The problem with fan theories like this, is that the people who makes the movies can adapt to the fan theories, rather than the other way around. So they don't "confirm" the theories, as much as use them and pretend that was the plan all along.
That's how religion works, and this isn't a coincidence; these movies are the modern equivalent of folk stories. We take the stochastic behaviour of observable phenomena and mold them into archetypal narratives to create meaning and purpose.
PikachuchuTrain like the Stan Lee watcher thing is just for fun. His cameos were never done with this in mind, they were just a little Easter egg to acknowledge his contributions to these characters. Then, like the video says, James Gunn decided to have fun with it. If this were true from the beginning that means that the Fox/Marvel/Sony universes have been connected all along, which they aren't. Still waiting to see Hulk vs. Wolverine...
PikachuchuTrain Yes. Of course, some may have planned this, but some are probably the other way around. Doesn't mean that some of these weren't actually planned, but definitely some of them probably conform to the fan theory rather than the theory figuring it out. To confirm which is which, we would need, say, an outline of the fan theory before the fan theory existed by the creators of the movie or something along those lines.
I thought everyone knew he was it wasnt hard to figure out since he wears the colors of the Genie plus how would he know the whole Story to it all so yea of course he was the damn Genie
The Tarzan one is dumb. Unless their parents changed their clothes, hair color and facial features. And that trip took more than one hundred years to account for the difference in firearms technology and clothing fashion.
+StrungSilver Mate, they have 19th century clothing. Norway was also pretty big by that point. Not having firearms would've been suicidal, if you wanted to actually run a country and not get invaded constantly.
Read the last line of the directors quote...they don't include it in this analysis. He wasn't serious about the Tarzan/frozen connection. It was just a fun idea that he indulged in for the purposes of the article. He also says that he wishes that Penguins were also in that world! It was a joke.
More like the writers liked the theories and decided to claim them. I'm not saying this is the case for all of them but it's definitely the case for the Tarzan and Spiderman theories.
Read the last line of the directors quote...they don't include it in this analysis. He wasn't serious about the Tarzan/frozen connection. It was just a fun idea that he indulged in for the purposes of the article. He also says that he wishes that Penguins were also in that world! It was a joke. So no, it's not "definitely the case" for Tarzan. The director clearly saya (if you read the whole interview/article that they DON'T include in this video) that there's no connection. It was just a joke.
So, if Elsa's parents were going to Rapunzel's wedding with Eric etc. How come Anna and Elsa weren't invited? I thought that Rapunzel was supposed to be their cousin according to this theory!? Theories try WAY too hard...
Oooooh thats very true! But why weren't Anna and Elsa going with them in the first place? Okay... Never mind the whole thing is dumb now I'll leave. hahaha!
That's the thing. Fan theories in general are just dumb. Trying to fit puzzle pieces when they clearly don't match. In a day and age of "Cinematic Universes" (Marvel being the prime example, and is also owned by Disney), everything made by a particular studio has to be connected somehow. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but does 'Frozen', 'Tangled', 'Tarzan' and 'The Little Mermaid' etc. have to be connected to each other to add to your enjoyment of these films? I like all these movies as much as the next Disney fan, but they can stand on their own. If it's not broke, don't fix it.
that doesn't hold up either, the ship in The Little Mermaid and the one the parents were on in Frozen are two completely different ships and their ship went nowhere down where Little Mermaid is supposed to take place (also, Little Mermaid takes place further int he future than Frozen....like almost 100 years). Also Elsa and Anna didn't go with their parents because customarily they couldn't leave their kingdom without anyone to look after it, and with Elsa being locked up and unable to control her powers but still the Queen Regent, that responsibility would have fallen to her until he parents got back, and since she can't handle her powers Anna would have been left behind to look after Elsa (or would YOU want to bring the magic girl who could freeze everything during a tantrum to a wedding across the ocean?)
I actually don't think that Tarzan was born on the ship. Remember the picture they had of all of them? I really doubt that they took that picture while sailing so it might mean that Tarzan was born before they even made the journey.
Also, if Tarzan was the son of royalty, I don't think Disney would pass that golden nugget up and not mention it in any fashion. They would have had someone yelling out a title or "Get the Prince and Queen!" somewhere or Tarzan discovering his lineage. The theory is just way too forced.
Seriously? the Tarzan/Frozen article you sourced says “DEBUNKED” in the title. It also says in the very next paragraph underneath the quote you used that Frozen and Tarzan have NO RELATIONSHIP. It’s right there in your own video! I mean it is RIGHT THERE.
Tarzan's English name is John Clayton II, Earl of Greystoke. His parents were English nobles. He was born around 1888. He is in no way related or connected to the characters in Frozen.
@ josh house: Tarzan is actually John Clayton III, Earl of Greystoke. His parents were John Clayton II and Alice Rutherford Clayton, the Earl and Countess of Greystoke. William Cecil Clayton is the cousin who had inherited the Earldom because everyone assumed both parents and their baby died in the jungle. (The ape Kayla had put her dead baby in the crib and taken the human baby instead.) And I did not learn this by 'listening to Hollywood', but by actually reading the original novels multiple times. :)
That Tarzan theory is rubbish. Tarzan is based on the classic novel "Tarzan of the Apes" by Edgar Rice Burroughs. Frozen is based on a the fairy tale "The Snow Queen" by Hans Christian Anderson. No connection. Also, Elsa and Anna's parents are Norse, whereas Tarzan is English. Specifically, he is the Earl of Greystoke. Whoever is coming up with these theories might want to pick up a book now and then. Lastly, that theory isn't confirmed just because some member of the production staff says that it goes along with the made-up world in his head.
Plus, Frozen 2 also debunks this theory. The King and Queen of Arendelle are shown in the water's memory that they DIED. I am a Disney fan, as you can see.
Simon Emuze tarzan is more realistc while "frozen" is more about magic..Two totaly different worlds and totaly different timeline.Tarzan was created decades before "Frozen".
I agree Also tarzans patents were English not scandernavain or Norwegian plus if u notice tarzans parents had a photograph taken with baby tarzan in it I don't think there was any form of photographic equipment ever in frozen movie so I doubt Anna and elsas parents picked up on in duty free before they set sail Think Disney need to do homework before agreeing that fans r right but hey I'm just someone who grew up with Disney movies that I watched 100 times over at least
The Tarzan theory is beyond stupid, the ship sinks between Sweden and Denmark yet his parents wind up in Africa? And no the Tarzan tale isn't based in a fantasy realm, as it's stated that the explorers are from Britain. How the hell does that theory makes sense?
+et 37 First, Disney didnt read the lore of Tarzan. The ship didnt sink with parents on ship, they were left stranded in Africa, by mutineers. Burrough's states that the ship later sank in a part of Africa oceans. Tarzan was born while parents are stranded, in fact his mum died not long after she gave birth, animals didnt kill her. It was Kerchak, that killed Tarzan's father. Other mistakes by Disney, Jane is blonde and American, not English. All but Clayton are American (Burroughs originally didn't want it to be based from England, he intended it to be from his Country, USA.) Clayton is a family member of Tarzan (Cousin).
Disney didn't make any "mistakes", they just changed plot points from the source material because they felt the changes would make for a more engrossing children's movie. This type of thing happens all the time and it is intentional.
The original stories are mostly irrelevant in this discussion. Just the first five minutes of the movie disproves the theory. Tarzan's parents abandon the burning ship just off the coast of Africa. It's great that you are familiar with the original tales, but trying to use that information to disprove this fan theory is like trying to bring in The Snow Queen not having shards of glass in people's eyes.
Step 1: Make a movie with some loose details Step 2: Read what fans have to say about it Step 3: Do fan service, and say "woah, you're so smart, you figured it out" Step 4: Profit... again, on top of the previous profits.
The Tarzan thing couldn't be correct, the fact that in Medieval Scandinavia was like early AD and time of colonial British expansion was only 100 years ago, the times don't add up at all, Tarzan would have to be like 1000
no, but anna and elsa would have had to be around 150 at least, the clothing is late 1700s early 1800s in frozen, tarzan is late 19th early 20thy century
But he straight up full-fledged talks to them in conversations also not just gorillas elephants too so I'm pretty sure that's his power. He taught them to "talk" to gorillas but not in the way he does.
Dude it's animation, years apart with different animators, it's normal they do not look alike. Your logic of "they can't be related, they do not look alike" would ruin 99% holywood movies where the actors do not look alike at all... The theory has a ton of holes, sure, but the appearance argument has to be put aside.
The Tarzan/Frozen connection still doesn't make sense. The biggest debunker for me is the huge disparity in technology. In the Tarzan movie, it's shown that guns are fairly common use, and later in the animated TV series, radio is already an emerging technology. Meanwhile the most advanced technology we saw in Frozen are crossbows.
nong333 Mine is that they would have had to travel from Scandinavia to somewhere near the equator on, at best, a large piece of wrecked ship. That's too far. Although that may explain the disparity in tech, if they took 50 years to float to the equator. And it's not exactly easy to survive a shipwreck in the north sea nowadays, there was almost zero chance back then.
Read the last line of the directors quote...they don't include it in this analysis. He wasn't serious about the Tarzan/frozen connection. It was just a fun idea that he indulged in for the purposes of the article. He also says that he wishes that Penguins were also in that world! It was a joke. To me, THIS is the biggest debunker.
It still blows my mind. When it comes to fan theories this is the first one that pops in my mind, and it was a really satisfying feeling when the show confirmed it.
ASoIaF has a lot of fan theories that are so much more amazing than R+L=J. Just to name a few: The Grand Northern Conspiracy The Gravedigger The Blackfyre Theory The Grand Tyrell Theory Pretty much everything regarding Howland Reed. I especially recommend reading up on the first one on the list, if you ever have a couple of hours to kill.
A don’t agree with the Tarzan/Frozen theory because it literally said NO RELATIONSHIP. On a different note I’ve heard this other theory about Frozen, which was that the king and queen were going to Repunzel’s wedding (her and Flynn are in an Easter egg at the beginning of the movie) but then the ship sunk and that ship was the one in the Little Mermaid. I have no idea where I heard this I just thought it was cool!
I believe the Frozen-Tangled theory which says that the king and queen of Arendelle die when they try to go to the celebration of the return of Rapunzel and hence three years later Rapunzel and Flynn come to Elsa's Coronation.
Aji Ayishwariyalakshmi J M Personally I’d be more inclined to believe that theory over the Frozen/Tarzan theory. I could complain about the timeframe for the latter, but for me, my complaint is more with the resemblance. I don’t see how it’s possible for their mom could go from a brunette to auburn/red head or their dad going from a strawberry blond to a brunette. At least with the Frozen/Tangled theory, it does fit in a similar timeframe and the proximity of where the two kingdoms are based on are close. Heck, I wouldn’t mind if that theory also tied in with the Little Mermaid too given where that movie took place and the sunken ship there resembling the one Anna and Elsa’s parents took.
@@tammymartinez7488 It probably wasn't out when they wrote that comment. I personally kinda of liked Rapnuzel, Elsa and Anna being cosions - "three years later" is an example of that plausible, but of course it wasn't true, and the creator who worked on frozen 2 were so feed up with that theory and then people started adding the little mermaid (the royal ship that Elsa's and Anna's parents were on, when down and then Airel finds it in the little mermaid and I looked at the photos of the two boats and they didn't even look remotely similar) and then some people don't understand scarasm - Anna and Elsa are related to Tarazan - oh please and are you going to tell that on the other side of the world is a surfering penguin?
The Tarzan theory is bull****. They even say in this video it was 'in his head.' Tarzan is a known character in an existing book, with a known heritage. When Elsa and Anna's parents leave on their voyage, you hear one of the girls say, "See you in a few weeks." the West coast of Africa is quite a bit further away than a few weeks, there and back. They clearly weren't going THAT far.
The Tarzan theory though interesting is totally bullshit, there is almost 50 years difference in time period between the movies, it does not make sense for him to be Elsa and Ana's lost brother, by the time Tarzan was born, if alive, the king and queen would be on their 70s or 80s depending on their age when they desapeared.
Information theory holds that "reality" is a three-dimensional (or 11-dimensional) holographic projection of a two-dimensional data matrix expressed on the surface of an expanding singularity, just as virtual worlds in a computer game are constructed from a two-dimensional matrix of data on your hard drive.
I refuse to believe the Trazan theory. It just doesn't make sense, it does work in the time frame, and there are too many holes in the theory. Like how did they get a framed family picture at sea?
Wayne Mattson Also, the king and Queens boat was capsized and Tarzan’s parents was on fire, so did their boat not sink and then catch fire or did they get on another boat... and good point about the picture, didn’t even consider that detail.
Tarzan and Cars are two different universes. Cars is in the Pixar universe. Along with Toy Story, monsters Inc, incredibles, Wall-E, Brave, etc. Frozen and Tarzan are not affiliated with Pixar.
@@waynemattson9143 wow there now No that is far fetched remember Nokk water horse from frozen 2? Well it caused tdial waves that sank the ship rtight? buyt the aprents survived however wetre washed far awy fro ahiel unti l they were picked by english ship which then got into another storm Plus tiem frames. Remember everyone thoguht rapunzel took place in different time too? But then we see rapunzel and flinn on elsa's coronation. Disney is not like original story, adn it may take place at same time without us knwoing And trust me that's not something I made up
"So in my little head, Annd and Elsa's brother is Tarzan-- but on the other side of the island are surfing penguine, to tie into a non-Disnet move, 'Surf's up'. That's my fun little world". I don't think that makes this canonical.
The Frozen- Tarzan one doesn't make any sense or hold up under scrutiny. In the Tarzan TV series he meets President Theodore Roosevelt. This was either when he was a sitting president (unlikely as he was one of the most busy Presidents) or after his turn as commander in chief, as Presidents of the United States keep that title for life. He was POTUS from 1901 to 1909 and he died in 1919. So Tarzan happens sometime between 1901 and 1919. Even if you discount the TV series the Tarzan movie clearly happens sometime around the Victorian era due to the technology and costumes shown. Frozen however shows costumes and technology from nowhere near that date. They show ships that seem to be based loosely on the Galleon, which was a ship type, used between the 16th to 18th centuries. The ships themselves look more like a Frigate, which was a latter successor to the galleon, but some of the ships in Frozen are larger than most Frigates. The costumes used in the film, along with the architecture, put the timeline of Frozen sometime in the late 18th to early 19th centuries. Basically it was set around the Napoleonic wars. WHICH WAS A FULL CENTURY BEFORE TARZAN.
+Dontai's Hat Lint: I know. It's just that I have seen so many video's on that theory, without any evidence shown, that at this point I "scream at my monitor" with frustration at how they just regurgitate it without putting in any research on the subject. A 1 minute internet search will show you a small amount of evidence showing that the Tarzan-Frozen thing is wrong. I just find it annoying.
the frozen Tarzan connection doesn't work because A the time periods dont line up B tarzans parents look nothing like the parents of anna and elsa and C the coast of Africa is way too far away from Scandinavia for anna and elsas parents to have any reason to be near there or to have drifted there from European waters
Byron Kingdom Finally someone brings up all those points at once. I thought I was the only one thinking that the Frozen/Tarzan theory isn't possibly geographical wise
And how do they have a picture of themselves in the treehouse but in the castle it’s all paintings... if they had that technology why not use it back when they were at home
The title of their source says "Debunked". Even after the quote they show it continues to say it's just how he saw it in his head. It was never an official theory.
I agree and there is one more thing that make the theory even less sense. the ship itself, in Tarzan, the ship was on fire and the waves wasn't that violent, while in frozen, the ship was in pretty good shape, no flames but a GIANT wave just flushed it down to the sea.
Frozen/Tarzan connection....The photograph of the couple & young Tarzan. Where did it get developed at? The developing equipment was saved in the shipwreck??
Not really. That's like saying the British colonizers that settled in America are the rightful owner when the natives were literally here first. He is A king IN the jungle, but not of.
Leave it to Looper to forget evidence written IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH as their own "evidence". Surf's Up takes place on the opposite side of Tarzan's island. In the director's head. Let the theory die, it doesn't really hold up when you look at it closely.
Its also shows that nobody checks things for themselves, seeing as after scrolling through the comment section, you and I are the only ones to notice that.
Have you seen the title of the article? Should tell everyone that the fan theories are horseshit and the director is making fun of them. Looper is literally trying to confirm a theory by using an article that debunks said theory as evidence. Man the stupidity.
The spiderman one was not the original intention, it was is an unofficial retcon backed by Holland. He has no say in the script of any of the films though or anything so him saying it is confirmed is like a codemonkey for valve confirming Half Life 3.
Yeah, Tom Holland lied about that, as much as he would love for it to be true. It's not official, he was just trolling everyone. The conversation never happened. Holland turned around and said he made it all up a day or so after he first said it.
Except Tarzan is Lord Greystoke from England, so unless Disney completely rewrote his background the theory doesn't hold water, no matter the director's headcanon.
GhostKingLink in my opinion, it would dishonor him because marvel as we know it now was his creation and i feel that he would want it to keep going even without him so that many more people could enjoy his creations. Thats the type of person he seems like to me.
STAN LEE MIGHT NOT BE A WATCHER! It hasn't been confirmed! Stan HAS confirmed that the character he plays is the same throughout all his cameos, but him being there with the Watchers doesn't mean he IS a watcher. Don't you realize that he had to wear a space suit? And his head wasn't gigantic?
The problem with the Tarzan thing is that he already has a revealed parentage and heritage in the books. He's Lord Greystoke, the last in line of a British noble family.
The Tarzan- Frozen theory isn't possible. If you look at the beginning of Tarzan, the ship is from the wrong period of history. Also Tarzan's parents clothes.
But Tarzan and Clayton are related... Tarzans' real name is John Clayton III and Claytons' name is William Clayton. Tarzan and Clayton are cousins. So Tarzan would also be a decendent from Gaston, which doesn't seem right.
There is a continuation problem with the Frozen connection with Tarzan. In the beginning of Tarzan, it shows the boat on fire. So unless most fans and the creators forgot that, it makes no sense
BUT NO! THAT CAN'T BE!! According to the Pixar Theory the humans evacuated from earth (as seen in Wall-e) and the cars inhabited the planet so it wouldn't be so destroyed! (You see the AI starting to take control in the Incredibles) When the humans return, they turn into monsters thanks to the poison still in the air (that's how monsters inc fits in the theory) It's all in a single universe!
In Tarzan, there's a photo of Tarzan's parents; in fact, it's shown in this video. Photography wasn't invented until the adult portion of Frozen, so the timelines just don't line up.
1. Stan Lee's cameo in Guardians of the Galaxy is not a "post-credits scene", it happens during Rocket's complicated warp travel bit. 2. He isn't A Watcher, he is an Emissary of the Watchers. If he was a Watcher, he wouldn't ask them for a ride home.
But frozen has like crossbows and castles and stuff making it like a medieval fantasy, whilst Tarzan is clearly Victorian or there about. That is a total clash unless it is supposed to be different time periods across the globe, which is stupid. The parents would also change period clothing on their voyage. I haven't actually seen frozen so correct me if everyone has 19th century technology and fashion, but that's not the impression I got.
Disney's Tarzan was somewhere between 1901 and 1919 as the TV show showed an episode with Teddy Roosevelt being called Mr. President and he was POTUS from 1901 to 1909. He died in 1919. It would have been difficult for him to go on "holiday" during his time in office to Africa, so we can assume it took place somewhere between 1909 and 1919. There is also no mention of anything to do with WWI so it is possible it takes place before 1914 or 1916 when the US joined the fight, but as this is a kids cartoon they wouldn't mention any sort of war anyway. Frozen however shows technology, costume and architecture from the about 1750 to 1830 (ish) Europe and at least full century earlier for Tangled. Disney have never been exact with the timelines in their movies as they use a "Generic era" to their world design.
Neil Price Solid chocolate was invented in the 1850s. So Frozen has to be around that time or later. But definitely after the 1800, since they also show bicycles.
Um, that's really wired seeing as Tarzan's real name is "John Clayton, Viscount Greystoke" which was the name given to him by Edgar Rice Burroughs who created the charter... Also his parents weren't killed by a leopard. They were killed by the very same Gorillas that raised Tarzan... I know Disney "re-imagined" it but they never say his real name in the movie so we'd have to assume his name would still be John Clayton which means he can't be King Agnarr and Queen Iduna son as that would make him a prince and he holds the title of Viscount.
no they have not, the director simply said that in his mind the theory is true but he is lying. there is no possible way for it to be true and tarzan is british
Read the last line of the directors quote...they don't include it in this analysis. He wasn't serious about the Tarzan/frozen connection. It was just a fun idea that he indulged in for the purposes of the article. He also says that he wishes that Penguins were also in that world! It was a joke. This video misrepresents what the director fully said.
Maximum Overdrive is linked to The Simpson's. A character says "eat my shorts" and another character is the voice of Lisa Simpson. Most popular movies since 1976 have been written by one guy! Groot is in BTTF as A small statue in Marty's house. Lot's of hidden stuff is his movies, TV shows, books, songs and videogame concepts.
Tarzan can't be Anna and Elsa's brother - Tarzan's parents were the Greystrokes from England. He's the Lord Of Greystroke. Did no one ever read the original novel? Oh, and in the original novel JANE IS AMERICAN! One of my favorite ones I've read is about The Emperor's New Groove the fly about to be eaten by a spider saying "Help me" is actually Kuzcos father turned into a fly by Yzma. Apparently one of the writers confirmed this.
It's a weird ret-con for Tarzan to be related to Elsa. During the "strangers like me" scene, Tarzan is shown a picture of the Eiffel Tower, built in the late 1880s. But the soldiers in Frozen were all using medieval-era crossbows as weapons. Tarzan takes place hundreds of years after Frozen.
the one above all isn't the supposedly most powerful, that doesn't even make sense, the one above all is the absolute most powerful being this is a fact, he is the abrahamic god of the marvel multiverse
He's actually not the most powerful. The director is. Stan Lee isn't even on set for any of the filming and gets about as much information as Tom Holland (which is, here's your part of the script. Record it, and you'll get to see it with everyone else on premiere night).
we're talking comics here... but you right Anna. Technically yeah, the director is. But in universe, TOAA, should they choose to include him in the MCU, is the most powerful. The thing is, I don't even know if there is a multiverse in the MCU, technically yes, cause it's all under Marvel, but do they choose to include that... idk. If they don't TOAA probably doesn't exist, although they did mention the LT in Dr. Strange, who is a multiversal being, heck omniversal being, by definition. SO... idk.
OK, the Tarzan theory makes no ense. Tarzan is the Earl Of Greystoke, which is a Fictional Earldom in England. Tarzan is British. Specifically, Tarzan is English. Anna and Elsa are not from England. And are Royalty. Tarzan is Nobility, but not actual Royalty. I can see them being related if they are European Nobility, but not Brother and Sister.
Fans are so smart, I once heard a director of Gravity Falls used to put a riddle in one of it's episode that it took him 1 week to think of that riddle and he thinks the fan would take 1 month to figure it out. But 20 minutes after release, a fan call and they already solve the riddle.
Frozen takes place around the 1840s. Tarzan is believed to take place around the 1890s (which means his parent's shipwreck would've taken place around 1865). Elsa and Anna's parents should've been lost at sea for around 25 years for this to be true. And now in Frozen 2, we learn that their parents were going North, which is the opposite direction of the jungle that Tarzan lives in. And also the fact that Elsa sees the truth, and learn that they did in fact die on their journey.
proof that stan lee is NOT a watcher. the watchers never interfere, stan lee has interfered multiple times getting drunk with the avengers in age of ultron, cutting thors hair in ragnarok, he was part of the jury in the trials of the incredible hulk, he saved a kid in spider-man, a woman in spider-man 2, gave peter parker advice in spider-man 3, yelled at spider-man in spider-man homecoming, gave mr.fantastic his mail in fantastic four, stole larry kings identity so he could talk to tony stark in iron man 2, tried to use his truck to pick up thors hammer in thor, talked to howard stark in agent carter, held onto t'challas winnings in the casino in black panther, delivered a package from steve rogers to tony stark in civil war, drove the schoolbus peter parker rides in infinity war, drove the limo in runaways, and most recently gave eddie brock advice in venom
If Tarzan is Elsa and Anna's brother, that means Frozen takes place maybe a few years before the industrial revolution. Also, baby Tarzan looked to be at least a few months old in the movie. Idk, the queen of arendale didn't even look pregnant when they left, so all of the timelines just don't add up. Also, their boat wasn't on fire - there was a horrible storm and a giant wave wiped it out. The most believable theory is that they were going to Rapunzel's wedding, but never made it in the storm.
I mean, come on, if stan lee is gonna be anyone, he has to be The One Above All. That would make the most sense, and it'd be great to make him a central point of the next avengers movie after infinity wars. Ya know, while he's still around.
Stan lee said it best “I guess it’s true. One man really can make a difference” you inspired us all and changed all of our life’s for the better. Rest In Peace Stan lee
Here are three proofs that the Frozen Tarzan Theory is NOT true: Agnarr has strawberry blonde hair and green eyes; Tarzan's father has brown hair and blue eyes; Iduna has brown hair and blue eyes; Tarzan's mother has red hair and green eyes; Agnarr and Iduna's ship sank; Tarzan's parents' ship burned; Frozen takes place in 1843; Tarzan takes place in 1911.
I had to stop after that one. I can see the intent to pay homage to that in Logan, but the vision was originally intended to be literal and was played out in the movie. Logan rips his heart out to get rid of the device inhibiting his powers. He is laying on the ground of the lab, holding his heart, and dies just before his healing factor kicks in and regenerates the missing organ. Ripping out your own heart tends to leave you covered in blood.
+Warhammer Workshop ~ The thing about prophecies is that they're always up to interpretation. Yukio's prophecy came out100% true, unless you're as blindly literal-minded as Drax.
And that's why they are nonsense and called 'prophecies'. Only crazy people would believe in such magic. I was merely pointing out the Logan one wasn't even true, also, it's not hard to force a prophecy to come true. Like with Jesus, the irony is amazing. Liberal has nothing to do with it?
Alladin is set in a post apocalyptic future, Gaston killed Bambi's mother, Gapetto is Doppy as an old man and what was left of Scar made a cameo in Hercules what the hyenas didn't eat.
