Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
According to Michael Chaves, the film's director,
It's a tricky situation, I don't want to give away any trade secrets. The idea was just to have a playful connection because the myth of La Llorona can stand on its own. But James was on as a producer, the conversation got started about an Easter Egg. It just kind of got away from itself. People loved that connection. But The Conjuring franchise is created by a team that's been there since the beginning. It's not really right to do an unofficial spinoff without the full team.
Originally, there was only supposed to be a playful nod by putting The Father in and having the Annabelle flash. But it wasn't supposed to be marketed that way. The plan was, you would get into it, and then it's like, "Oh my God, they're connected!". We weren't, from the beginning, supposed to be doing that. And that's why it has this outsider status. But as La Llorona is an outsider herself, I think it fits.
Every source I googled up in the past 10 minutes listed and discussed The Conjuring Universe as including The Curse of La Llorona. Seems cut and dried. What indicates that it does not belong in the list?
Ninja'd once
Edited by Tabs
^ the note on the page that i specifically mentioned in the OP says "The film's inclusion in the Universe is disputed by Warner Bros., which maintains the connections are a mere Easter Egg and does not include it in Conjuring collections." i don't see a reading of this that isn't "it's not actually a Conjuring movie but we're going to list it anyway and say the creator is wrong".
So you're arguing this is a case of everyone deciding this movie is part of the universe when the studio says otherwise and other people involved in production are iffy.
You seemed to have already made up your mind about removing the entry and why. Why start an ATT query?
Edited by Tabs
I'd think ATT queries are made to discuss with other people before doing something unilateral.
I'll vote to consider it not be a part of the franchise and it was a Company Cross References.
TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
Mm, company cross references and Production Posse, maybe Common Knowledge ? Everyone on the Internet seems to think it's part of the 'verse.
It also has Exiled from Continuity example at Trivia.The Curse Of La Llorona
TroperWall / WikiMagic Cleanup
^, ^^ sounds good to me. i was also originally intending to put, somewhere in the description for The Conjuring Universe, "The Curse of La Llorona references this film series but is officially not part of it" when i removed it from the list; does that sound acceptable?
Sounds good.
alright, i made the discussed changes. i also pulled the Exiled from Continuity entry because it was misuse; the person using it probably meant Canon Discontinuity, but that doesn't fit either since it was never intended to be a full entry in the franchise. unless anyone has objections to the changes i made, i think this can be locked.
The Curse of La Llorona is listed as a Conjuring movie on The Conjuring Universe... with a note that says it's been confirmed to not be part of the series and the references are just easter eggs. the note is phrased as if the creator is wrong, but that's not how we do things; no one gets to present their fanon as canon, no matter how well it's supported (and in this case, it's literally contradictory to actual canon). move to remove it from the page, or at least take it out of the list and put the information elsewhere in the description.
e: La Llorona's page also says it's a Conjuring movie in direct defiance of the same statements.
Edited by ChloeJessica