Skip to main content

star wars - In canon, does Han Solo shoot first?


Considering the "Han shot first" controversy, is there any version that has been stated canon over the other?



The 2006 DVD had two versions—the 2004 changes and the original theatrical version. The theatrical version features no changes, including Han Solo shooting without Greedo firing a shot.




So, this leaves me dubious of which one is considered canon.



Answer



According to several references I found, DVDs are considered the canon, so (sadly from my POV), Greedo shot first.


From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_canon:



The Holocron is divided into 5 levels (in order of precedence): G-canon, T-canon, C-canon, S-canon, and N-canon.



  • G-canon is absolute canon; the movies (their most recent release), ...




Please note that, as the question noted, the latest release (as of 3/2011, it's "2006 DVD", but the answer might change once the rumored Blu-Ray Star Wars is released) had two versions — the 2004 changed "Greedo shot first by a small margin" and the original theatrical "Han shot first" version.


Despite both version co-existing on the DVD, the release explicitly notes that the original theatrical version with Han shooting first is "bonus material", and thus not the "main" version. Therefore, Greedo shot first according to G-canon rules above.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

aliens - Interstellar Zoo story

I vaguely remember this story from my childhood: it was about an interstellar zoo that came to Earth with lots of bizarre and unusual species, and humans would file through and gape at all the crazy looking creatures from other planets. The twist came at the end when the perspective shifted to the other side of the bars and we discovered that the "creatures" were traveling through space on a kind of safari. They thought they were the visitors and we were the animals. Neither side knew that the other side thought they were the zoo creatures. Answer Got it. Zoo, by Edward D. Hoch. Published in 1958. Link to Publication History Link to PDF

Could one of Voldemort's Death Eaters have killed or harmed Harry at Privet Drive?

In Order of the Phoenix , Dumbledore explains to Harry the protection that the Dursleys' home provides: While you can still call home the place where your mother's blood dwells, there you cannot be touched or harmed by Voldemort. He shed her blood, but it lives on in you and her sister. Her blood became your refuge. You need return there only once a year, but as long as you can still call it home, there he cannot hurt you. Your aunt knows this. I explained what I had done in the letter I left, with you, on her doorstep. She knows that allowing you houseroom may well have kept you alive for the past fifteen years. Dumbledore says that he cannot be "touched or harmed by Voldemort". Does this mean that he could have sent a Death Eater to just bust down the door and kill Harry, assuming that Voldemort would allow them to? And even if he didn't want them to kill him, could they have harmed him in some other way (e.g. the Cruciatus Curse)? Answer No. Harry was protect...