Jump to content

Talk:Shared universe

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleShared universe was one of the Language and literature good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 13, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
July 11, 2007Good article nomineeListed
August 2, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 14, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

"more than one writer"

[edit]

I find this part of the definition unsustainable.

Here's just a single example where you can discuss a shared universe between characters all created by a single writer, I'm sure there are many others. Michael Connelly has created both Bosch and the Lincoln Lawyer. Do these characters share a universe? In the books, yes. In the tv shows, no. Point is: we can and should definitely be able to use the term "shared universe" in this context despite only one writer being involved.

I am boldly removing the part of the definition that excludes single-writer shared universes. CapnZapp (talk) 06:46, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems reasonable. 2601:240:E200:3B60:E0FD:4466:64:7446 (talk) 12:35, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should have a section on Universal Monsters

[edit]

Universal Monsters is one of the first series that comes to mind for me when talking cinematic universes, and I believe it fits all the criteria. It has a series of movies, each initially separate, that all start crossing over after awhile and firmly get established as linked. ZeroSD (talk) 14:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There used to be; it was removed by Andrzejbanas [1] BOZ (talk) 02:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, I stand by this removal per the reasons stated. It was about the "Dark Universe" film series that never came to be. If content can be found which addresses the earlier films specifically in this context, i'd have no issue obviously. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:16, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. BOZ (talk) 04:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we could take the first half of the deleted part, without the Dark Universe bits? ZeroSD (talk) 15:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Universal Monsters are a complicated issue. I've done some recent research that i've added to the talk page of that article, but I'm suggesting maybe something like this.

Following films the films Son of Frankenstein (1939) and Dracula's Daughter (1935), Universal began experimenting with transfictional storytelling with their horror films series throughout the early to mid 1940s.[1] This form was is conceptualized by Richard Saint-Gelais who described it as when "two (or more) texts exhibit a transfictional relationship where they share elements, such as characters, imaginary locations, and fictional worlds."[2][3] William Proctor in Horror Franchise Cinema (2021) wrote that Universal began transfictional storytelling by applying it to the film series, but these experiments were "not always conducted as carefully or as thoroughly as audiences, especially fans, would expect in contemporary terms."[4] This is seen in Universal's Frankenstein films, the Dracula films which are sequentially fragmented as Son of Dracula (1943) does not reference narratives or characters from either Dracula (1931) or Dracula's Daughter.[5] Following the release of the The Wolf Man (1941) and The Ghost of Frankenstein (1942), Universal released Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1942) which operated as a sequel to both films. Proctor suggested that the Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1942), the first crossover in film history, and the ensemble films House of Frankenstein (1944) and House of Dracula (1945) established the first "cinematic universe".[6]

This could maybe be expanded on, but I think this helps clarify stuff as the Universal Monsters films are complex, some films don't even follow what you'd assume would be a narrative timeline (see Dracula film series) while others do. This isn't like Iron Man (2008) where Stark is met to help with Avengers initiative at the end of the film, the films are sort of just changed and the continuity is hyper-flexible to suit whatever narrative a film decides to take. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC) Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a follow-up, I see that @ZeroSD: had added content without any sources here. I do not think I have to state why that's against very general rules, so I've added the sourced content above to replace it as the previous version was not exactly accurate to how these series play out. Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:41, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yea sorry about that, I'm out of editing habit. I like your version, appreciated. And just to talk a bit more about the series, the Creature from the Black Lagoon movies never tie in, and the last movies in it are the Abbott and Costello crossovers.ZeroSD (talk) 17:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. The sources I'm plugging from go into that a bit, I don' t have the quote on hand, but Universal Monsters is such a bonkers thing to think of. It's both like a franchise that has films crossover, about five or six different films that could be categorized as a film series/franchise, and as marketing label where some films in the Universal Catalogue from this era are branded as being part of the Universal Monsters brand. Its complicated to say the least as the terms are used very flippantly and its not always clear what is being discussed in any form. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the dark universe at least get a mention that it was a planned shared universe in a more modern style? As is half the entire article looks like another Star Wars article. 72.47.31.51 (talk) 03:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Proctor, William (2021). "Building Imaginary Horror Worlds: Transfictional storytelling and the Universal Monster franchise cycle". In McKenna, Mark; Proctor, William (eds.). Horror Franchise Cinema. Routledge. p. 44-45. ISBN 978-0367183271.
  2. ^ Proctor, William (2021). "Building Imaginary Horror Worlds: Transfictional storytelling and the Universal Monster franchise cycle". In McKenna, Mark; Proctor, William (eds.). Horror Franchise Cinema. Routledge. p. 44-45. ISBN 978-0367183271.
  3. ^ Herman, David; Jahn, Manfred; Ryan, Marie-Laure, eds. (2005). "Transfictionality". The Routledge Companion of Narrative Theory. Routledge. pp. 612–613.
  4. ^ Proctor, William (2021). "Building Imaginary Horror Worlds: Transfictional storytelling and the Universal Monster franchise cycle". In McKenna, Mark; Proctor, William (eds.). Horror Franchise Cinema. Routledge. pp. 40–41. ISBN 978-0367183271.
  5. ^ Proctor, William (2021). "Building Imaginary Horror Worlds: Transfictional storytelling and the Universal Monster franchise cycle". In McKenna, Mark; Proctor, William (eds.). Horror Franchise Cinema. Routledge. pp. 40–41. ISBN 978-0367183271.
  6. ^ Proctor, William (2021). "Building Imaginary Horror Worlds: Transfictional storytelling and the Universal Monster franchise cycle". In McKenna, Mark; Proctor, William (eds.). Horror Franchise Cinema. Routledge. p. 42. ISBN 978-0367183271.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Shared_universe&oldid=1260334055"