Retroactive Continuity
If you are old enough to remember the popular eighties “soap opera” Dallas, then you will no doubt be au fait with the infamous ninth season of the show. Having painted themselves into a corner with the death of a popular character, the writing team effectively revealed in the season finale that everything that had transpired in the previous thirty episodes had been “all a dream”. Let us take a moment to reflect upon the hubris of this “creative” decision. Did fans complain and roll their eyes at this utterly trite plot device? Yes, they most certainly did. But they also kept watching and the ratings increased. It got the writers out of a fix of their own making and allowed them to move on as if nothing had happened. It was a very high profile example of so-called retroactive continuity being used in a mainstream TV franchise and my first experience of such a narrative device.
Nowadays, retroactive continuity or retcon is used far more often. It can be something as straightforward as replacing an actor for an established role with a new actor, as in Iron Man where James Rhodey Rhodes was first played by Terence Howard and then Don Cheadle. Or something more impactful such as rebooting a franchise as with Casino Royale in 2006 or Star Trek in 2009. Daniel Craig’s tenure as James Bond effectively began an entirely new five-film, self-contained story arc for 007 that ignored everything that had happened in the previous films. J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek used the narrative conceit of an alternative timeline as a means to tell new stories with existing characters. All of these examples successfully managed to retcon their respective franchises without any major critical or financial consequences. Most fans managed to successfully suspend their sense of disbelief and overcome any continuity or logical flaws. But the process isn’t always as seamless as this.
Take the Halloween horror film franchise. The original 1978 movie spawned a direct sequel Halloween II in 1981. This ended with the central antagonist dying in a fiery conflagration. Hence Halloween III: Season of the Witch (1982) is a standalone story. Creator John Carpenter then sold his interests in the franchise and so three inferior sequels were churned out based on the premise that Michael Myers had survived. Halloween IV: The Return of Michael Myers (1988), Halloween V: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989) and Halloween VI: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995). Then in 1998 the first retcon took place with Halloween H20. This was a direct sequel to the first two films and ignored the story arc of parts 4 to 6. This was then followed by a further sequel Halloween: Resurrection in 2002. The franchise was then rebooted in 2007 with director Rob Zombie remaking the original film and then a sequel the following year. In 2018 a further retcon saw a new direct sequel to Carpenter’s original, confusingly called Halloween. A follow up, Halloween Kills, was released recently.
Retroactive continuity can be a useful tool in so far that changing established narrative events can provide a means to perpetuate a commercially viable and popular cinematic franchise. However there are consequences. Alien 3 featured a retcon that completely negated everything that happened in the previous movie, Aliens. A facehugger miraculously survived and managed to impregnate Ripley while she was in cryonic stasis. A convenient spaceship crash subsequently eliminated the characters of corporal Hicks and the child Newt. Something fans felt was especially mean spirited. The first season of the TV show Star Trek: Discovery saw a major visual and design retcon. Set just before the TOS era the production aesthetic was radically different from the established canon. Fans were not pleased and adjustments were made in the second season. And not only did Highlander II retcon the entire premise of the previous film, it subsequently retconned itself when three separate edits produced radically different stories.
The retcon has been an established part of film making for decades. Universal Studios used it extensively in the thirties and forties over the course of their commercially successful series of horror movies. Onscreen events were reframed to accommodate sequels, actors were replaced and lore bent to facilitate new plots. However, it can be cogently argued that the increase in retroactive continuity in recent years both in TV and cinema, ultimately stems from a creative system that is extremely risk averse. Experimentation with new and original concepts is an expensive gamble, compared to the proven track record of established franchises. Furthermore, if a franchise should suffer a less well received instalment, judicious retconning can be used to correct any mistakes. However retconning cannot cure an audience of boredom brought about by a continuous diet of the same content, just packaged differently. Ultimately, established trends run their course as the western and musical genres have proven.
