Deviation Actions

NostalgicChills's avatar

I'm Surrounded By Idiots And Fan Theories

*When i say idiots, i mean people who fight over these theories NOT people who believe in them. Just thought I'd clear that up to avoid as much hate mail as possible :P *

Yes, i'm talking about fan theories! Those annoying little tid-bits that are capable of 'destroying' our childhoods. Love em' or not, they are here to stay. And i want to discuss all the most common ones that i could think of. These theories are nothing more than fan based stories that some people write for fun. No theory out there is right or wrong unless proven or disproven by a show's/film's creator. With that said, this begs the inevitable question: What are we really fighting for?

I know i've missed quite a few known fan theories, i can only fit so many in one picture ya know. So please, don't start listing all the ones i've missed.

One by one I will explain the theory itself, and my personal thoughts on each.
Obviously, they are MY opinions - if you disgree that's fine. But don't be a dick about it; please. I'm entitled to my own opinion, just as much as you're entitled to yours. So let's be civilised, and let's begin.

1. Kopa (The TLK Fandom)
This is one of those theories that just won't go away! If you are a part of the Lion King fandom, no doubt you would have come across this theory...many times...TOO MANY TIMES!!
What is the theory?
People believe that Simba and Nala's cub at the end of the first movie is not Kiara, but in fact a male cub named Kopa. People point fingers at it because the cub's appearence differs from Kiara's quite significantly. So people were left wondering "who is that cub?" It was then that people began to take reference from a series of books released in 1994 known as 'The Lion King: Six New Adventures.' This collection of spin-off books were written by various authors and published with the Disney Company's permission. The books featured a cub named Kopa, who is Simba and Nala's first (and only) son. But since the sequel didn't feature Kopa, fans began making stories that 'explains' his disappearence. The most popular theory being that Zira killed him. So strangley, this theory has sparked other theories, so now it's nothing but one big mess.
My Personal Thoughts:
Kopa fans, you may NOT want to read this. Personally, this theory annoys the hell out of me! It wouldn't, if it wasn't constantly shoved down my throat - and not just here on DA, but everywhere! People seem to forget that those books weren't WRITTEN by Disney, just approved. Yet, people mistake it for fact. They were written by (i assume) fans! So, they are just fan theories, nothing was confirmed by Disney at all. In fact, Disney called the cub at the end of the first film 'Fluffy' not Kopa! Plus, has anyone else noticed how unoriginal Kopa's design is? It's basically just cub Simba with a thicker tuft of fur on his head. How un-creative is that?? The picture I drew of him was referenced from the illustrations from the books themselves, so i didn't exaggerate it. So, let me break this theory down the way i see it: The cub at the end of the first movie was named 'Fluffy', Kopa only 'exists' in those books, Fluffy was discarded and replaced by Kiara for the sequel. That is it...moving on.

2. Scar ('How Taka got his scar theory' - TLK fandom)
There many versions of this theory. And people tend to actually fight over it, whenever an artist illustrates one of the theories, someone ALWAYS comes along to 'correct' them if they believe one that's different to theirs.
What is the theory?
There are three common versions to this theory, the film doesn't give any real clues - so people have just made these up:
1. His father gave it to him as a punishment
2. Mufasa gave it to him
3. A Water Buffalo scarred him with its horn after a failed murder attempt on Mufasa.
The third is probably the most common, again it's because of those 'six new adventure' books as i explained earlier.
My Thoughts:
I don't really care much about this theory. My least favourite is the Water Buffalo theory, mostly because of those damn books that people mistake for fact! Because again...They're written by fans, not Disney! Those stories weren't Disney's way of explaining anything. If Disney wanted us to know what happened to Scar, the film would have told us. For all we know, that scar could have been a birthmark and his name was Scar all along. But the film didn't tell us anything, because we're not supposed to know - it's not particularly important to the story. Scar has a scar on his left eye, and we as the audience are supposed to just accept that and not worry about it. So why are we still fighting about it??

3. Jake The Dog (Adventure Time theory)
I'm fairly new to this theory, as much as i'm new to the show itself. However, one of the two main theories surrounding the show has actually been proven by the show's creator as fact. Which of course means that it's no longer a 'theory' but a truth. Despite this, I will explain both theories.
What are the theories?
The most common one is the fact that 'Adventure Time' is set in a post-apocolyptic world. Finn is the only surviving human of the 'Mushroom War' and lives out the rest of his days surrounded by people, objects and animals that were mutated by the bomb's radiation. This is why Finn is simply known as 'Finn the Human' implying that he is the only one of his kind. And it also explains the wreckage of 'modern' technology that was planted right at the beginning of the theme song. For a long while, this was just a theory - until the creator himself confirmed it as true!
The second theory is lesser known, and for good reason. This one revolves around Finn being in a coma after a suicide attempt, after losing his favourite dog Jake. And so the show centres around the chronic dreamlike state that Finn is forever trapped in; as he is reunited with his deceased dog, hence Jake's white, 'lifeless' eyes and supernatural abilities.
My Thoughts:
I'm too new to this show to say much about the theories, so I can't really say much at all. I like the show, it's very creative and entertaining. But I'm yet to watch enough episodes to make a critical decision about the fan theories. So, I'll just move on.

4. Little Foot (The Land Before Time - Heaven theory)
I'm VERY new to this one, i had to add in Little Foot at the last minute, it was only about a week ago i found this theory. I discovered it thanks to the 'Nostalgia Chick' on Youtube. It was very interesting but there are quite a few plot holes in this one, which highly discredit its plausibilty.
What is the theory?
The theory is that, Little Foot and all of his friends actually die at the end of the movie. And The Great Valley is an allegory for Heaven. The argument is this, near the end of the film - Little Foot is visited by the spirit of his mother in the shape of a large cloud that literally leads him to The Great Valley. A lush green paradise, that does appear very suddenly. His friends later catch up to him as they too have died of starvation/exhaustion as they follow Little Foot's voice to the great beyond. Where they live out their lives of eternal youth and happiness. There is even a quote in the movie that people use to enforce this theory. After Little Foot's mother dies, Rooter says this: "We don't all get there at the same time, but we all arrive at the same place."
To take this theory seriously of course, you pretty much have to ignore ALL twelve of the sequels - but that isn't hard to do.
My thoughts:
Jesus Christ! As if The Land Before Time wasn't depressing enough! But i guess; it's because of TLBT's darkness and sombre atmosphere, that i almost believed that this theory could actually be true. That is until i watched the ending to the film again, there was talk about Little Foot and his friend's ancestors passing down the tale of their journey to The Great Valley, that wouldn't make sense if they're dead! Plus a common rebuttle is: If that IS Heaven, where is Little Foot's mother? Which is a good point! However, if i were to believe this theory, i could refute that by saying how; people who don't know the theory would be VERY confused to see Little Foot's mother in the Valley - since the audience is mostly children after all. Another theory around this is that the allegory for Heaven was TLBT's original ending, but then it was altered before its release.
So, maybe there is subtle truth behind it, maybe there isn't - either way, it's a pretty interesting theory.

5. Eeyore (Winnie the Pooh - mental illness theory)
This one is pretty common too, and is a lot more noticable than others. Even people who haven't heard or seen the theory would probably guess that something isn't quite right with the cast of Winnie the Pooh.
What is the theory?
Quite simply, it revolves around the idea that nearly all of the Winnie the Pooh characters have some type of mental illness/disorder:
Winnie the Pooh: Has an eating disorder.
Eeyore: Quite obviously has Depression.
Tigger: ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder)
Rabbit: OCD (Obssessive Compulsive Disorder)
Piglet: A generalized anxiety disorder
Owl: Dyslexia
Kanga: Social Anxiety Disorder - Smothering, overprotective
Christopher Robin: Schizophrenia
This is one of those theories that just craps ALL over your childhood, because once you notice it - you can't unnotice it. And it'll drive you crazy!
My thoughts:
I used to be skeptical of this one, however over time i realised that perhaps (for the most part) it could be true. The mental disorders do fit with all of the character's personalitites, all except one...I'm still not convinced that Christopher Robin has Schizophrenia. His perception of talking stuffed animals could easily be explained just by an understanding of a child's imagination. I think it IS all in Christopher's head, but not for any sinister/twisted reason. The rest i can believe, and i haven't looked at Winnie the Pooh the same way since.

6. Kimba ('The Lion King was plagarised off of Kimba' theory)
Unlike most of the other theories, people are quite torn with this one - and often feel strongly about whichever side they support. People can often get pretty angry about it, whenever this question is raised, arguments are almost inevitable.
What is the theory?
The theory is as simple as it sounds, people often scream plagarism whenever they see The Lion King, claiming that Disney was 'ripping off' Kimba the White Lion. A Japanese anime cartoon show from the 1960's. They base this accusation on their similar imagery, characters and settings.
My thoughts:
Mostly bullshit. It's been proven very thoroughly that all the comparisons between Kimba and The Lion King are superficial, manipulative phrased and compared, and the similarities can be easily explained away logically. And a popular YouTuber called YMS did exactly that in a 2 and a half hour long video essay on the subject. Please watch it if you haven't already:…

7. Spongebob Squarepants (Mutant/Deadly sins theories)
Yep, there are two theories on this one. One is probably more plausible than the other. I suppose the utter ridiculousness of the show's premise brought upon these fan theories, as people try to put logic to a show that clearly doesn't have any.
What are the theories?
The first one has more logic to it than the other. This one is similar to the Adventure Time theory (see above) where all of the characters in the show are mutants because of raditation due to nuclear testing. The idea behind the theory came from an actual event, nuclear testing actually happened in a place called 'Bikini Atoll' (hence the name 'Bikini Bottom') Also it is known that the creator of the show was a former Marine Biologist.
The other theory is that all of the main characters represent one of the seven deadly sins:
Spongebob: Lust - Lust for life, ready for anything/always cheerful
Mr. Krabs: Greed
Plankton: Envy
Patrick: Sloth
Squidward: Wrath
Sandy: Pride
Gary: Gluttony
There are other theories too, like all the spongebob characters are on different kinds of drugs, but i wanted to stick with the main ones. If you want you can look into those ones, they're not hard to find, but i'm not going to address those.
My thoughts:
I haven't really thought about these theories very much, they don't particularly interest me. And i haven't seen the show since learning about the theories, so it's hard for me to give my take on it. Some, one or perhaps all of the theories could be true - the show is pretty bizarre after all, so i guess it's possible. But unfortunately, i can't really say much more than that.

8. Angelica (The Rugrats theory)
Quite a lot of you might know this one, apart from the Lion King ones, this is the most commonly known theory surrounding a beloved childrens' cartoon.
What is the theory?
The theory is that (as far as the young characters go) none of the characters except Angelica (and Dil) actually exist. That's right, this is yet another mental illness/hallucinations theory! There are two sides to it: Either Angelica suffers from Schizophrenia, or she created her baby cousins and friends out of loneliness from being ignored by her mother. Each character represents a tragic back-story or 'truth' about their origins.
Tommy: Was a still-born. Which is why his father spends a lot of his time in the basement, making toys for a child he almost had.
Chucky: Died alongside his mother in a car accident, which is why Chaz is always a nervous, emotional wreck.
Phil and Lil: Betty had an abortion, since Angelica was unsure of the baby's sex, she created twins - a boy and a girl.
Dil: Was the only non-fictional character, however Angelica couldn't tell the difference between him and her creations, so she barely took notice of him.
Much like The Land Before Time theory, you'll have to ignore the spin-off series of Rugrats 'All Grown Up' There are sites that dive deeper into this theory, but i just wanted to explain the basics. Feel free to check out those sites if you want more details about it.
My thoughts:
This is probably one of the dumbest theories i have come across! I don't understand the logic behind it. Rugrats was a show about babies/toddlers and their interpretation of the world around them. And we all had that mean, little manipulative cousin growing up, and if you didn't - it was probably you. The show had a very simple premise, which is why i think this theory exists in the first place. Because apparently simple is boring, so they have to 'spice it up' by making it dark and disturbing. Which is stupid.

9. Rolf (Ed, Edd n' Eddy purgatory theory)
This one is also dark and creepy...for no good reason. I'm not sure how common it is, but here's the idea.
What is the theory?
Basically, all of the characters from Ed, Edd n' Eddy are dead. And they all live together in purgatory/heaven. Not only are they all dead, apparently they all died in different time periods. This is exemplified by how they live, what they wear and what technology they use.
Rolf: Died in the early 1900's
Johnny: Died in 1920's
Eddy: Late 1930's
Ed and Sarah: Early 1950's
Naz: Late 1970's
Edd: Late 1980's
Kevin: Late 1990's
Jimmy: Early 2000's of Leukemia (hence sick/pale look)
However, if i'm not mistaken, i read somewhere that this theory was disproven by one the show's creators. So i don't know if this one has any credibilty anymore.
My thoughts:
Again, like the Rugrats one, this theory is stupid and pointless. I blame the simple premise again, people will always point fingers at something that is too simple - especially when it involves young characters. But most cartoon shows in the 90's were simple and each had a similar premise, think about it: Hey Arnold, Recess, Doug, Pepper Ann etc. It's just the way the 90's were, no need to pull the cartoons apart and put pieces together that aren't there.

10. Banzai ('Disney is racist' theory)
Much like the Kimba theory, people are often pretty one sided about this one. This one really depends on what film you're actually pointing fingers at, and you have to be careful when doing so. Saying something is racist when it in fact isn't, kind of makes YOU racist. If that makes any sense at all.
What is the theory?
Pretty straight forward, people often point to the very old Disney films, ones like: Song Of The South, Dumbo, Peter Pan, various Donald Duck cartoon shorts etc. and shout racism based on how certain races are portrayed. However, it's not only the very old Disney films that get pointed out - people even single out some of Disney's more modern classics such as The Lion King. People say that it's racist that two of the filthy, cowardly hyena characters were voiced by ethnic actors. Even forgotten films like Oliver & Company can't escape from being called racist, since the Chihuahua was voiced by a Hispanic actor (Cheech Marin, same as Banzai) Although nearly all of these accusations can be explained and rebuttled logically.
My thoughts:
I personally wouldn't call any of those films racist. Because, if you really look at them - you'll notice that those people were not portrayed in any real negative way. Besides, you can't blame a Disney film from the 1940's for having a different take on a particular race - they didn't know any better, racial sensitivity wasn't enforced back then; like it is now. As for Oliver & Company being racist because of the Chihuahua's voice...Chihuahua's come from Mexico!! Disney was not being racist, they were just being true to the breed's origins. There is nothing wrong with that. People also say The Lion King is racist, not just because of the Hispanic voice again for Banzai, but also because Shenzi was voiced by a black actress (Whoopi Goldberg) This argument makes no sense. Mufasa, Sarabi, Rafiki and Young Nala were all voiced by black actors too, but nobody brings that up. So, yeah i don't think the modern films are in any way racist. As for the older films, give them a break - they're not hateful or even THAT racist, they're just products of a different time.


Final thoughts:
You must think i really hate these theories right? Well, yeah i do hate some of them. But for the most part, i actually kind of like them. They do crap on my childhood quite a bit, but they are creative and i'm a strong advocate for creativity - even if it dumps all over someone else's. It's the fighting i can't stand! And like i said, no theory is ever going to be right or wrong, unless proven or disproven by its creator. I understand that it's the 'not knowing' that's driving us all crazy, and for whatever you choose to believe in is fine - but let others believe in what they want to believe. That's all i have left to say about this. Please tell me what YOU think about some or all of these theories. I always love comment discussions!

I'm sorry for how long this is.
If you made it through to the end, kudos! :salute:

Scar, Eeyore, Kopa, Banzai (c) Disney
Jake, Rolf (c) Cartoon Network
Angelica, Spongebob Squarepants (c) Nickelodeon
Littlefoot (c) Don Bluth
Kimba (c) Osamu Tezuka

Various screencaps were referenced for this image
Image details
Image size
2410x3436px 1.05 MB
© 2013 - 2021 NostalgicChills
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
BlackPharaoh86's avatar

I love to see Jake bite the longneck 😂

Hermanchungus's avatar
The-X-Gamer's avatar

I make up fan theories and I think I'm a terrible theorist, when some people find my fan theories interesting, I just shut up about it, and not brag about it, I think most Fan Theories are all bullshit, because most of them are shot down by the original creators, the Squall is Dead theory was the last time I even believed a fan theory.

SonicStreak5344's avatar

Poor Scar he can't get a break and thought the Hyenas were bad.

MidniightBases's avatar

"You pretty much have to ignore ALL twelve of the sequels"

I feel like Land Before Time should have been a stand-alone movie anyway.

I personally don't like all of these theories, but my least favorite is probably the Rugrats, I just don't like the idea of death and stuff, it makes me uncomfortable, but Chuckie is the saddest, why him? And why a car crash:cries:, and the idea of Angelica, my second favorite character, hallucinating and slowly becoming insane? She's only 3 years old! Sorry that got a little strong....:(

wiryabudisantoso's avatar

Looks like Diary of a Wimpy Kid. Now I'm stuck in this school with bunch of morons.

MidniightBases's avatar

Did you watch The Lion King at all? The title is a reference.

wiryabudisantoso's avatar
MidniightBases's avatar

It's a yes or no question.

MidniightBases's avatar

If you have a Disney Plus account, I recommend you watch it. It's a very good movie.

wiryabudisantoso's avatar
MidniightBases's avatar

Are you old enough to pay for it?

View all replies

To NostalgicChills:


naturenut190's avatar

*sigh* Aren't we all?

ROB24DOG's avatar

Scar's origin of his scar found here

Battle for the Pride Lands - Disney's The Lion Guard

Otar3000's avatar

Maybe you're right. Maybe I am too obsessed with fighting for a fav theory instead of just believing in it for myself which may be enough.

Thanks for a remind my friend

Ariel1989GloryHoundz's avatar

Lil' Nat aka Natalie me (to Jake The Dog): Enough! (pulls him out of biting Littlefoot) Bad dog! (smacks his butt and scolded him) You know better than biting people like that!

Jake The Dog (hung his head in shame): Sorry, Littlefoot. Sorry, Natchalmers. I won't bite anyone.

Lil' Nat aka Natalie me: I'm sorry I smacked your butt and my sincere apologies to the fans of Adventure Time, I respect your opinion. Now, go home.

Jake The Dog went home as the fighting stops.

Lil' Nat aka Natalie me (Later at the vet where Littlefoot is nursed by the red hoodie autistic star, gently): I am so sincere about Jake. You are okay.

NightstormXStarstorm's avatar
Can we focus on jake biting littlefoot xD WhEeZe
keffer1's avatar

tell me about 😒

Here's my fan theory is kenai a neanderthal?

Volespirit's avatar

another reason the rugrats theory doesn't add up, Suzie could see the babies as well, and there's also Kimi.

Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In