Greetings again my avid readers! Today, be prepared for me to crush all of your childhood dreams. Isn't that always fun? Similarly with my post about the lies Disney has taught us, your innocence regarding kids movies will once again be ripped apart. If you're one of those naive people who automatically assume everything vaguely Disney related is purely as it seems, I'm afraid you're in for the shock of your life. Believe it or not, some hardcore Disney fans have actually created totally plausible, super outrageous conspiracy theories regarding some of your beloved childhood movies. So without further ado, here they are . . .
'Frozen', 'Tangled' and 'The Little Mermaid' are all apart of the same Fictional Universe
How is this plausible you may be asking yourselves? At first, even I have to admit this all seems a bit cray, but after you look into it a bit further, everything gradually becomes clearer. First of all, why don't we whip out our geographical skills of deduction and see if this is at all vaguely possible. When you think about it, the characters in 'Frozen' and Tangled' indeed would be living rather close to one another. Supposedly, 'Tangled' takes place in Germany (as that is the origin of the original tale of 'Rapunzel'), and I'm guessing 'Frozen' is set in Norway, if some of the accents are any indication (also the fact that the original story 'The Snow Queen' was set there probably has something to do with it too). So yeah, it's possible that they knew each other, but why? Why would fans make up a conspiracy this huge based on relatively close geographical proximity? The answer is they didn't, because the plot thickens.
Probably the biggest giveaway of this little trio of crossovers is the fact that the protagonists of 'Tangled', Rapunzel and Eugene/Flynn, were actually seen attending Elsa's coronation towards the beginning of 'Frozen' (way to be discreet Disney).
But why? Why would they go if they weren't even residents of Arendelle? Well my friends, this is where it gets interesting. The theory is that Elsa and Anna's parents (from 'Frozen') were on their way to Rapunzel's wedding when their boat crashed and sunk. And where did it sink? Why that would be in Denmark, where 'The Little Mermaid' just happens to be set.
If your minds aren't completely and utterly blown yet, just see the wreckage of the ship from the actual 1989 'Little Mermaid' movie.
I'm officially on board, no pun intended (kidding, of course it was).
Boo is the witch in 'Brave'
I think we're all familiar with Boo, the adorable little girl we know and love from Monsters Inc.
Believe it or not, one of the theories that has been floating around for a while is that this bundle of cuteness became the witch from 'Brave'. Why would anyone come up with such a strange theory you ask? Yes, you guessed it, there's a long winded explanation for this one too.
Looking at the two of them, there aren't any overwhelming similarities that stick out, so obviously physical features aren't what is fuelling this theory. Okay, let's start at the beginning. As a part of the grand unification Pixar theory, it was established that the movie 'Brave' is the beginning and end of the Pixar timeline. Let me try and explain and aid your totally confused, messed up minds. Merida, the protagonist of 'Brave', discovered magic (called the will-of-the-wisps), which is seen being used by the witch as she disappears through a doorway.
Hmm, magical doorways, that sounds awfully familiar. According to the theory, this magic unlocked the ability for animals and inanimate objects to have human characteristics, creating one big explosion of personification which pretty much explains all of the Pixar movies (Finding Nemo, Up, Monsters Inc, all that jazz). We are then taken to Monsters Inc. By the time that comes around, all that is left in the world is monsters and machines, which becomes a major problem when they come to the realisation that they need humans as their source of energy (which would make sense if you've seen the movie, and if you haven't, why are you even reading this?). So then, Mike and Sulley decide to use the doors to travel back in time and accidentally find Boo, which is when everything becomes pretty canon (for a while). After their little adventure, Boo gets hung up on her monster pal Sulley, and is determined to find him again. How does she go about doing this? By harnessing her ability to travel through doorways (that she handily learnt from her monster biffles) later in life. To do this, she once again has to access the power source (the will-of-the-wisp) as seen in 'Brave', which also happens to explain why the witch has a carving of Sulley.
If you aren't totally sold yet, stick around, there's more. As the witch travels through time, she drops little clues (whether or not this is deliberate is up to you) known among fandoms as 'Easter Eggs'. Never seen any? Prepare to be blown away.
I know right! Who knew? After all that, it kind of explains why the door in 'Brave' is magic as well- because it's all a Monsters Inc connection! Seriously, people much have so much time on their hands. I love it!
Andy's Mum was the original owner of Jessie
I'm actually totally on board here with this one, the plausibility is just ridiculous.
You see that hat Andy's wearing there? That just so happens to be what started this entire theory. I know what you're thinking, how could a hat be so vital in some sort of crazy conspiracy? Well readers, this is only the beginning. You see, this hat is rather distinctive, with its bold red colour and laced white border. And where have we seen that before? You guessed it, on Jessie.
Coincidence? I think not.
We all know the tragic tale of Jessie's past, how her owner, Emily, stuffed her into a charity box when she got older (leading to Jessie's claustrophobia). But who is Emily? Is she just a random, or is there more to the story? Of course, fans are going with the latter, and theorising that Emily is in fact Andy's mum. But first of all, why don't we see if this is at least at all possible? Based on the scenery shown in the flashback sequences in 'Toy Story 2', we are assuming that Emily grew up around the 50's and 60's.
Considering the first movie came out in 1995 when Andy was 6, Andy would've been born in 1989. If the mother was indeed Emily, that would've made her either in her 20's or 30's when she had him, which I have to admit, does indeed add up. Plus, the mother's name is never actually specified throughout the trilogy of movies, she is only ever referred to as 'Ms. Davis'. However, just because she could've been Emily, doesn't mean she was. But wait, there's more. You know that hat that I was talking about before? The hat seen worn by Jessie and Andy? It seems it was also seen lying on Emily's bed in the flashback sequence.
You really can't mess with that evidence now can you. Still not convinced? Why not take a closer look at both hats. I'm serious, they're exactly the same.
I know right, it's getting cray. So obviously, no doubt about it, Emily is indeed Andy's mum. I really see no evidence to the contrary. What must've happened is that the mum (Emily) got Jessie and the hat as some sort of two for one deal, gave away Jessie but passed the hat on to Andy, and by some strange coincidence, Jessie happened to end up with her son. How? I guess it's just fate.
'Aladdin' is set in the Future
No, I haven't lost it completely (yet). Yes, it is indeed a theory that 'Aladdin' is set in the future. How? It's actually quite simple (in a complicated kinda way). It all starts with the genie.
In the story, it's known that he's been stuck inside his lamp for over 10,000 years. This all seems legit, until he offhandedly states that Aladdin's clothes are looking 'so third century'. Considering the movie came out in 1992, there's actually no way the genie would be that up on third century fashion, as he still would've been firmly lodged inside that lamp. So yeah, I know that you're thinking one slip up doesn't warrant an entire conspiracy theory, but wait, the anachronisms don't stop there.
The genie also slipped up a couple of other times, doing impressions of 20th Century popular culture icons such as Jack Nicholson and Groucho Marx. For someone who's been locked up for ages, he sure has caught up with the times.
Based on all this, it seems that the only possible explanation is that Aladdin is set in the future, in at least 10,300 AD. According to some Disney tumblr addicts, it is set in a 'post-apocalyptic world' in which only Arabic and select Greek cultures have survived, where the name 'Arabia' has morphed over the years into 'Agrabah'. I have to say, it sounds pretty convincing. Plus, it means that we can just blame the fact that everyone is able to fly around on magic carpets on futuristic technology.
Mother Gothel and the Evil Queen are the same person
Once again, it seems that fans are concocting conspiracies regarding the identity of two characters. This time, the spotlight falls on Mother Gothel from 'Tangled' and famous antagonist, the Evil Queen, from the Disney classic 'Snow White'.
I have to admit, when you think about it, it does make a lot of sense. It was pointed out recently that there are an awful lot of similarities between the dagger and knife found in Mother Gothel's drawer in 'Tangled', and the Evil Queen's box and dagger she is seen passing on to the huntsman. Sure, this could purely be a coincidence, but where's the fun in that? In the picture above, there aren't all that many overwhelming physical similarities, but personality wise? They never end.
Let's weigh up the facts, shall we? The Evil Queen is totally hung up on her beauty, and Gothel throughout 'Tangled' is fixated upon maintaining her youth. If both of those things don't scream narcissistic villain, then I don't know what does. Plus, you've got to admit, when Mother Gothel returns to her old age, she does look an awful lot like the old crone in Snow White.
I'm officially sold.
So that's the end of my list of Disney conspiracy theories. I'm afraid I can't take credit for any of these, because I came up with literally none of them, but they are pretty awesome. Hopefully I haven't ruined Disney for you or transformed you into some kind of skeptic. Anyhow, I urge you to get back to your lives and stop reading about insane conspiracies, it's probably not healthy. Til ' next time . . .