So, I've read in lots of websites people saying/claiming the sequels (and the television series) to the original (Disney) animated movies are non-canon and all I have to say is: Unless Disney herself confirmed it, I DON'T BELIEVE IT. Why's that? Simple.

Do you guys remember the movie "The Rescuers" (from 1977)? It gained a sequel in 1990 called "The Rescuers Down Under" and this sequel IS PART of the Disney (main) animated canon movies...Hence, why the sequels (and television series) of other animated movies shoudn't/can't be considered canon, too? Like Aladdin, for example, the TV series takes place before the third movie...

 

Do you guys know anything about it? If so, could you please explain this to me?

 

Love and peace...

 

 

Well the Little Mermaid tv series was a prequel more than a sequel.

Indeed, it was a prequel to the first film. However, the TV series and the 3rd movie (which chronologically is the first) tell us different ways of how Ariel and Flounder met.

 

 

In my opinion, Cinderella II and III did not have to be made and they weren't very good, either. The argument could be made that Cinderella II had a good moment when Drizella (I think) falls in love with the baker guy and ends up going against her mother's wishes, but that's basically it. Same thing with Aladdin: Return of Jafar, it was completely pointless. However, it did lead into the third film that involved Aladdin's dad and them reuniting, which was decent.

Cinderella II had the plot of a basic romance novel, and the the interesting ones with the secret babies and stuff, I mean the ones where nothing happens.  Cinderella III actually has something interesting happen!  Stuff goes down!  It has the most interesting plot of all of them.

 

As for the other sequels, I did not know that Disney movies had a cannon.  I don't see why the squeals wouldn't be cannon.

Cinderella II had the plot of a basic romance novel, and the the interesting ones with the secret babies and stuff, I mean the ones where nothing happens.  Cinderella III actually has something interesting happen!  Stuff goes down!  It has the most interesting plot of all of them.

 

As for the other sequels, I did not know that Disney movies had a cannon.  I don't see why the squeals wouldn't be cannon.

Indeed, it was (not better than the first film, of course (IMO), but still, very good and interesting).

Yeah, me too.

Cinderella II had the plot of a basic romance novel, and the the interesting ones with the secret babies and stuff, I mean the ones where nothing happens.  Cinderella III actually has something interesting happen!  Stuff goes down!  It has the most interesting plot of all of them.

 

As for the other sequels, I did not know that Disney movies had a cannon.  I don't see why the squeals wouldn't be cannon.

True, it does has more of an actual 'plot', but it was completely unnecessary. I mean, did we really need to see Cinderella become what is akin to an action hero? Did Cinderella really need a time-travel (ish) story added to it? Not really.

True, it does has more of an actual 'plot', but it was completely unnecessary. I mean, did we really need to see Cinderella become what is akin to an action hero? Did Cinderella really need a time-travel (ish) story added to it? Not really.

You know how villains are: the first chance they have to rewrite story and ruin the hero/heroine's life, they'll take it without thinking twice. Hey, since the third Cinderella movie has time-travel as a plot element, do you think it might be possible for its world to return in KH3? Oh, yeah, I forgot: Lady Tremaine and her daughters were killed, so NO!

 I mean, did we really need to see Cinderella become what is akin to an action hero?

YES!  Her personality was boring otherwise.  Don't take that personally, you're free to have your own opinion.

Then theres the Tinkerbell film series which is a prequel to Peter Pan. That film series have been getting positive reviews but doubt will see Pixie Hollow in KHIII as part of Neverland.

Then theres the Tinkerbell film series which is a prequel to Peter Pan. That film series have been getting positive reviews but doubt will see Pixie Hollow in KHIII as part of Neverland.

Why not? If the "time-travel" thing is what bothers you, then don't worry...the series can handle it very well by now...

Why not? If the "time-travel" thing is what bothers you, then don't worry...the series can handle it very well by now...

no no no I meant doubt will see Neverland in KHIII because Neverland only appear in 4 games.

no no no I meant doubt will see Neverland in KHIII because Neverland only appear in 4 games.

Maybe not in KH3 exactly, but do you remember that in the first game, our hero promised the boy who never grows up that he would take his girlfriend there to try to fly sometime?

Maybe not in KH3 exactly, but do you remember that in the first game, our hero promised the boy who never grows up that he would take his girlfriend there to try to fly sometime?

Well lets hope Kairi gets her own to game that lets her go to Neverland.

Well lets hope Kairi gets her own to game that lets her go to Neverland.

Kairi's solo game? Oh, yeah...

I liked Aladdin: King of Thieves, it just wasn't on the same level as The Lion King II. (a lot of that had to do with the animation though, as it was kind of subpar)

 

That's because the department of Disney responsible for handling most of the animated sequels, was the exact same department responsible for handling the tv shows as well. Hence, why the animation quality looked more like something from a Saturday morning cartoon, rather than legit Disney. A sneaky way for them to get sequels out, but in a cheaper manner.

Its usually not cannon. Upcoming series The Lion Guard will have a grown up Simba with a son when he already had a daughter in the 2nd film. and the fans are not best pleased about that. 

If it makes money and people like it, its cannon, if it doesn't then its not.

 

The sequels usually are, the TV series usually are not. The TV series usually take their own stories, like a collection of fan fictions bought to life. 

Its usually not cannon. Upcoming series The Lion Guard will have a grown up Simba with a son when he already had a daughter in the 2nd film. and the fans are not best pleased about that. 

If it makes money and people like it, its cannon, if it doesn't then its not.

 

The sequels usually are, the TV series usually are not. The TV series usually take their own stories, like a collection of fan fictions bought to life. 

I guess the fans forgot about the male cub at the end of the first film.

I don't think they forgot. Its just that there was no mention of a male cub in the 2nd film. 

I don't know. I haven't been following news about The Lion Guard since its announcement. I just remember reading the comments on the blog that confirmed it and seeing a lot of fans getting a bit up in arms about it. 

 

I usually just assume spin offs and TV series stuff is non cannon unless confirmed otherwise. 

Its usually not cannon. Upcoming series The Lion Guard will have a grown up Simba with a son when he already had a daughter in the 2nd film. and the fans are not best pleased about that. 

If it makes money and people like it, its cannon, if it doesn't then its not.

 

The sequels usually are, the TV series usually are not. The TV series usually take their own stories, like a collection of fan fictions bought to life. 

...you serious about this?

...what a stupid way to decide if something is canon or not...

I guess the fans forgot about the male cub at the end of the first film.

:huh:  what?

I don't think they forgot. Its just that there was no mention of a male cub in the 2nd film. 

I don't know. I haven't been following news about The Lion Guard since its announcement. I just remember reading the comments on the blog that confirmed it and seeing a lot of fans getting a bit up in arms about it. 

 

I usually just assume spin offs and TV series stuff is non cannon unless confirmed otherwise. 

...while my idea is completely the opposite...

You don't remember?

You don't remember?

No...

On 1/15/2015 at 3:00 AM, Philip Ellwell said:

Most are awful, but the ones I remember seeing like Beauty and The Beast: The Enchanted Christmas, Tarzan and Jane, and Stitch: The Movie should be considered canon. A lot of Disney sequels take place DURING the original film, like Bambi 2, so it should be considered a lesser part of disney canon. 

But you could easily pick and choose: Cinderella 2 is mostly ignored by 3, so it's almost like it didn't happen, while Little Mermaid 3 ignores and often flat out contradicts Little Mermaid 2. 

So it's hard to say what you could call "canon" and "non canon".

The only one I wish wasn't considered a sequel was Belle's Magical World: my cousin made me watch that crappy thing when I was 5, and I still hate it. 

No way. The Beauty and the Beast midquels are not canon at all and make no sense. If you consider them canon, then that disrupts the flow of the first film.