Universal Sponsored 'EXTINCTION NOW' Twitter feed proves TLW is Canon with Alternate San Diego Rex Footage!

When and why did the existence of Site B become questionable as to whether or not it was canon? I haven't been keeping up with things until lately, but for me the idea that site B doesn't exist is ridiculous.

Spiegel wrote:

When and why did the existence of Site B become questionable as to whether or not it was canon? I haven't been keeping up with things until lately, but for me the idea that site B doesn't exist is ridiculous.

Basically there was a mass misinterpretation of a quote by Trevorrow back when Jurassic World was yet to be released. He said that that sequels "weren't being ignored, but set aside."

For whatever reason, people took that as they were being written out of continuity, when really, their events (at the time) didn't have a major contribution to what took place in Jurassic World (outside of Hoskins' Pteranodon extermination mission which got him his job with InGen Security.)

Though I am glad that the DPG website is including more backstory to thread them together (Like the Corythosaurs, Ceratosaurs, Ankylosaurs, and the Spinosaurus being illegally cloned (and some indication that the Spinosaurus was either genetically modified or hybridized), and then the "San Diego Tape" showing the Tyrannosaur smashing into the bus. And including JP:TG into the canon more cohesively. (Gerry Harding being the veterinarian that revealed why Dennis Nedry stole the embryos, and the fact that four Herrerasaurs were originally in the park. And finally clarifying that Baryonyx, Metriacanthosaurus, Proceratosaurus, and Segisaurus were not yet placed into the park, while Baryonyx did exist on Isla Sorna.)

1morey wrote:

Robotpo wrote:

I know it's not canon, but Jurassic World Evolution heavily includes the Five Deaths, which of course are a TLW creation. So, that's another recent nod to the second movie.

I think that while the game itself is non-canon (obviously), I think that the information in the InGen database could be considered canon, since it just adds info about characters and locations, that don't necessarily contradict the films.

They directly reference Roland Tembo's meeting in Mombasa with Ajay, and they give a bit of background info on Robert Muldoon (saying he grew up in a family of hunters), and I believe they even mention Henry Wu as being MIT and OSU alumni. Also the Jurassic Park aviary is finally depicted (though it is a stock image of the Worker Village communications center).

They also mention Therizinosaurus being part of the Indominus rex genetic makeup. (I believe that Horner's statement was originally misinterpreted (as in it was the inspiration for the I. rex's distinctively long middle claw, but not literally part of its makeup.). But I'm glad to see a more or less official confirmation that it was indeed one of the dinosaurs making up the Indominus rex.

The game itself... are you referring to the List here? http://www.dinosaurprotectiongroup.com/investigation-the-old-park.html

Colin recently even tweeted that TLW was always canon. The film itself mentions Sorna.

Sickle_Claw wrote:

1morey wrote:

Robotpo wrote:

I know it's not canon, but Jurassic World Evolution heavily includes the Five Deaths, which of course are a TLW creation. So, that's another recent nod to the second movie.

I think that while the game itself is non-canon (obviously), I think that the information in the InGen database could be considered canon, since it just adds info about characters and locations, that don't necessarily contradict the films.

They directly reference Roland Tembo's meeting in Mombasa with Ajay, and they give a bit of background info on Robert Muldoon (saying he grew up in a family of hunters), and I believe they even mention Henry Wu as being MIT and OSU alumni. Also the Jurassic Park aviary is finally depicted (though it is a stock image of the Worker Village communications center).

They also mention Therizinosaurus being part of the Indominus rex genetic makeup. (I believe that Horner's statement was originally misinterpreted (as in it was the inspiration for the I. rex's distinctively long middle claw, but not literally part of its makeup.). But I'm glad to see a more or less official confirmation that it was indeed one of the dinosaurs making up the Indominus rex.

The game itself... are you referring to the List here? http://www.dinosaurprotectiongroup.com/investigation-the-old-park.html

Sorry, I don't think I'm understanding..I was talking about how Jurassic World: Evolution is non-canon, but that the database technically could be part of the film canon.

Don't get mad at me for what I am about to say but, about this whole canon thing...

Just to throw my 2 cents here, a similar situation is happening with Star Wars right now. Since the majority of fans hated that the old George Lucas Expanded Universe was taken out of canon by Disney and the vast majority of fans hated even more how Disney gave the green light to so many things in The Last Jedi that make no sense and/or were very unpopular... Now many many fans are just straight up considering the Disney Star Wars movies to be not canon, only an alternate universe (for lack of a better world) and they are considering the old Expanded Universe as canon once more since it was given the green light by the creator himself.

Now my humble question here is.... Is it really the wordt thing in the world if fans choose their own canon? It is a fictional movie after all. And in Jurassic Park (like with Star Wars), there are so many different comics, books, and movies that all those canons sometimes don't quite fit with one another.

Remember the whole Spino skeleton issue? Tjat official Jurassic World video said that it was THE Spino from Jurassic Park 3 even though the Spino from JP3 never had a crest on it's skull and that skull overall is very different.

It isn't really a matter of whether something is the worst thing in the world or not. It's a matter of what's true and what isn't. As Ian Malcolm once said, "There aren't any versions of the truth", and the same applies to canon. It's largely a black and white issue. Either something is canon or it isn't (unless the phrase "soft canon" is used, in which case the whole thing gets kinda muddy).

But yeah, canon is canon, whether someone likes it or not, and yes, the DPG is absolutely 100% canon unless stated otherwise.

I know fans are not the owners of the franchise. But sometimes things are not so black or white. Sometimes some things declared canon just don't make sense with the already established canon.

We know the Spino from JP3 did not have a crest or a skull like the skeleton in JW. But because a twitter video says it is the same animal without explaining changes, it is hard to just take it as it is, that's all I am saying.

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

Don't get mad at me for what I am about to say but, about this whole canon thing...

Just to throw my 2 cents here, a similar situation is happening with Star Wars right now. Since the majority of fans hated that the old George Lucas Expanded Universe was taken out of canon by Disney and the vast majority of fans hated even more how Disney gave the green light to so many things in The Last Jedi that make no sense and/or were very unpopular... Now many many fans are just straight up considering the Disney Star Wars movies to be not canon, only an alternate universe (for lack of a better world) and they are considering the old Expanded Universe as canon once more since it was given the green light by the creator himself.

Now my humble question here is.... Is it really the wordt thing in the world if fans choose their own canon? It is a fictional movie after all. And in Jurassic Park (like with Star Wars), there are so many different comics, books, and movies that all those canons sometimes don't quite fit with one another.

Remember the whole Spino skeleton issue? Tjat official Jurassic World video said that it was THE Spino from Jurassic Park 3 even though the Spino from JP3 never had a crest on it's skull and that skull overall is very different.

George Lucas hated the Expanded Universe, a few people have mentioned this.

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

I know fans are not the owners of the franchise. But sometimes things are not so black or white. Sometimes some things declared canon just don't make sense with the already established canon.

We know the Spino from JP3 did not have a crest or a skull like the skeleton in JW. But because a twitter video says it is the same animal without explaining changes, it is hard to just take it as it is, that's all I am saying.

Those would be retcons then.

You know, despite me hating that Sorna is likely decimated, I kind of like some of these retcons. Retconning the Spino and Sorna Raptors as Wu's experiments honestly makes more sense, and if we do take these as hard canon once the trilogy is completed, it makes Grant's lines about "what else InGen was up to" much more ominous, because they've been experimenting fairly recently. Plus, just the "Well one was this side of the island, one was this side" explanation fans were forced to come up with for the Raptors didn't make a ton of sense to me if these Raptors were all likely created about the same time.

Some retcons make sense. And I don't have a problem with most of them.

But that one about the Spino skeleton is like telling someone "Fire will make you cold, ice will make you hot, that's the new retcon, you have to accept that canon without questioning it".