Fluffy?

[FlipMode]

Which is still a good thing though :) since the Laserdisc version is rare, and a player for it is even rarer lol

[Jiirani]

I don't have one of those actually xD

[atouchofgrace]

[quote="FlipMode"]Which is still a good thing though since the Laserdisc version is rare, and a player for it is even rarer lol[/quote]
Here you go, my friend.
I don't know if you have them already but...

The laserdisc special features:
http://forum.nala.ru/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1512

(Just click on those links and the download will start)

[FlipMode]

Indeed I had never seen them before, and thank you for the links :).

[atouchofgrace]

[quote="FlipMode"]Indeed I had never seen them before, and thank you for the links .[/quote]
They're very good! They have a lot about deleted characters and deleted storylines. They explain what was the "King of the Jungle" storyline they cut...
You also learn than Nala was supposed to be called Nadra and Pumbaa was supposed to be called Harold.
Lots of things most TLK fans don't even know.

[SuperBabySimba]

The fact that Fluffy looks more like Kopa than like Kiara, is evidence that it might be Kopa?
I don't see how? Even if we ignore the fact that Kopa wasn't created by Disney.

I mean, where in this picture Kopa fits in so that absolutely nothing contradicts the idea of Kopa being Fluffy?

1.) The cub at the end is created and published in June 1994.
2.) Kopa is published later in 1994. They publish those books ONLY in USA. (You'd think that anything meant as canon and official would be world wide.)
3,) Year 1995: The end's cub's creators publish a commentary track of the film and refer to the cub as "Fluffy" and don't confirm its gender. No mention of Kopa whatsoever even though he does exist in the book universe.
4.) At some point other film makers at Disney start making a movie sequel. The production lasts for years during which it is a wonder if they don't come across the book universe at all as TLK is still relatively new thing that got explosive popularity.
5.) 1998: The sequel is published. It makes no mention of Kopa whatsoever.
6.) They make Simba an over-protective parent but not Nala at all. Nala is perfectly secure and fine with Kiara running free. This ought to be saying that the parents don't share a common child-related trauma. They leave Kiara's protection in the hands of a tiny meerkat and a relatively half-wit warthog - a pair that could be killed off by one or two lions with ease, and who they know to sometimes forget to keep an eye on the child because of quarreling with each other. This ought to be saying that the parents haven't lost a child to a murder or had a child disappear.

SO. I acknowledge the differing ceremony scene and Fluffy looking more like Kopa than Kiara could as stand-alone be evidence of it possibly being Kopa, but can you honestly claim that some design look issues weight anyrhing when put together with the points I just listed about the development of the TLK universe and the way they wrote SP's plot? Especially as the design issue can be written off as a remake.



[quote="Arani"]Anyways, it makes complete sense, especially with the whole Zazu "Merderous outsiders." thing and Simba being WAY to over protective.[/quote]

Murderous doesn't require a succeeded murder. Just a fail attempt that was witnessed by someone. I see you argued relatively well the fact that Nala isn't over-protective. But even with your point, Nala would have to be at least a BIT unnerved and worried if she's supposed to be a good and loving mother who has lost her first born child. And explain, please, why didn't they discuss the death or disappearence together after Kiara had run off? Nala only teases Simba about Kiara being exactly like he was as a child. If nothing else, this would've had to be the point where they make a crucial plot point clear to the viewer, because the ending's cub alone isn't explanatory enough.

Hey, I haven't yet said that there's also these facts:

1.) Kopa in the books appears to be the same age as Kovu in the film. This means that if Kopa existed in the movies, he would need to show in the film because he would've been alive and with his family between Kiara's ceremony and the day she met Kovu. Also, Kopa isn't even mentioned to have a baby sister in the books. All this is why Kopa and Kiara couldn't be litter mates and Kopa couldn't have died or disappeared before the SP movie's time.

2.) Kovu was the last born before Simba exiled them and as Kovu was hand-chosen by Scar. Kovu had to be born before Simba returned. Judging by the fact that Pride Lands' nature had already recovered so well and widely and all the herds had returned by the time of Fluffy's birth, there has to be in the least numerous months - likely about a year between Kovu's and Fluffy's births. Way too much age difference for Kovu and Kopa.

3.) A lion cub's tail tuft is fully formed around 7 months of age and thus Kiara had to be at least that old when she met Kovu. This would make Kovu some 8 months older than Kiara, which fits the timeline between Kovu's and Fluffy's birth quite well.

Results in: Fluffy can not be Kopa but it can be Kiara.

[atouchofgrace]

^^ I agree with this. You and other people make this points several times. I don't see why they're so easily rejected. It makes freaking sense.
It seems we have to repeat this over and over again to be heard.
Sometimes I wonder if some people bother to read through it all. They should.

[SuperBabySimba]

They should, indeed.

And I think in the end of that post I just proved that SP made sure that the timeline doesn't leave room for older siblings for Kiara. Not just for Kopa with his pre-teenage appearacne but for a sibling of any age.

[Panda-chan]

We do read them, we just choose not to answer with our own opinions because if we do we know we'll get attacked by another 92903848 word paragraph...

[Ushujaa]

[quote="Amanda"]We do read them, we just choose not to answer with our own opinions because if we do we know we'll get attacked by another 92903848 word paragraph...[/quote]

^^ this