about the EU (officially sanctioned) novels?

Too much trouble for no good reason.

Edited by Kaitan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree that 'Anything Goes' - I see a lot of SW MOCs that would look more at home in "Buck Rogers" than Star Wars.

People complained that the new Hoth base set looked like a space police set, it was only the figures that made it Star Wars. A lot of fanon MOCs are the same, only they don't have the figures to redeem them...

Having said all that, don't ask me to define SW style, I can't :tongue::classic: But I know it when I see it :laugh: As I'm sure we all do, if we are honest!

Kaitan

P.S. Splitting the forum to Canon And Fanon wouldn't work - Define Canon? Everything that appears in the films/TV series? What about the EU (officially sanctioned) novels?

Too much trouble for no good reason.

While it's a horrible Echo Base, it's still Echo Base because someone at LucasArts approved it. However, if someone did a MOC of Echo Base, it would not be fanon, just someone's interpretation of a canon place. If someone picks up a rock and calls it a ship, it's their own awful fanon idea until it appears in CW at some point. Fanon vehicles can be great though, they just aren't SW because you're making it all up yourself.

Canon is anything improved by LucasArts unless it's a "what if" story or material overwritten by a higher canon. The EU is canon, just a very low level of canon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree that 'Anything Goes' - I see a lot of SW MOCs that would look more at home in "Buck Rogers" than Star Wars.

Interesting, Ralph McQuarrie worked on concept designs for Buck Rogers in the 25th Century and it's a rumoured that the Snowspeeder design was inspired by/based on his designs for the 'Buck Rogers's' star fighters (which were also the initial designs for the original Battlestar Galactica's Vipers). A lot of mid - late 70's sci-fi shared a common aesthetic, that of ships looking functional and used. Star Wars is often credited as being the first sci-fi using this look but it is not (Space 1999 anyone?). However, this style has always until recently been the SW 'style' even the PT which is set during a more prosperous 'golden age' reflects this aesthetic.

For me this has always been the way I judge a fanon creation - if it looks functional and 'lived in' then it's more than likely acceptable as a 'SW style creation'. But to make a sweeping statement; I generally feel that fanon creations should go in the sci-fi forum. I'm reluctant to comment on anything fanon, apart from to say 'that's a really good creation' or 'I don't think this is very well built' - how are you supposed to judge it when you can't compare it to an existing SW object?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While it's a horrible Echo Base, it's still Echo Base because someone at LucasArts approved it. However, if someone did a MOC of Echo Base, it would not be fanon, just someone's interpretation of a canon place. If someone picks up a rock and calls it a ship, it's their own awful fanon idea until it appears in CW at some point. Fanon vehicles can be great though, they just aren't SW because you're making it all up yourself.

You missed my point, and corrected yourself at the same time! My point was the thing that made the Echo base set a representation of the actual place was the figures. Until you add the figures, it could be from any number of TV shows/films. Many fanon MOCs do the same thing. e.g. Here's my rock ship from the planet Granite, piloted by the Bounty hunter Stonehead D'Nutter, who just happens to be a failed jedi/surviving clone (pick one) - oh look he's got a light sabre! it must be star wars....

Anyway, in spite of the confusion, I totally agree with you :)

I still hold that trying to split decide what's canon and whats not, is too much trouble. - (especially if, as you point out, there are 'levels' of canon, which I personally think makes a farce of the whole thing to start with!)

Kaitan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid you've already been beaten to building ships out of rock-like material.

I never liked the Vong designs. They're just this side of hideous.

P.S. Splitting the forum to Canon And Fanon wouldn't work - Define Canon? Everything that appears in the films/TV series? What about the EU (officially sanctioned) novels?

Too much trouble for no good reason.

StoutFiles is usually the one to get at this, but I'll throw in my two cents. Canon in the Star Wars universe has been defined - it's just that most use the term too loosely.

"The database does indeed have a canon field for each individual entry and for sources, though the canon level of the entry would override the canon level of the source since it factors in other sources associated with that entry. When determining canon levels for individual entries, anything in the films and from George Lucas (including unpublished internal notes that we might receive from him or from the film production department) is considered "G" canon. "T" canon comprises the theatrical release of The Clone Wars and The Clone Wars television series. The planned live-action television series would also likely fall under "T" canon.

Next we have what we call continuity "C" canon which is pretty much everything else from the EU. There is a secondary "S" continuity classification used for older published materials created when there was less attention to making everything in the EU fit with everything else in the EU. But, if it is referenced in something else it becomes "C". Similarly, any "C" canon entry that makes it into the films can become "G" canon.

Lastly there is non-continuity "N" which we rarely use except in the case of a blatant contradiction. Any contradictions that arise are dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

...

"G" canon and "T" canon comprise George Lucas's vision of the Star Wars universe.

"C" canon and "S" canon comprise the vision of the Star Wars universe held by Lucas Licensing that goes beyond George Lucas's vision. This material is collectively referred to as the Expanded Universe.

The Holocron's canon system does not take into account any of the 3rd-Pillar fan-generated material. This material is not represented in the Holocron unless it gets canonized as "T," "S," or "C" canon by an official source. The 501st Legion, R2-KT, What's the Story, etc. are just some examples."

Full post here.

What's a little sad from an MOCer's perspective is that many things intended by the people who built the studio models (such as ship lengths) are considered N-canon, meaning that a random number some guy working for DK thought up and stuck in a book is considered more 'canonically' accurate than the scale of the actual filming model. :hmpf_bad:

Interesting, Ralph McQuarrie worked on concept designs for Buck Rogers in the 25th Century and it's a rumoured that the Snowspeeder design was inspired by/based on his designs for the 'Buck Rogers's' star fighters (which were also the initial designs for the original Battlestar Galactica's Vipers). A lot of mid - late 70's sci-fi shared a common aesthetic, that of ships looking functional and used. Star Wars is often credited as being the first sci-fi using this look but it is not (Space 1999 anyone?). However, this style has always until recently been the SW 'style' even the PT which is set during a more prosperous 'golden age' reflects this aesthetic.

For me this has always been the way I judge a fanon creation - if it looks functional and 'lived in' then it's more than likely acceptable as a 'SW style creation'. But to make a sweeping statement; I generally feel that fanon creations should go in the sci-fi forum. I'm reluctant to comment on anything fanon, apart from to say 'that's a really good creation' or 'I don't think this is very well built' - how are you supposed to judge it when you can't compare it to an existing SW object?

What's funny is that there actually exists a ship in the Star Wars canon, the Incom I-7 Howlrunner, that resembles the Earth Directorate starfighter from Buck Rogers:

buckr0_thunder01.jpg

Howlrunner_negvv.jpg

I feel the same way regarding feedback to fanon creations, which is why I rarely comment on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's also an entry concerning canon on Wookieepedia, which is the one I often reference.

Personally, what I hate most about the levels of canon is the T-canon level. It represents an entire level created just so that CW can override the established EU. It tells me that the way they plan to make everything make sense is just to make anything and everything that disagrees with CW non-canon. (or at least the disagreeing portions)

But that's a discussion for another thread.

I have to agree, I never really liked the Vong or the series they're in, and theirs are some of the craft that I think look worse than some fanon creations. They're just not Star Warsy. They're too organic. The same way that I never liked the Gungan sub. (and the same applies to fanon craft, IMO) But then again, that's a big part of the whole OT vs. PT thing, so maybe PT fans like the organic craft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The content of the Wookieepedia article is from Chee's blog post, which is why I linked to the latter.

I have to agree, I never really liked the Vong or the series they're in, and theirs are some of the craft that I think look worse than some fanon creations. They're just not Star Warsy. They're too organic. The same way that I never liked the Gungan sub. (and the same applies to fanon craft, IMO) But then again, that's a big part of the whole OT vs. PT thing, so maybe PT fans like the organic craft.

I would say that Prequel fans and Original Trilogy fans are on common ground in terms of organic vs. non-organic, since the designs of most Rothana vehicles and craft were derived from established Kuat designs (AT-TE from AT-AT, etc.). It's really more of whether you associate Naboo with Star Wars (which, frankly, I don't).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how to explain it, but fanon is okay as long as it looks SW-ish. IMO the M-wing does not look SW-ish. It's too small. Does anyone really think the Rebel Alliance would use such a small ship to fly around trying to defeat the Empire in space? :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how to explain it, but fanon is okay as long as it looks SW-ish. IMO the M-wing does not look SW-ish. It's too small. Does anyone really think the Rebel Alliance would use such a small ship to fly around trying to defeat the Empire in space? :wacko:

I wouldn't say size is too much of a problem... the M-wing looks to be around 16 studs, which in stud-to-foot scale isn't too small. I mean, both the Eta-2 and the T-47 were about 4.5m in length, and the TIE/rpt only about 3m (assuming the ball cockpit is identical to that of a TIE/ln).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO the M-wing does not look SW-ish. It's too small. Does anyone really think the Rebel Alliance would use such a small ship to fly around trying to defeat the Empire in space? :wacko:

IF you were old enough and knew the backstory...the M-Wing (Jon Palmer's design) was designed as a spy ship used by the Rebel Alliance to get in and get out quickly. It was built as part of a larger project, to create ships using the unused letters of the alphabet. Not quite sure how much FBTB 'loves it' as some of you say, but I remember starting to get back into LEGO big time and I remember all of these wild custom ships. Those M-Wings came out at a time when the online LEGO fan aspect was really taking off and for that, it is still today one of my favorite MOCs ever made! You may not like them, and that's fine. Just try to be respectful.

And I think that's the point. Fanon, Canon...it's all made up shit; some by fans, some by Lucas! Many MOCers feel that the version they build is the best, and that's fine. We can argue all day about how the original 3 movies are the end all be all for the Star Wars Universe. Or we can just enjoy what others make. To be honest, I am actually entertained at how crazy and passionate some of you get when you disagree about something in the Star Wars Universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF you were old enough and knew the backstory...the M-Wing (Jon Palmer's design) was designed as a spy ship used by the Rebel Alliance to get in and get out quickly. It was built as part of a larger project, to create ships using the unused letters of the alphabet. Not quite sure how much FBTB 'loves it' as some of you say, but I remember starting to get back into LEGO big time and I remember all of these wild custom ships. Those M-Wings came out at a time when the online LEGO fan aspect was really taking off and for that, it is still today one of my favorite MOCs ever made! You may not like them, and that's fine. Just try to be respectful.

And I think that's the point. Fanon, Canon...it's all made up shit; some by fans, some by Lucas! Many MOCers feel that the version they build is the best, and that's fine. We can argue all day about how the original 3 movies are the end all be all for the Star Wars Universe. Or we can just enjoy what others make. To be honest, I am actually entertained at how crazy and passionate some of you get when you disagree about something in the Star Wars Universe.

FBTB had 4 straight frontpage threads about it this year. It bordered on obsessive, and multiple people commented on how they took it too far.

On Rocktopia, the Rock People hollowed out large rocks and built ships within them. The rocks floating through space looked like small bits off a meteor, until it was too late! There, I wrote a backstory. Backstories are worthless in a "anything goes" world like Star Wars.

I like the M-wing, it's a nice little ship. You can't just make up a backstory and call it Star Wars, it doesn't work like that. I can make anything a vehicle in Star Wars if I want, it's incredibly easy. Fanon is what it is, not Star Wars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with StoutFiles. The M-wing is ingeniously built. If there was ever a starfighter that deserved to be lauded with 'NPU!'-type comments, it's the M-wing. I really like it as an MOC. It just doesn't seem Star Warsy.

Though admittedly, although I was a serious LEGO fan, I didn't start lurking in the LEGO online community until 2007, so it could very well be a case of simply not being able to remember when the MOC was first shown, the same way today's YFOLs and TFOLs probably have no idea what Fabuland was. I know MOCing and the fan opinion of Star Wars canon is always changing. If the M-wing played as big a role in FBTB's history as Stash is saying, I have nothing against four frontpage posts about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.