Animation Source Forums

Well, it might have crossed their minds. But if it wasn't so much as alluded to in the first movie, any incorporation of it in the second movie would be rather incongruous, wouldn't you say?

Touche.

Oh crap did I say Orlando by mistake? Dang Pirates of the Carribean Orlando Bloom.. I meant to say New Orlands.. What a bad blunder that was thanks for the catch

i've always wondered as to how itchy lived from 1939 considering that charlie was 2 years old and itchy was either same age a few months younger or older then charlie to 1996 always baffled me, i think the writers really messed things up i also have another theory though very low chance of being true

the charlie and itchy in the second movie were descendents of the ones in the first movie as they bring no mention of flo who was either charlie's wife/gf/sister or anne marie which i believe that charlie would of asked about once he saw itchy

and to add to the theory charlie was always referred to himself as charlie b barkin in the first movie when he introduced himself for the first time to someone and in the second he was just known as charlie barkin and makes no mention of the b in his name

Wow... Just WOW!

Too bad theres a big hole in the theory. If there were descendants then what were the descendants doing in Heaven? Second problem. There would have been 2 Charlies and 2 Itchy's present not 1.

well lets see the second movie takes place close to 56-57 years after the first one so the decendents would of died in the time, 2nd there would not nessacerily be 2 of them not if they already passed on to the next life nor if they were else where in heaven, just becuase there is decendents doesnt mean they are gonna hae the ancestors in the movie its not nessacary

What... .how does that make any sense. You can't have a descendant without having an ancestor. A descendant is an individual who comes originally from an Ancestor. Like that Episode in which Charlie was dreaming THAT had Original Charlie as the ancestor and the other as the descendant.. so of course they had to have ancestors.. And Who would Itchy.. marry if that was the case? Charlie didn't have any pups that did in fact look like him. If you're pointing at Flo that is. Another problem Who did Carface marry? XDDD Who would marry carface any way? xD Also.. Charlie.B.Barkin originally which it was.. isn't in the second. .because. A. it's wasn't played by Burt.. B. The writers thought it was unnecessary.. You know how they are.

what i mean is they dont have to show them in the movie, and would said anything about marriage, also if we go back to another theory in which anabelle is the duagter of the original angelic whippet then we have a mother for charlie as well (though that strikes out the anabelle&charlie shipping) also itchy did have flo remember sure he wasnt charlie but he was the closest she was getting charlie after his death, and remember back in the first movie carface was the rich top dog while charlie was in heaven a girl would be with him simply for the money, there are a whole list of possibilities that could tie them as decendents, and charlie wasnt just with flo he was a player after all, so he probaly had a kid with some other random girl who looked like him

Well, Charlie didn't have any pups that looked like him at the time of that episode, but later on it could happen.

As for Carface, well, 1) some ladies are shallow enough to marry just for money, and 2) that was a robot, not a biological descendant. For all we know, it could have been Carface himself converted to a computer program and downloaded into a robot body. Besides, it was a dream.