Is there Muppet continuity/canon?

frogboy4

Inactive Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2002
Messages
10,080
Reaction score
358
Muppet Canon in my opinion...
(this won't work for everybody)

The closest projects to Muppet Canon are:
The Muppet Show, The Muppet Movie, Muppets Tonight and The Henson Hour.

The Muppet Characters Canon is:
The Muppet gang (of various ages and backgrounds) led by Kermit, met up one by one to create entertainment in NY, CA and to some extent the UK.

Of course they always seem to play with the formula whenever it suits the writers. Some concepts are much more fast and loose than others.

For Better or Worse the Canon is not:
The Great Muppet Caper, The Muppets Take Manhattan, The Muppet Babies, Muppet Christmas Carol, Muppet Treasure Island or the idea that Gonzo's an alien in Muppets From Space (although the house idea is interesting). Those are more "artistic pieces" or Muppets from infinite earths. :wink:
 

GonzoLeaper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2002
Messages
2,500
Reaction score
225
Just wondering, but what is Gonzo if not an alien? Kermit and his "voice" muse that he's a little like a turkey in "The Muppet Movie", but not much. (Though I do kind of agree with the turkey idea in that he kind of reminds me of one to some degree.)
And Chewbacca does mention being held captive by weird turkeys in the Star Wars episode of The Muppet Show and Gonzo was portraying the villian, Dearth Nadir.
Yes, I know that's really stretching it and in the end, it doesn't matter because Gonzo's perfectly happy with being a whatever or a weirdo. I love Gonzo! (hence my username- lol):concern:
But it is fun to ponder.

And no, I don't think there's a strict Muppet canon. There's as much of a canon as you want there to be, I think.
(Which is pretty much the same in most things- although in the case of Star Wars and Indiana Jones, George Lucas has worked to maintain a continuity with those properties. I think the same is true for Star Trek as well.)
Something like Back to the Future, for instance, that's more iffy. (But they're all cool!)
 

MrsPepper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
4,333
Reaction score
75
So what do you guys think? And if the Muppet Show characters are simply acting...does this mean the Fraggle Rock characters
are merely actors(as seen in the "Fraggles Look For Jobs" wrap up special in 1986), or that the Sesame characters live on "the street"...but perhaps are unwitting actors in a kid's show?
Dude, stop messing with my childhood. :grouchy:

Just kidding. :wink: I like this theory. Who says Kermit isn't in on everything?
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,717
Reaction score
6,710
For Better or Worse the Canon is not:
The Great Muppet Caper, The Muppets Take Manhattan, The Muppet Babies, Muppet Christmas Carol, Muppet Treasure Island or the idea that Gonzo's an alien in Muppets From Space (although the house idea is interesting). Those are more "artistic pieces" or Muppets from infinite earths. :wink:
In the case of GMC, they are clearly playing themselves in a movie, and make multiple references to it. Of course, most of the movies somehow manage to mention that it IS a movie (Pepe's line in MFS... the tourist rats seeing one of the locations used in the movie Muppet Treasure Island) so you could get to wonder, if there is any true canon as far as the movies go, it has something to do with them in movies playing themselves or others in distinctly non-canonical situations.
 

GonzoLeaper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2002
Messages
2,500
Reaction score
225
Well, even in "The Muppet Movie", Robin asked Kermit if this was how the Muppets really got together and Kermit answers, "Well, it's sort of approxmiately how". So what do you make of that? Again, this was obviously a case where they were all acting in a movie since they had all gathered to watch the screening (with Statler and Waldorf there to heckle it, of course:boo::sleep:)
So it seems like it leaves room to speculate that Muppet Babies could actually fit in the continuity, but that would be a humongous stretch, I admit. From what Kermit said, he seemed to indicate there may have been a few things changed here and there, but probably not quite as drastic as it all basically being a lie if most of them grew up together with Nanny in the nursery. And of course, this would make no sense for the characters to go off and meet together later in life and not know each other. (even if they were all adopted out of Nanny's nursery or something.) And considering that the origin of Muppet Babies is definitely Piggy's dream in "The Muppets Take Manhattan", I don't think we could really count "Muppet Babies" as canon. But it is a fun take on an alternate universe for The Muppets.
It doesn't mean that Skeeter couldn't still exist as a Muppet- just that we had never seen her on The Muppet Show or in the movies- but she could still make an appearance at some point. (as she finally has again in the comics- which was quite awesome, by the way. I love Muppet Babies!)
Also, I think "The Muppets Take Manhattan" is one of the few theatrical (perhaps only) movies I can think where it's not clearly indicated that The Muppets are performing in a movie. (Outside of the Broadway musical within the movie- "Manhattan Melodies", of course.)
Of course, this is also really conjecturing probably way too much on something that isn't really meant to have a strict canon, as Dr.Tooth pointed out with various other cartoon series- like Looney Tunes.
The Muppets' canon is about as good as the canon for Saved By the Bell- there's tons of inconsistencies, but in the end- it really doesn't matter. Just enjoy the show.:big_grin:
 

dwmckim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2002
Messages
2,874
Reaction score
848
Also, I think "The Muppets Take Manhattan" is one of the few theatrical (perhaps only) movies I can think where it's not clearly indicated that The Muppets are performing in a movie. (Outside of the Broadway musical within the movie- "Manhattan Melodies", of course.)
There may not have been as much overt nods to the fourth wall as with the other movies, but aside from the fact that it was a new story with a new history for the characters meeting up differently (though the core cast knew each other as the movie started, they still met others for the first time like Scooter's meeting Chef and Lew working at the movie theatre), a lot of the major nods to the cast making a movie where they were playing parts came courtesy of the promotional campaign surrounding the film with various interviews with Piggy claiming that since the minister in the finale was a real minister, the wedding was real and the two were now married and Kermit saying it was just a scene in a movie and nothing's changed in regards to their marital status.
 

GonzoLeaper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2002
Messages
2,500
Reaction score
225
a lot of the major nods to the cast making a movie where they were playing parts came courtesy of the promotional campaign surrounding the film with various interviews with Piggy claiming that since the minister in the finale was a real minister, the wedding was real and the two were now married and Kermit saying it was just a scene in a movie and nothing's changed in regards to their marital status.
True- but I was thinking of more within the movie itself.
And I'm curious about this thing of Scooter meeting Lew and Swedish Chef at the movie theater. That could've been a first meeting or it could've been that they all just ended up with jobs there. For a possible Muppet continuity within movies, if "The Muppet Movie" is to be "sort of approximately" how it happened- after the Muppets got together and got the "standard rich and famous contract" in Hollywood- it would seem that they jumped straight into making movies from there. Should it be assumed that "The Great Muppet Caper" and "The Muppets Take Manhattan" and all the other movies to follow have been from their efforts there? Or would it be feasible that the Muppets would've gone to college together from that point, as seen in "TMTM"?
But if we factor in the various promotional interviews the Muppets have given for the movies, then from that perspective we can look at all of them as just movies that they've acted in and none of them are necessarily representative of events in their lives.:confused::eek:
 

beaker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2002
Messages
7,761
Reaction score
858
I consider them having an "open" canon. They have themes that keep cropping back up, but the details tend to depend on who's talking. Anyone who reads my fanfics knows I LOVE outlining a canon for the Muppetverse. I believe that just about everyone aside from people/whatnots/whatever that are just walking down the street or something are actors for the show or movie being taped. Even dinosaurs broke the fourth wall every once in awhile.

While it begs the question how dinosaurs exist in the modern world, I feel even Dinosaurs is their SPIN on the story of how they acted. I feel they are modern actors who are perfectly aware they are mocking sitcom issues and using (in part) the popularity of Jurassic Park to get people to watch. I think they agreed to do the show to use the purported story of their demise to teach humans a lesson. While it sounds like at least three people voiced Gunge, I like to think they actually hired Gunge himself to flesh out the "ancient animals" cast, but the only way Marjory would agree to it is if Gunge is never truly eaten.

I think there might be elements of Muppet Babies that might be true (especially since I've noticed the main characters seem to be letting some of their Babies personality slip every now and again, like Scooter and a laptop or Gonzo's alien status or Animal's bunny thing. It's clear that the show as created is Piggy's idea. I like to think that Piggy sponsored the cartoon with the help of the other Muppets to flesh out their childhoods, but harp on using imaginations in every episode to hammer the truth down people's throats that it's made up. Still, I think it a sin that Skeeter can't be a real Muppet yet. They need to fix that in the movie, even if it's just a "pause the dvd and zoom in to see it" cameo. Since the babies aren't technically babies with the exception of Animal and Robin, I like to think that the characters were born wherever they said they were, but by the time they were almost school-aged, they were put in the care of some sort of day care center while their parents tried to get jobs in the big city. It just simply can't happen the way MB presents it, or Robin would just be a couple years younger than Kermit and Janice would be older than Rowlf. I find that hard to swallow.
I like the way you think! Yeah I've long thought the Muppets are just actors, even Fraggle Rock...though I feel they do genuinely live in Fraggle caves. The cluelessness of Travelling Matt when he's interviewed(like in the 1993 Today Show segment) tells me he really is his character. Though, "Fraggles Look For Jobs" from 1986 shows the Fraggles talking to their casting agents.

Sometimes, Muppets desperately need work, as Rowlf lets it be known in a recent Muppets Kitchen with Cat Cora sketch. This is why so many former Muppet Show and Fraggle Rock characters showed up on the UK show Mopatop. While other Muppets continually show up in Henson Alternative projects(I consider HA to still be Muppets)

You have a very intriguing take indeed on Muppet babies. A lot of things invented for that show have translated over; such as the Animal and bunny construct and other things you mentioned. But perhaps like The Joker's hazy retelling of several possible origins of himself in Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight, perhaps we are only seeing fragments. While the Muppet Babies seem like "wishful thinking" in TMTM, in the unedited MFC its explicitly implied the Muppet Babies is real canon(tho that conflicts in some ways with the notion they all met eachother while looking for acting work) My theory is that KSY is not official canon, and that Kermit found his way to the metro DC area in the mid 50's as a very young frog wanting a new life from the swamp, and soon became part of television culture. And then soon after he met Rowlf, who a few years later began appearing on tv. The Kermit-Rowlf dynamic is essential to the early Muppet origins, given their prominence, as well as how they created Sesame Street.

Finally, it is a BIG shame there is not a Skeeter puppet, given how well she'd fit into *modern* Muppets, how Disney NEEDS the tween girl demographic and how well she turned out in the comic series.
 

beaker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2002
Messages
7,761
Reaction score
858
I tend to think all the accumulated "behind the scenes" moments as canon - the main story in GMC is not their backstory but a situation for making a movie, but the fourth wall moments are included.
I totally agree, as well as blooper scenes, talk show appearances, featurettes/press junkets, etc. This is why I do not take anything from the shows or specials or movies as "canon". It's like there's Jason Alexander, and his character George Costanza. (Though, I still haven't figured out how the Muppets "know" Jim Henson)

I think specials, shows and movies have themes that are true to the Muppets. Like Kermit coming from a swamp, Fozzie having a mom who lives in the country, etc.

Its also interesting to see the Muppets evolution. We've seen Kermit become more calm over the years. We now see Animal has a bunny best friend who calms him down. Rowlf seems resigned to his fate as a has-been who feels lucky to get any roles. Even Fozzie's innocence and naivety has evolved in a way.
Gonzo seems much much older now. If you click on the Gonzo room skits on Muppets.com, he comes off as middle aged and noticeably more mature. (the new Gonzo build recently introduced throws me off tho)

Now, I absolutely HATE Muppet Kids, though. Scooter not being able to read? He had a computer when he was a toddler, I think he can do a little more than read. Gonzo having parents that somehow were only around then?
The Muppet Kids/Teen era of the late 80's and early 90's is curious. I recently found a ton of Muppet kid/teen books in my closet, where of course the Muppets are depicted as early teenagers. This should of course not be confused with "Muppet High", the proposed animated Muppet show set in a 50's high school(I still have some of the figurines from that)

Btw, while Gonzo seems to have this knack for opening up portals and a calling over yonder to galaxies unknown in MB, I still can't fully accept "Gonzo is a space alien" as strictly canon.
While some Muppet races are intergalactic(Koozebanians, Yip Yips, etc), Im not sure its been 100% established that he's alien. I havent seen all his 1999-present interviews or q and a's, but maybe he mentions it.

Retconning is funny, such as the Harley Quinn stuff. I think Skeeter could easily be brought into the main Muppet fold.
 

beaker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2002
Messages
7,761
Reaction score
858
Muppet Canon in my opinion...
(this won't work for everybody)

The closest projects to Muppet Canon are:
The Muppet Show, The Muppet Movie, Muppets Tonight and The Henson Hour.

The Muppet Characters Canon is:
The Muppet gang (of various ages and backgrounds) led by Kermit, met up one by one to create entertainment in NY, CA and to some extent the UK.

Of course they always seem to play with the formula whenever it suits the writers. Some concepts are much more fast and loose than others.

For Better or Worse the Canon is not:
The Great Muppet Caper, The Muppets Take Manhattan, The Muppet Babies, Muppet Christmas Carol, Muppet Treasure Island or the idea that Gonzo's an alien in Muppets From Space (although the house idea is interesting). Those are more "artistic pieces" or Muppets from infinite earths. :wink:
Brilliant! I whole heartedly agree. I think if anything can be said of MB, it contains elements of things that are true; at least with individual characters and social behavior that comes out later.

We know a lot of the Muppets must be old too. Kermit would have to be at least 70 something, given he moved from the swamp to land a gig on tv in 1955. Rowlf too would also be in his 70's. Gonzo would be in his late 50's if not early 60's. Skeeter could still be portrayed as a late teens/early 20's character, as per the comic series. Unless we're going by "Simpsons" age, in which case the characters are forever stuck in the age they've always been. Kermit and Rowlf's origins of looking for work in the 50's and early 60's is established, but I assume many of the other Muppets were also folks who for one reason or another landed acting gigs. I can see Scooter as an old cinema film affaciando, having worked as a ticket taker/concession stand/projectionist at old revival movie theaters. I can see Fozzie as a struggling comedian who went across America.
Somehow they all found eachother in the early-mid 70's when Lou Grade gave them all a chance with the Muppet show. (the backstage parts of the show being canon)
 
Top