Why the allegations?

[SilverSimba01]

I think we're all (including me) just confused on terminology.

Can we define canon characters as characters that originate from the movies (aka directly made by Disney)? And then can we define official characters as characters that originate from books and comics (characters that at any point in time were accepted/approved/developed by Disney)? Everything else inherently must be fanon.

• So Simba would be canon and official.
• Kovu would be canon (even though TLK2:SP was not a canon movie) and official.
• Kopa would not be canon, but would be official.
• Mheetu would not be canon, but would be official (because at some point Disney was developing this character).
• And so on.

Perhaps if this terminology was expressed somewhere it would be easier on all of us.

that very much explain it

[SnowyCheetah]

You notice, however, that it still is not set-in-stone fact, it's only a suggestion (one that I disagree with, anything that is official TLK has no reason not to be considered canon).

The definition of the word canon

read that, then tell me how Kopa cannot be canon when we're using the definition correctly.

[Moka]

Well canon refers to the Disney canon (google it). The Disney canon is a list of animated theatrical releases, of which The Lion King is a part of, but TLK2:SP is not. So our new definition isn't 100% accurate, but it still works.

[FlipMode]

I still say TLK 1, 2 and 3 are cannon and everything in them. Anything else is not

[CoeurDeLion]

Indeed, proper "canon" depends on the company employing the term. As Moka mentioned, Disney canon is determined by its list of animated theatrical releases. With Star Wars (for example) anything from the movies, paperback novels, etc is considered canon. In that case, you can have a random author working on a Star Wars novel who introduces new characters/ events that are then considered canon. Why George Lucas does that to us, I don't know...its hard to keep track

One last example is Games Workshop. They produce a fantasy game called Warhammer. Anything that it produces in rulebooks and armybooks is considered canon but the novels its sister-company releases is NOT considered canon.

In a word, to each his/her own.

Unless we can get a Disney historian or some official to tell us what is and is not canon, then I think we can debate until we are blue in the face. Of course, the ruling Moka provided can fill in the gap as well

In my own personal opinion, I consider the movies canon and that's it. I don't take any other characters into consideration. Keeps it easy for me...

Cheers.

[Mike]

Kopa is a second tier canon character =) He does not appear in the movies, but is present in the extended TLK universe.

[Arani]

In my opinion Kopa is an official Character. He was in TLK books and, in my opinion anyway, was the cub at the end of TLK 1. I know others think differently, but this is just my opinion. I agree with Mike that Kopa is a second tier canon character because he might have been the cub at the end of TLK 1, and he might not of. That bit depends on who is looking at it and what matters is what they decide on the matter, no need to try and prove others wrong about it.

[dariusgib]

Please STOP dont make him cry

[Golionking]

Kopa is canon, people! Ok?!

[Pixie]

I think he is not movie canon only canon in the full TLK universe. This makes any theory about Kopa being "killed" by Disney untrue. It just makes it easier for me, anyway. I think the theory of Zira killing Kopa, etc. works, but it was never planned by Disney, so therefore it is inconcievable.
Kopa was planned by another part of Disney, and is never in the movies, no matter how much people want him to be. The thought of him being the cub at the end makes perfect sense, but sadly, it is not true.