The Lion King Characters That Just Aren't There

[SuperBabySimba]

I'm not denying the characters' existence in the general TLK universe. This post speaks for the movie universe only.
Please forgive me the frustrated tone. No offense intented to anyone. For now this fandom has just made me so frustrated because it just can't draw a line anywhere when it comes to what is official/canon.

There's a reason why there are the different terms; canon, semi-canon, fanfiction. Because there's a difference and the difference matters. I personally welcome fanfiction with open arms into my interests in fandoms - but I do find it also awfully important that the facts are kept straight in official/canon vs. fanfiction. And in this fandom the facts are so messed up.

"Scar killed Mheetu! It is true! Just search google!" Since when was random Google search results the Truth? I think you'll find the truth a whole lot less dranatic. And "Zira killed Kopa and that's why-" Blah blah BLAH. Then why doesn't the film refer to any cub or murder with so much as half a word?! Perhaps because Zira DIDN'T kill a cub. "Why haven't they made a movie where they explain what happened to Kopa?!" Because nothing happened to Kopa for Kopa has never existed in the movie universe.

You know what I think is this fandom's problem?
This:

"Mheetu,Sarafina's son by an unknown male is never mentioned in the movie. But he does exist! So what do you think is his story? Here is my opinion..."

As in that every character who has ever been mentioned in The Lion King universe in the slightest official shape or form - whether it was originally intented into a film or simply has Disney's stamp on it - has to have an official story for why they don't show up in the film(s).

In fact Mheetu doesn't exist and he doesn't have a story for not being in the movie(s) because he was cut out with no references. Hence, CUT out, not written out. And Kopa doesn't appear in the Simba's Pride film because he never existed in the first place.

Boring? Yes, I agree. But that's the reality of film making;

Mheetu is a victim of how lots of stuff is intented but then cut out as unfitting, unneeded, or just out of the way of better ideas, and thus not meant as part of the final outcome's universe in any way. Becomes non-existent without a story for it.

Kopa is just a fanfiction character which Disney holds copyrights for. Because he wasn't developed by Disney and he was evidently never intented by the film makers. He was created by non-Disney people after the film was released. Created him into the book universe for kids' amusement and Disney's profit purposes, which is very likely the only reason Disney gave its stamp on the books and several other books that contradict those books' content. (Being the evidence why the book universe is fanfiction stories and not semi-canon.) And thus Kopa got ignored and denied by all film makers and remains a fanfiction character who never existed in the film universe and so doesn't have a story for it.

There are no stories for the two characters' absence in the films. Mheetu just isn't there and Kopa is a never-was.

It's cool and fine if you want to create and share fanfiction views for why they don't appear in the films - those made-up stories may be even interesting. But for heaven's sake, they don't REALLY have a story other than that they just aren't/never were there. So please stop spreading the stories as official - because not one of them is, and please stop saying/giving the impression that the characters officially exist in the movie universe - because they don't.

I've been asked what is semi-canon according to me.

I think the truth is; there is no true semi-canon in this fandom. Semi-canon is born when something is in one way or another tied in to the canon source by the canon source's makers. In this case it should be tied in to the first film by its makers. Otherwise it just doesn't connect/link with the canon story in any official way. There is no denying that, is there?

But the original film's makers have denied both Kiara and Kopa and made clear the film stands alone when it comes to its official story. As in nothing of the existing other TLK stories has been tied in to the canon (the original film), as in approved by its makers but instead simply denied by them.

But the Simba's Pride movie could still be considered semi-canon to an extent even though the original film makers ignored and denied Kiara the same as Kopa.

Because the essential difference is in how and by who it is made;

Kopa & the Six New Adventures books are written by outsiders and only approved by the general Disney Company just like all the other TLK story books out there that by the way contradict the SNA books's content.

Simba's Pride movie isn't approved by Disney, it is actually made by people who work in the Walt Disney Company, plus it's made in its movie studios (though in different one than TLK) and is thus part of the official Disney classic movie universe just like The Lion Kiing.

It doesn't matter how many considers SP as a sequel. It is nonetheless the only official continuence to the first film. So whenever we are looking for an official gender and name for that cub in the end of the first film, it is the girl Kiara because she is the only other cub introduced in the movie universe. Which results in her being the next most official after Fluffy. And as Fluffy has no gender and the SP film makes absolutely no references to any other cubs besides Kiara, it results into Fluffy and Kiara being the same cub in the movie universe, regardless of the differences.

TLK1½ may be as much canon as SP is, but there's an essential difference; SP was made with serious attempts to continue the story - even though with some logic fails included. TLK1½ is evidently meant to be a parody of the first film and nothing more.

SP and TLK1½ are the closest thing to semi-canon this fandom has while even they aren't that exactly. Like... At least the films are Disney's visions even though not the canon film makers' vision. But the book universe is not Disney's visions, they are outsider people's visions which they gave to Disney. Disney gave a stamp of approval only, not a stamp of this-is-our-official-vision. Evidently none of the books are because they've given a stamp of approval to many contradicting books. SP and TLK1½ are the closest thing to semi-canon this fandom has.

To some people I may be a funsucker or something but I consider myself as just a passionate fan who likes when the facts are kept straight and the canon and fanon line clear. The fanfiction can still be as fun as ever. Perhaps even more fun as people would actually remember and understand what is fanfiction and what is not. (:

[Pixie]

It does get abit frustrating when people claim things that just aren't true. Or the opposite like the never-ending "Kovu is OBVIOUSLY Scar's son!" when he ISN'T.
I mean, I like to think that Kopa is the reason that Simba is so weird and why Zira is banished, but I'm not saying that's an actual fact, it's a theory. And Mheetu... well I've never been that attracted to him because he was no known appearance, unlike Kopa, so I don't really care for him.

[SuperBabySimba]

[quote="Pixielicious"]It does get abit frustrating when people claim things that just aren't true. Or the opposite like the never-ending "Kovu is OBVIOUSLY Scar's son!" when he ISN'T.
I mean, I like to think that Kopa is the reason that Simba is so weird and why Zira is banished, but I'm not saying that's an actual fact, it's a theory. And Mheetu... well I've never been that attracted to him because he was no known appearance, unlike Kopa, so I don't really care for him.[/quote]

I'm so glad to hear that. (:

But an unneeded theory, might I add. A great theory, I admit - for in a way it's more interesting than the real reasons but still none the less unneeded and unofficial. I mean, Simba's weirdness is fully explained in the film and then when you think about it back to the first film you see just how perfectly it makes sense and how it doesn't need any other theory. Sometimes I really wonder if people are really watching the films at all if they don't hear the exlpanative lines of Simba and Nala and can't connect them to the horrible, traumatic events of Simba's in the first film. Nothing else is needed to explain Simba's behavior.

And Zira's banishment is also fully explainable by the first film's base alone; Simba's traumas and hatred of Scar while the second film makes very clear that Zira is obsessively in love with Scar. Of course she'd be banished for the sake of everyone's safety. She wouldn't need to kill anyone! But if some people need some explanation to the used word "murderous", they should remember that one doesn't have to downright succeed in murdering someone to be labled murderous. All it takes is a failed attempt to murder. And in this case, if there was any murder attempt, it very likely was targetted at Simba himself as Simba was the one who spoke about how one shouldn't turn their back on an outsider AND when making a sequel film the makers naturally will use the first FILM as the background source. Not any fan made based-on books.

[Pixie]

Yeh I realise that, and I understand that the books don't explain anything, but I just think it makes more sense, and thickens the plot
But in no way do I count Kopa as a real character.

[SuperBabySimba]

That's great. And while I agree it would thicken the plot, I don't understand how would it make more sense than the film's actual background?

[Pixie]

[quote="SuperBabySimba"]That's great. And while I agree it would thicken the plot, I don't understand how would it make more sense than the film's actual background?[/quote]
Well it just makes the film more dramatic, and I personally dont think that Simba's life was enough to make him so obsessive and protective of Kiara, and "fluffy" is too different to Kiara. Even as a kid, when I first saw SP, it didn't make sense to me. When I heard the theory about Kopa, it just fit. Again, i dont think that it actually happened but the thoery itself makes perfect sense to me.

[SuperBabySimba]

[quote="Pixielicious"][quote="SuperBabySimba"]That's great. And while I agree it would thicken the plot, I don't understand how would it make more sense than the film's actual background?[/quote]
Well it just makes the film more dramatic, and I personally dont think that Simba's life was enough to make him so obsessive and protective of Kiara, and "fluffy" is too different to Kiara. Even as a kid, when I first saw SP, it didn't make sense to me. When I heard the theory about Kopa, it just fit. Again, i dont think that it actually happened but the thoery itself makes perfect sense to me.[/quote]

Of course to the cub's design difference another cub would make more sense but then again just as well it could be that "Fluffy" was born after the events of Simba's Pride movie being Kiara's much younger little brother or sister.

And why the heck isn't Simba's life enough for you? Stop wanting a thicker plot for a while and think about it: He got almost killed by hyenas because he disobeyd his father and loving all things cool and wild and he got almost killed by the wildebeest because he trusted the wrong person - and Kiara was just like him as he and Nala agreed. And those very traumatizing events were only a glimpse of two days of Simba's childhood. There could've easily been much more dangers during it even if less traumatizing ones. So, he knows his child is just like he was when he was young and getting himself almost killed, and he knows there are murderous outsiders around. That is more than enough reason to become the father he was to Kiara.

[Pixie]

Chill mate, I'm just saying how I feel. I've said that I don't think that Kopa is real, but I still think it would work. Chill buddy.

[SuperBabySimba]

I was chilled. You sound like I was using capslock and tons of question/exclamnation marks or something. I merely wished you'd stop and see that his childhoos is enough to make him over-protective and paranoid over his child who's just like he used to be, when taking a better look at psychology and what had happened to him. And basically asking why do you feel it's not enough? You didn't answer that question.

[Pixie]

Yes I did. And by the way the only reason why I asked you to chill is because up till your last post you seemed friendly. I haven't gone against your words, I actually agree with what your'e saying. I don't think Kopa existed. I don't think Mheetu existed. I was just saying that the theory makes sense, to me. I'm not saying it is what happened, because I don't think it acutally happened - but to me, it makes sense. OK?