How many cubs does Simba have?

[Jiirani]

Yes, lets :3

Like I said before, Simba only has one cub, but just seen through different eyes.

[SuperBabySimba]

[quote="Jiirani"]Like I said before, Simba only has one cub, but just seen through different eyes.[/quote]

^This.
There are 2+ different eyes & stories:
1.) The official movie universe story with Kiara.
2.) The book universe stories with Kopa, or alternatively unnamed cub but still just one.

Or what a fan likes to imagine based on the purest canon alone (as in the first film). This, as in non-profit fanfiction is the only way Simba could have more than one cub.

[Moka]

It's a rip in the spacetime, man! Seriously, there are simply two (or more) paths the timeline of TLK can follow. It's up to the fan which timeline they believe is the purest. The one that gets its information from the movies that Disney budgeted and created, or the one that gets its information from the spin-off books that were written by random people and then accepted by Disney

[AdAstrα]

I agree. People are always going to have different theories about this. That's the truth. It's just a matter of interpretation. Whatever floats your boat =P

[atouchofgrace]

^^ Exactly.

[SuperBabySimba]

[quote="Moka"]It's a rip in the spacetime, man! Seriously, there are simply two (or more) paths the timeline of TLK can follow. It's up to the fan which timeline they believe is the purest. The one that gets its information from the movies that Disney budgeted and created, or the one that gets its information from the spin-off books that were written by random people and then accepted by Disney [/quote]

Yeah, but the only way those paths can realistically cross is if Kopa was born after Kiara and after the sequel's events. I mean, the books don't say Kopa is their first child, do they? The film itself doesn't say that Fluffy is their first born child, so it would make sense by the tier 1 canon alone, if the cub at the end was wished to be someone else than Kiara but conected to Kiara's film. Like, Kiara could've for some reason had left somewhere with Kovu - perhaps pissed off with Simba and Nala putting the little brother ahead in the line to become the ruler just because of the gender? Though I personally really don't think they'd do that - that the gender mattered. But there could've been many other ways for Kiara to not become the ruler of Pridelands after all. In the film it is literally said that Kiara would carry on in Simba's place, but in the books Kopa talks about "when I'm the king"... So, something woud've needed to happen.

[PrincessKiara]

[quote="SuperBabySimba"][quote="Jiirani"]Actually, when you think about it logically, they did say they didn't think TLK would be as popular as it is, they didn't even think anyone would like it. So they didn't think anyone would look into it this much, as to the timeline and how realistic everything is. Simba's Pride was definatly not as realistic as TLK was, and even then TLK wasn't very realistic in it's own little ways. I don't think the film makers would expect us to argue over suck meager things [/quote]

The point is the film makers themselves - both TLK's and SP's - bothered to go to Africa in order to study the animals. TLK's makers even brough them all the way into the studio. As in, why would they do all that expensive and time-taking stuff if they weren't going to put all that they studied, into the films? And why would they widely and loudly tell us that they went to Africa, studied the animals and brought them into the studio, if they didn't expect us to treat the film's content according to realistic life?[/quote]

I see what you mean, I really do. But did you ever think that the animators made such a big deal of studying lions because they needed to learn how to draw them? They did the same thing when making Bambi, they had to study real-life deer to understand how they moved. That doesn`t mean the animators made the animals 100% realistic in behaviour or even aging-process. Certain artistic liberties must have been taken. The Lion King is an animated feature for children, not a documentary on lion behaviour.

[atouchofgrace]

[quote="PrincessKiara"]I see what you mean, I really do. But did you ever think that the animators made such a big deal of studying lions because they needed to learn how to draw them? They did the same thing when making Bambi, they had to study real-life deer to understand how they moved. That doesn`t mean the animators made the animals 100% realistic in behaviour or even aging-process. Certain artistic liberties must have been taken. The Lion King is an animated feature for children, not a documentary on lion behaviour.[/quote]
^^ This.

[AdAstrα]

Well said Solle

[FlipMode]

[quote="atouchofgrace"][quote="PrincessKiara"]I see what you mean, I really do. But did you ever think that the animators made such a big deal of studying lions because they needed to learn how to draw them? They did the same thing when making Bambi, they had to study real-life deer to understand how they moved. That doesn`t mean the animators made the animals 100% realistic in behaviour or even aging-process. Certain artistic liberties must have been taken. The Lion King is an animated feature for children, not a documentary on lion behaviour.[/quote]
^^ This.[/quote]

^^ This.