debunking the pixar theory

[@dogeatdog3579]

a lot of people have been commenting that you can do both, so if anyone here can find a video of matpat earnestly analyzing a pixar movie & not using it to push a creepypasta he stole from reddit i will admit defeat and delete my entire channel

[@itsdripnovababy]

Please don’t delete your channel, even if that does happen.

[@TECfan1]

I feel like this video shows a lack of understanding as the what the Pixar theory is. No one who is a fan of the Pixar Theory actually believes that Pixar intended for all the movies to be connected. It's simply a fun way to connect them all as a sort of fan fiction with logic. The "magic is made up" stuff is obvious but it doesn't really debunk the theory. The movies themselves didn't intend to convey that the magic caused certain things to happen...and everyone knows that. It's just a way fans of the Pixar Theory "made up" in order for the theory to work. But the theory is not that Pixar intended everything to be connected, the theory is the fan's way of connecting them in their own creative way.

[@debater452]

Yeah The Theorizers Pixar theory there you go. It has a ton of evidence it'd original and it dosen't try to change the meaning of the movies. Also he made different tree part theories on multiple movies before trying to tie them together

[@leftygurl]

i think it’s fun to humour the pixar theory now and then, but i agree, it is mostly made up. my main issue is that the movies are, clearly, not meant to be connected. nobody made wall e trying to tie it back to toy story or monsters inc, they’re just referencing things they made before because… that’s what creators like to do, it’s fun!

[@therealmrmago9077]

i think there is a case that some of these movies could be conected but its mostly just fun to think about

[@siennahartle9069]

Agreed. You can enjoy the movie for what it is and have fun imagining it as part of a larger story

[@MLPPixel727]

I agree.

[@xereeto]

Do people really take the Pixar theory seriously, as in, believe it was the original creators' intent? I thought everyone was clear that it was a fun bit of headcanon...

[@jaaaaaane]

I know!! Like, figuring out where films fit on the timeline is fun, with the knowledge that people like Easter eggs because it makes us feel connected with a little inside joke. But if people are actually convinced that the universe was supposed to be there all along, a “dark secret” for us to find and not think about the minds behind this who are making movies and adding Easter eggs because they have a deep appreciation for their and others’ art…that is where it starts to be a little bit concerning.

[@brendanthebomber.]

Ikr I just thought of it as a fun excuse to talk about Easter eggs

[@mindless9750]

This

[@TheDanteEX]

People that watch or read a quick thing on Facebook or Instagram take it at face value. I feel like that’s how so much misinformation is spread these days.

[@TECfan1]

No. That's why this video is sort of silly. Of course magic is made up for the theory, because the Pixar Theory is and always has been fan fiction. No one ever believed Pixar intended all the movies to be connected. It's just for fun.

[@poggers3218]

It’s definitely something I thought sounded interesting but when you think about it for more than a minute, it falls apart. A good bit of fun but nothing to be taken seriously.

[@TECfan1]

No one is taking it seriously. It's just like you said, fans having fun.

[@zaidlacksalastname4905]

I don't "believe in" the pixar theory at all, but I still really like it. It's a cool idea presented interestingly. The fun is making it work.

[@ijustlikebees]

Same

[@moproodu]

*tortuously forcing each part of it to fit*

[@ortherner]

same. I never believed the Pixar Theory but it was fun to watch.

[@Error_-ct2vp]

No it’s not. It’s annoying and that’s why no one gives a shit about it

[@TECfan1]

Okay but you don't believe it in what way? The people who create the Pixar theory don't think that Pixar intended all the movies to be connected, they realize they're just having creatice fun. It's a sort of fan fiction. So what's to even believe? All of these movies are fictional so whether they're connected stories or not, anything can happen in them or be true because they're not real.

[@Yoshiedude]

The overall problems with the pixar theory stems from the fact its spinning a shared universe into a single thematic narative. It tells the story of somthing thats not there. The theory exist to explain small Easter eggs in brave and with every passing movie the argument got weaker and weaker. Despite the fact cars made absolutely no sense in the theory. I could buy everything else but not cars. I always thought there was was an Akira toriyama shared universe but i never said it was a grand expansive narrative were the girl poking shit means anything else.

[@mynameisreallycool1]

Plus even if the theory was true and the cars randomly came to life, they probably wouldn't be able to function and live for more than a year (which, even that amount of time is generous) without humans taking care of them, let alone multiple centuries. Also, why would the humans evolve into monsters? How? They live on the same planet as their ancestors did when they left for space. I understand that the world had much less vegetation and more pollution than before, but how would THAT make them somehow evolve into literal monsters? And why would they each evolve so drastically different from each other? Some of furry, some have scales, some have smooth skin. Some have two eyes, some have more, some only have one. HOW??? WHY??????

[@morganfeywild5977]

absolutely in love with the fact that point one is basically "this is a fucking children's movie"

[@thewrongsorcerer]

It feels like most fan theories are just bad fanfiction that fandoms take too seriously

[@70thalternativeaccount63]

SuperCarlinBrothers: *Distressed Screaming*

[@finlayl2505]

I always saw it as just a thought exercise. I suspect a very small fraction of people familiar with the pixar theory actually think that it's real (and they're probably mostly kids at that). It is fun to try and link all the movies together, exploiting your knowledge of easter eggs and trying to come up with creative ways to fit together a timeline.

[@callumsparrow4379]

I much prefer the theories about the individual Pixar films/ universes rather than the supposed grand scheme hap-hazardly connected timeline of all of them in one.

[@deepblu8423]

The virgin “NOOO YOU NEED MORE FACTS AND EVIDENCE THIS ISNT WHAT THEY MEANT” vs the chad “yeah I made it up”

[@arthurpietrogarcia1057]

Is the virgin Dog eats Dog or A Pixar Theory fan?

[@bassplayerbyrne]

Raiden vs Armstrong

[@frostbitetheannunakiiceind6574]

Even though I am a believer of the Pixar theory I never understood why people think wall-e and cars take place at the same time there is so much wrong with that (which you will probably get to, I haven't finished the vid yet). It's honestly the dumbest part of the theory in my opinion. I think it would make more sense if cars takes place furthest in the future, li,e at the very end of the timeline. Like after humans go extinct and after the monsters and atuffnlime that. But it's honestly the biggest flaw and I don't know why people think that's the case

[@alexknj1]

To quote J Carlin, "People who say they've disproven the Pixar theory are missing the point. The point is to make it work." I don't think anyone, at least that I've seen, actually takes this as serious fact, it's all for fun, an interesting way to look a the stories we love. Connecting a few easter eggs to create a grand narrative because it's fun to think about.

[@LieseFury]

Okay but connecting some loosely-arranged dots into a massive, perspective-altering story and calling it a "theory" is not something we should be encouraging right now. Or ever, really, but especially right now.

[@geoffreyrichards6079]

@ Lieselotte Furiosa It may be so when concerning real-life, but when its concerning fiction, I think we can go more easy on it since fiction is fixable.

[@LieseFury]

@@geoffreyrichards6079 I'm not talking about the fiction. I'm talking about the thought process. A conspiracy theorist might not remember believing this Pixar thing ten years from now, but their brain will.

[@friendlyastronaut6462]

@@LieseFury What

[@friendlyastronaut6462]

@@LieseFury That's the definition of a Theory. A theory is an opinion, and in this case, a loosely connected theory made a decade ago for kids movies that was created for fun. I don't think this of all things is going to encourage conspiracy theorists "subconsciously"

[@1everysecond511]

I agree it's annoying that theorizers who obsess over literalism (and encourage that mindset) gloss over the actual intents and messages of the media in question. I also feel like this can especially hurt smaller (or at least bound to Internet culture) content creators, with people getting millions of views trying to piece together clear-cut, literal, concrete "lore timelines" for stuff like Salad Fingers and Don't Hug Me I'm Scared (just as examples) just because "Internet spooky = le ARG" instead of just appreciating them for their actual themes, messages, and presentations which were worked on so hard.

[@mjhtv5397]

I feel this way about the MCU. Once a new movie from them comes out lots of people automatically want to talk about the next thing and how this connects to that. It's fun to theorize, but it's also cool to appreciate what that one movie has to offer.

[@Pinka13]

But what if the timeline/theory videos *are* how they appreciate the themes or messages of a work? Not everyone experiences or enjoys things the exact same way

[@KilgoreTraut]

@@Pinka13 then they're not in the same boat as what OP was talking about? they literally mention "glossing over the actual message" in the first line, your hypothetical is entirely meaningless

[@Pinka13]

@@KilgoreTraut You don't need to be condescending, hon. Just because they don't interpret certain media the same way you do doesn't mean they're way of experiencing something is invalid.

[@KilgoreTraut]

@@Pinka13 i'm not your "hun," sweetie

[@s_gamma_4668]

Ever since i was a little kid I absolutely adored every single Pixar movie and rewatched them all to death. I think its fun to think about how all these movies might connect to each other, albeit with a little bit of fan fiction. But i think its silly to look at these works of art purely through the lense of comparing it to other movies to form a narrative thats full of plot holes and stretches, and not appreciate them individualy for what they are and story they try to tell. Pixar is a studio that has never ceased to impress me with every single literal masterpiece they create and i would hate for them to be the “MCU of animation”. There’s definitely a time and place for speculation and fun theories but it’s definitely a problem when it gets in the way of the movie itself and what its trying to accomplish.

[@maestrofeli4259]

agreed

[@Blackfoot48]

Just realized you have “mordetwi expert” in your channel description and I value and respect so much more

[@geoffreyrichards6079]

I get that some people may get annoyed by the focus of Easter eggs and cameos, but I don’t think most of these theorists are skimming over the main themes or messages of the films. The movies are generally good and enjoyed by many, but when you get older, simply enjoying your favorite media isn’t enough anymore. You kinda want to delve deeper into it, analyze why you enjoy them so much and discover new things to appreciate. This theoretical idea of a shared universe is just one of those ways of further enjoying the films for certain people. Of course, that’s not to say that mindset isn’t without its faults. Some of it can lead to overhype and toxic behavior to any alternate interpretations. But that’s just the nature of a double-edged sword - you cannot have the good without the bad.

[@RaylaEclipse]

I enjoy a good shared universe, like Marvel or Star Wars or whatever, but I will never forgive these franchises for what they have done to media theories. The most basic and often wrong theories thrown around now are these shared universe theories, and more often than not they are based on literally nothing other than a brand name, and maybe a couple easter eggs if you're lucky.

[@awsomeusprime]

As much as I like the Marvel movies, they really ruined the concept of a fun Easter egg for other movies. Audiences really need to chill out with the whole "in the same universe" thing.

[@DCT-tt8ib]

It’s not a coincidence that the Pixar Theory was created around the same time the MCU started blowing up in popularity.

[@mediaguyking7045]

But it’s fun to do lol

[@acesniped639]

I really like your breakdown in the second part of how thought like the PIXAR theory hurts media literacy/genuine appreciation of media!

[@DCT-tt8ib]

Honestly, I seriously doubt the Pixar Theory (And similar “Movies sharing the same universe” theory) would’ve caught any traction or be taken with some level of seriousness if it weren’t for the MCU popularizing the concept of a shared cinematic universe. Also, unrelated, but I find the idea of the Cars franchise ending with all the Cars entering a massive “Water War” over oil and then going extinct because of it to be depressingly funny.

[@dannypipewrench533]

Whether we want to interpret these details as showing a link or not, Cars simply cannot fit into it. First of all, there are clear references to the present era. Sarge is a Willy's jeep, from World War II. He says to Fillmore at the "Every Third Blink is Slow" scene, "The Sixties weren't good to you." Interstate 40, one of the most important parts of the movie, reached Arizona by the 1980s. We see its construction within the lives of the movie's characters. We also known the Cars cars can die, so it is not like these events were an eternity ago. A reinforcement of this is that Ramone says, "Big Al left town like fifteen years ago," to Lizzie in the court scene. Big Al evidently left shortly after the town was bypassed, and Cars was made in 2006, which meanse Big Al left around 1991. That lines up with the construction of Interstate 40, and is also recent history. So, whether there is a timeline or not, Cars is simply not a part of it. It is just an alternate reality, a concept.

[@moproodu]

noooo but *those* easter eggs don't count >:( I just think it's odd that people thing Cars takes place between human civilisation and the movie Wall-e. So, did the cars put everything exactly back in place to make it look like a human apocolypse? Was Wall-E just out there the whole time during the events of the Cars movies? Kinda takes the punch out of his lonliness, huh.

[@dannypipewrench533]

@@moproodu Yeah, that was another problem I had with it. If the Cars exist after the Humans, and the Humans trashed the world (By the way, there is no possible way to produce that much garbage by the time Wall-E is set.), then why is the world reminiscent of Human civilization, if everything was destroyed? So, yeah, I think Cars is its own reality.

[@itsdripnovababy]

The Pixar theory is basically me trying to prove that Splatoon and Advance Wars take place in the same exact world.

[@friendlyastronaut6462]

More like trying to prove every Nintendo game are loosely connected because of shared eastereggs, but yeah

[@ijustlikebees]

@@friendlyastronaut6462 that's a fun idea though

[@friendlyastronaut6462]

@@ijustlikebees it's is

[@SavageGreywolf]

@@friendlyastronaut6462 it's more like trying to say that all nintendo properties are INTRINSICALLY CONNECTED and happen in the SAME UNIVERSE and pointing at easter egg appearances of Mario as your evidence. And probably Smash Bros. too but legit I will Stone Cold Stunner anyone who gives that argument unironically

[@oanadragomirescu2360]

@@SavageGreywolf Well, I still think figuring something like that out would be fun? This whole video seems to take stuff like this too seriously, I just think it's a fun Lil thing to think bout, even if it's most definitely not true

[@Magodosverbos]

"Homo theory" got me

[@sonicwontletmeleave]

now you’re telling me you DON’T believe boo from monsters inc is the witch from brave???? erm 🤨

[@tajklair]

There just easter eggs right its crazy

[@friendlyastronaut6462]

I think the original point of the theory was to have fun, and give a new, but flawed, perspective of things, even if the aren't true as falls apart just thinking about it, it has a certain appeal that some people like/liked. I remember getting into this years ago in middle school. I doubt anyone actually believes this theory, outside of kids who watch KZbin. PIXAR has debunked this theory a multitude of times, but has joked and made fun of it too, even with creator Jon N. But the problem lies with the people pushing it as absolute fact and nothing more (cough cough SuperCarlinBros), when at the end of the day, it's a theory. Like they add nothing of value to the theory or explain why it's wrong

[@kris_user7744]

So, this is the first time I've heard of this theory...ever

[@gustavohernandeza.890]

For me too as well

[@friendlyastronaut6462]

Yeah this theory is old, blew up back in 2012 and fizzled out over time

[@moproodu]

lucky

[@porcupiney]

oh golly i’m early! love your videos a ton, “product placement fanfiction” has to be my new favorite phrase ever

[@robby7499]

Yup. It's not even a theory: just making broad assumptions with what little the "theory" actually has to work with.

[@CookieGobblerCookie]

I think this video helped me make a pretty well-defined distinction between two different types of easter eggs: cameos and canonical foreshadowing. I think easter eggs are really fun, subtle exercises in viewer perceptiveness of a film in the context of something like Star Wars or Marvel where everything is pretty much in one cohesive cinematic universe. I like that Jon among other Pixar enthusiasts catalogued these sorts of details. That said, I don't really buy the theory of a Pixar canon simply because there isn't a clearly defined Pixar cinematic universe, and at least from what I know of these Pixar easter eggs, they don't seem to serve as foreshadowing for the next Pixar films (If there are examples of such, please do let me know!!). At the same time, I don't necessarily think this is a harmful thing so as long as people aren't breathing heavily over their keyboards and overshadowing discussions that appreciate and analyze each Pixar movie for itself. Looking forward to the next video!

[@axlr1029]

people actually take this theory seriously? when i first found out about it last decade (because 2012 was 10 YEARS AGO) i just thought it was like an interesting cool thing as like "oh neat i guess"

[@moproodu]

like, it's less that they believe in it (many probably do) but more that they think it's clever. It annoys me that people talk about it like it's clever.

[@ulfberht4431]

“You made most of this up!” Um, isn’t that kind of the point of a theory? To take an idea and create a hypothesis based on suggestions that someone used based on observation? In other words, you kinda just explained what a theory is. Something made up to sound plausible

[@anth636]

You don’t make up proof to make a hypothesis plausible.

[@Crossark1]

I think you’re taking a weird stance here. It seems like you think people are incapable of simultaneously enjoying the story that’s actually being told *and* theorycrafting for shits and giggles. The way you talk about this, it makes it seem like you believe there’s some hierarchy in everyone’s brains wherein you can either focus on theory above the actual movie or vice versa. That may be how it works for you (as you say, this theorycrafting hobby doesn’t interest you), but it’s not how it works for plenty of people. Most theorycrafting comes from people who have long since engaged with the movie at face value so much that they’re receiving diminishing returns and begin to look for new details to capture their imagination - and when a lot of those details appear to sync up across multiple movies, it can be fun to try to establish some sort of metanarrative that links things together. Fans “care so much about canon” because they’ve invested so much time into their favorite franchises (as an aside, I’d point out that caring about canon is exactly what you’re doing in this video, as much as you claim it baffles you), and a certain degree of narrative consistency is important for the enjoyment of most media. Obviously, some theorycrafting is better than others, and a lot of the Pixar theory is predicated on extreme, self-referential extrapolations from little or no data. But at its core, this behavior is born from an excessive attention to detail and a compulsion to keep explanations in-universe - not from some lack of media literacy.

[@qmulus_yt]

people who unironically think the pixar theory is canon are the typa people to think everything should be in a shared universe and also constantly power-scale anime characters to see who would win

[@bradensorensen966]

Yeah, the theory was fun as a joke-unless his book was never a joke… Taken seriously, the Pixar Theory is really really REALLY lame.

[@jestriia]

Pixar, who just wanted to make movies and ended up getting a whole conspiracy theory: 👁👄👁

[@slashbash1347]

While I agree with you, isn't making it up the whole thing that makes a theory (colloquially, not a scientific theory) a theory? I mean, I thought the whole point was how it COULD all be threaded together.

[@samchiu9918]

My largest problem with the Pixar theory is that it was thought up after Brave came out, and then every single movie from then on afterwards has just been plugged and chugged into the timeline. There is, and never has been, any attempt to revise it; therefore, it is inevitably outdated.

[@IcyDiamond]

I feel most of the cameos and Easter eggs are just done for fun, like Riley from Inside Out in Luca, even though that movie took place in the 50’s and Inside Out takes place in the modern era, it’s still a neat little Easter egg

[@digitalzealot7026]

I think the theory that all Disney channel/dcoms are in the same universe makes way more sense, which isnt really a theory cuz it's obviously true

[@otherlego]

Zombies though?

[@digitalzealot7026]

@@otherlego not sure really. I only saw a bit of the first movie. I mostly think this cuz you have some shows with dcoms (even Stevens, good luck Charlie, etc), some shows have crossovers, and they just give off that vibe idk and it's funny. Didn't say I had hard proof 😭

[@otherlego]

@@digitalzealot7026 oops thought you said all movies, my mistake. Yeah this could be true

[@sel9981]

Some parts of the Pixar theory have heavy "Sir, this is an Arby's" vibes

[@thomaspaine7098]

Sir this is just a Easter egg

[@edfreak9001]

I enjoy the pixar theory for basically being slightly ascended fanfiction but I always took it as a "yeah but what if though look at all these connections you can make if you reach a bit" However, especially in recent years i've learned that the internet is very literal most of the time and cannot handle the concept of something not being black and white, ergo: "there are connections so it MUST be canon and real and intentional", instead of it just being a bunch of fun cameos and not needing to create more fake trademarks to illustrate yet another Wal-Mart type of company.

[@gustavohernandeza.890]

Thanks for the great video. It's pretty obvious that the audience's relationship with the media/art we read/listen/watch have changed very drastically in recent times. Not that something similar existed before but thanks to the abundance of different works available and the easier access that we've at hand thanks to technology has also changed the way we perceive and engage with those as well. I never heard of the Pixar theory before but I've seen the expansion of all related whole analysis/theory of films and TV series. I can see the appeal as a way of doubling down on the escapist angle but seems for me to be exhausting just by thinking of it. Hobbies are not supposed to be homework IMHO but to each its own. Looking forward to your next videos and best of luck on your studies!

[@firecrakerj3312]

The people who take this theory seriously and overthink it, make me roll my eyes.

[@Dankyjabo]

Hell yeah, always great seeing you upload, such an entertaining channel for real :)

[@DiscordC]

Why do skeptics have to ruin everything.

[@frostbitetheannunakiiceind6574]

Finished the vid, you make some valid points.

[@GumSkyloard]

TL;DR: It's just a buunch of easter eggs you knobheads, y'all are making a panthalassa out of a cup of water

[@frostbitetheannunakiiceind6574]

I was about to be like "how dare you debunk the Pixar theory" but the meme 0:32 won me over, it killed me lol

[@christianeddins]

it might not fit in with the actual movie but I am hoping I can watch Lightyear while I make believe it is a 2022 live action Buzz Lightyear reboot that exists in the Toy Story universe.

[@toontrooper4103]

I like that point you made about companies looking at these things. Companies cater to what makes money and creators are just a means to that end. Those little references can be warped if the CEO wants another dollar.

[@toontrooper4103]

If the CEO thinks it'll make another dollar*. Better wording but I don't wanna edit the comment. So here's a reply.

[@saikoblyat]

To me, the most absurd part in all this is that monsters evolved from humans in the course of a couple thousand years, when that kind of large scale evolution would take hundreds of thousands if not millions of years🤣 not to mention, there would have to be an environmental reason for said evolution. The Monster World and the human world look starkly similar, and the intense diversity of monsters in the monsters universe would suggest the presence of hundreds of different biomes with harsh conditions on every corner of the monster world, which we know isn't true since the worst place Waternoose could think to send the Yeti is Nepal.

[@mattwolf7698]

Makes me wonder if the people who came up with this even understood how evolution works.

[@bitbandit1678]

i think you guys in the comments are being awfully charitable here. this is a really dumb fan-theory. and if pixar had ever actually officially made something like this canon, I would think it's stupid as hell.

[@moproodu]

yes.

[@watchmangames2337]

its so sad that people treat it as fact im starting to think they have never heard of the ancient term "Easter Egg"

[@uneek35]

I thought you were going to talk about the many ways in which The Pixar Theory just straight up doesn't make sense. The idea that Cars would recreate 21st Century human society for no reason and just act like they've always been around is insane. The idea that it takes place in the post-apoc future of WALL-E is asine. How Inside Out, which takes place in a metaphor, is evidence of anything is beyond me. Connecting unrelated stories into one grand mythology can be pretty fun, IMO. That's how comic book universes started. But if you have to rely on huge ass-pulls instead of actual evidence to connect things, there's really no point. You can connect anything with that method.

[@BritishSoldier-kr9xf]

The only good theory about a pixar movie. Is that cars 2 was one of mator's tall tales.

[@acabusarmies7279]

Personally, the obsession with cannon has to do with being able to make fan fiction about the universes that come through the doors, allowing fans to potentially make darker stories and more "interesting" concepts. I actually do this myself, so I may be projecting here, but from what I have experienced, it brings me great joy to either make a new cannon or see the subtle implications of the "existing" one. A lot of the time, these creators have to throw out authorial intent and look at these things without that lens, which serves well when making the theory, but makes analysis harder since the potential new ideas that come from considering the intentions of writers is not considered.

[@acabusarmies7279]

Addendum: This is prehaps the logical extension of film analysis gone awry in this manner, but it is my favorite form of analysis. kzbin.info/www/bejne/opPbkJKDn9xrY7s Personally, I'd love to see something like this actualized into an actual peice of media, likely a fanfiction.

[@sweesbees]

remember when people could just,,, _enjoy_ movies without needing to endlessly theorise about every little thing under the sun???

[@delksbwg3777]

Fiction has always been heavily theorized on, mainly when we could rewatch/read things multiple times, and we start to get a bigger grasp, and we start seeing the fiction piece differently, same thing with real life or religion tbh

[@jcanimation9974]

Really great video! As someone who works in the 3D animation industry, I have always had mixed feelings on this sort of stuff. On one hand, it makes me happy to see people enjoying the content, even if it is for theorizing. On the other I hate to rain on anyone's parade, but 90% of the time you see a prop reused between two movies or shows it is just because animation takes a lot of time, people, and money to produce. We cut corners wherever we can; we have deadlines to meet. Assets, textures, even full characters, get recycled and reused all the time. I would love to say that studios put meticulous thought into every detail to connect all of their movies in one universe, but the reality is that we just reuse props, because it's easy.

[@Delta-lu5kf]

5:54 The Toy Story magic actually isn't made up, at least in regards to the human emotion part of it. TS4 confirms that it's the child's emotions towards the toy that causes its sentience, which was how Forky was able to become sentient Aside from that, I think your whole premise of why the Pixar Theory is bad is fundamentally flawed. Humans aren't one track minded. They can, in fact, both appreciate the individual themes while also wanting to theorize about all the films being in a shared timeline. Also, the Star Wars and MCU comparisons are pretty nonsensical considering they both have actual canon timelines. A much better comparison would've been the Zelda community

[@JakeTvisterOfficial]

It's one of those mishaps by no fault of the creative leads in the studios adding easter eggs and self-referencial gags or hints that invites the audience to spot upon first or repeated viewings. Having a vested interest in constructing a deep and expanding transnarrative universal theory in of itself is a cool thought, but I doubt Pixar spent their founding years maticulously planning their next 30 years of releases to put these in. If it were the case, then it'd had to be a lore master chained to the desk and be a consultant so as to fit them in XD

[@thebigdawgj]

You're not fun at parties.

[@SPRIGHTLYMAIDEN]

what i think people like about this theory is that, now a lot of movies are part of one big story with other movies or tv shows. i've seen these types of theories with a TON of media and none of them are good, like at all. People tend to forget that things can just be one thing by themselves which is fine, not every media people like has to be in one BIG media fold that lets everyone connect, its ok to just like a media that has its own world that isn't connected to any other world, i think people forget that

[@theneef174]

It's just good fun. Everyone already knows it's not true. It's just something fun to think about. It's a popular headcanon.

[@Lugiamasterbrony]

To me the only thing that really held any weight in the Pixar theory is the BnL stuff and that's about it. Though if it were to be confirmed at one point I don't really think it would become like the MCU, DCEU, SCU, or Star Wars etc. You would still be able to watch any of the Pixar movies without needing context of any of the other movies asides from ones where there are sequels to them. I think it would be more like the Buddy Universe (yes this is a thing) where you have a bunch of movies in the same universe but aren't really needed to understand other movies within it. Sure you have the main Buddy movies followed by Buddies but really most of the Buddies movies I believe are not needed to understand other Buddies movies as well.

[@benjaminmargulies1853]

the "a bug's life" storybooks debunks pixar theory

[@MLPPixel727]

I was never huge on the Pixar Theory, and I only believe it less and less with each new movie Pixar produces. Writers make similar things, and can like inside jokes, as mentioned here. Also, we don’t have to know everything about every story; the details form the greater stories they want us to enjoy, and we can understand what we need to for knowing the stories and characters better. The theory only tries to make a personal grasp not everyone has to agree with that, unfortunately, only limits understanding further. If we can catch what Pixar values, from each story, that’s what matters.

[@MLPPixel727]

The irony about the Pixar Theory is that a lot of theories we use today for even real life things follow similar trends as this.

[@mr.swordmanthebestsword6189]

The thing that really infused me about the Pixar theory is that why is there no pollution in Radiation Springs.

[@l-_-lnzrd]

I love the getting over it background music (or is it just public domain stock music?)

[@fafaaf61]

As someone who engaged in the Pixar theory a few years back and occasionally still follows creators who work in that space I will try to defend it. As stated by many others the Pixar theory, at least by the people I've interacted with, is not meant to be seen as the "truth" and indicative of the creators intentions or even supposed to represent what actually happened in the narrative. As you yourself put it, it's more or less supposed to be fanfiction. People engage with it mostly because it's fun to think of ways Pixar movies connect, not because they believe that it's actually true. Your primary point is that engaging in the Pixar theory prevents people from engaging thematically and culturally with the work because they focus on the Easter Eggs and building a separate narrative instead but I'd argue that it's possible to do both. Like I said, the Pixar theory is essentially fanfiction and it's perfectly plausible to engage in fanfiction while remaining thematically conscious of the works involved. I can appreciate how Up deals with themes of loss, being stuck in the past, expectations, dreams and reality and moving on while also toying with the idea that it shows how animals gain sentience. I can look at Inside Out and acknowledge the idea of healthy displays of sadness, toxic positivity and the fear of uncertainty while also humoring the idea that it explains where scream energy from Monsters Inc. comes from. Basically, from my experience, most people who engage in the Pixar theory do not believe or argue that it is a valid and literal reading of the text, rather it is separate narrative that is independent or in other words fanfiction. Because it's not a literal interpretation of the text I'd argue that it's not a contradiction to engage with Pixar movies on a thematic and emotional level while also advancing the narrative of the theory. Personally speaking, I do care about taking a look at both the messages of Pixar works, the cultural context they exist in and engaging analytically with the works, listing out, for lack of a better term, the thesis of these movies and the pathos behind them. However, I also find it very fun to just sit back and think about how the witch from Brave is actually Boo from Monster's Inc. Sure I don't believe it but that doesn't mean that it's not fun to think about and like I said, I don't see the reason why that should hinder thematic analysis of the works.

[@TalleyBellum]

This is gonna be an interesting one

[@DENVERRIOGRANDEMAN21]

Probably one of favorite theories although I don't think is true

[@ChuggersLR]

I always thought it would be cool if they did a movie centered around the pizza planet truck that is hidden in all of their movies, maybe tying everything together through some multiverse aspect (maybe that would be jumping the shark but idk) The name "pizza planet" would be great for some mega pizza delivery company that operates through time and space or whatever, literally taking up an entire planet

[@ianhawke2203]

To be honest, the only films I think share a universe are Incredibles and Ratatouille.

[@RaisinHater]

all you need to do to debunk the theory is just look at onward, that's it

[@leonardosomma4196]

Forget the pixar cinematic universe. For me, I'm obsessed with the DISNEY cinematic universe and the LAIKA cinematic universe

[@Twinklethefox9022]

I think this Pixar theory is a big stretch. But I do believe some Pixar movies are in the same universe. Like brave and frozen could be in the same universe but different timelines. And of course cars with planes because that is 100% confirmed it would be in the same universe. Edit: ok I forgot that frozen is a Disney movie and not Pixar but I remember alot of people trying to tie some Disney movies into it since Disney owns Pixar.

[@fusetunes]

the people who are die hard about this theory kind of remind me of the people who insist that every cartoon is actually just a hallucination and all the characters are actually dead or whatever. it’s technically harmless, but getting so hardcore about it takes away the fun and wonder that the original media is supposed to be about.

[@TalleyBellum]

This was definitely an interesting one. Good video

[@collinbollin]

As someone heavily invested in "Zelda Timelines" I have to admit that a part of me knows that there is no canon timeline. It is the same reason why I was once invested in the Pixar theory and the fridge logic that ends up connecting all games together through smash brothers or completely disconnected sitcoms via cameos. Which is that rather than genuinely believing these things are intended or true, it gives someone who is obviously already invested in, and has given more attention than most to these stories, an excuse to dive deeper scrub every frame for details and discuss the thing they like. I don't think the moral of ratatouille is lost on anyone who actually contributes to the theory and the community, quite the opposite. they must have watched the movie enough times, understood the characters on such a deep level, that the morals, the intended message of the film has gotten stale. They want to keep loving their thing so when someone mentions that a reference in this film is in another film, searching for connections becomes a way to express their investment and enjoyment of the films, or in the case of zelda timelines, the games.

[@mattwolf7698]

Nintendo confirmed the Zelda timelines though in Hyrule Historia. I honestly still don't think they work very well though.

[@bradens.3125]

the fact that you made your random dog pfp your avatar is amazing

[@BigRig97]

Theories make these fictitious pieces of media feel the more interesting, so I don't think any theory (no matter how popular it is) should be taken serious.

[@debater452]

Personaly the Theorizers Pixar theory is the best since it dosen't try to change the meaning of thses movies. Also it has actual evidence

[@ARSD219]

I have a feeling people do it not because it's "the truth," but rather, since it's fun to create a theoretical timeline.

[@siennahartle9069]

No one ever talks about how the Pixar theory actually originated as a joke in a Cracked video

[@OpossumNotPossum]

I think the point is really that references can be just that, references. Nothing more nothing less, just animators enjoying the movie they’re working on.

[@superpapaextreme9064]

Honestly, I feel like one day Disney/PIXAR will just retcon their way to making this true so they can make money off of a crossover.

[@Iiiiii884]

What if… …There was… …The DreamWorks Theory?

[@Drace90]

The Pixar Theory is just a fun creative excercise. No one actually thinks it's true or what the filmmakers at Pixar intended. In fact, most of popculture overthinking works like that. Reading way too deep into something on a level that the original creators never intended, is the entire joke. It is fine to also do the opposite and debunk it, but it is kinda ironic to complain about people's media literacy without getting that. Theories don't come from people not appreciating the films enough, it is the opposite. They appreciate them so much that they want to spend even more time with them.

[@MightyJoeMaple]

Pixar Theory reigns supreme due to the fact it is not intentional and is very fun and staisfying for all of us to piece together. It's not an overall canonical story, we're just rearranging things. And the Easter Eggs are something we all look for nowadays, at least I do. But not fiercely, I don't just scan for the Easter Eggs, I enjoy what I'm watching and will go back over it after. I see this video was posted 2 years ago and I hope your mind has maybe been changed a bit to appreciate the Pixar Theory. Much love.

[@anth636]

“Please like my fanfiction!”

[@imrustyokay]

The more you unpack this, the less sense it makes, like, wouldn't it make more sense for the human-focused movies to share a (loose) universe, have the Cars movies in their own universe, and have Monsters Inc in it's own universe that connects to the loose human universe?

[@breheh]

I literally love your channel and your voice so much, a great way to relax on a Thursday afternoon

[@dogeatdog3579]

aww thank you

[@Horatio787]

"Who cares where the xenomorph came from?"

[@lucca_who]

The pixar theory is peak worst fandom culture, they go "pixar isn't giving us cinematic universe INFINITE CONTENT to endlessly talk about and consume forever, so we make it ourselves"

[@LieseFury]

it's pixar fans dropping the mask and proving they're just as bad as disney adults

[@ijustlikebees]

Or just the insistence that a popular theory must be true,even though it's completely nonsensical,but no one questions it,that's my problem with fan theories and fandom culture

[@Toaster003]

So basically you’re just trying to say “it’s just a movie”??

[@demarcusdawson6158]

Am I the only one that thinks this video is a bit silly😭. I’ve never seen anyone genuinely believe it, people just find it fun and interesting. And also you can find it interesting and understand the individual beauty of the film at the same time, there’s nothing stopping you. Also it annoyed me a bit how the only reasonings she gave was that it “wasn’t real”, like duh that’s how theories work, they’re made up😭 if she would’ve given legitimate contradictions I would’ve understood that but the thing is she didn’t😭

[@danielmcelroy4505]

I think this headcannon popularity is a symptom of intertextual (here I guess metatextual) weaponized nostalgia

[@Kinochai]

I don't think that you came off as too harsh, though I do think you missed the mark in many ways, as well as missing the point. For starters, just saying that certain ideas and evidence is made up really doesn't disprove anything. People know that none of this is stated in canon, they're just drawing conclusions and conclusions from possible threads they see. And as far as people missing the point of the movies, I think it's silly to assert that these people only watch them for these reasons, and only appreciate it on that level. There's no reason to assume they don't love the movies and appreciate them for the stories they're trying to tell, no one would be this invested in these stories if they didn't deeply love them. I believe you may be misunderstanding the point or the fun, and kinda missing the forest for the trees, but thats just me. I hope that may have cleared some things up, and I in turn hope that I didn't come off as rude at all.