Dave Filoni recently sat down with ScreenRant and made some comments about Star Wars and its canon. My interest lies mainly in how his perspective on the matter has been interpreted, or perhaps misinterpreted. Here’s a quote from the interview:
“People get into all these debates of what’s canon and what’s not, and sometimes forget the special nature of telling a good story and creating great characters. Part of the fan debate in the past always used to be, ‘What’s canon? What’s not?’ because there was George, and we always knew George was the canon.” Filoni continued, “I look at it very broadly, and I just say there’s a love of Star Wars. Because I knew George, I worked with him, and none of us are going to be him. But we love the Galaxy he created, and we’re very much a product of it; growing up with it.”
This is being widely covered as Dave saying that canon doesn’t matter or that it doesn’t matter what is officially considered canon or not. I don’t think that’s his point. To me, it reads more like frustration with people always focusing on the minutiae of whPreview (opens in a new tab)at “counts” rather than enjoying fiction for its own merits (or, in some cases, lack thereof). People have been mad at Filoni ever since The Book of Boba Fett, blaming him for every failure, cameo, and perceived slight. I think Filoni and Jon Favreau just love Star Wars and have fun with it; I think his point here is that it’s fun. People complaining about Visions’ lack of canon status (or Kathleen’s disregard of the de-canonized EU?) are missing the forest for the trees.
But what do you think? Let us know in the comments!