The cub is not Kopa
I made this so the truth would somehow reach this site, too. There are many fans out here who actually care about the facts and discussing the true canon world - and even more importantly, when new people come asking questions they naturally want the facts and not your personal believes, or fantasy world mambo chambo and fanfiction visions.
Thank you so much for all the favourittings! And for all the discussion too! It's good to know people even here appreciate this.
KOPA IS OFFICIAL ONLY TO THE BOOK UNIVERSE:
Alex Simmons, the author of the first book in the "Disney's The Lion King: Six New Adventures" series ("A Tale of Two Brothers" wherein Kopa first appears) does not work at the Walt Disney Company. ALEX SIMMONS' PERSONAL WEB SITE: [link] also makes clear that that novel is his original story based on the hit film.
But even if we ignore the fact that Kopa wasn't created by Disney...
THE LION KING PRODUCTION DENIES KOPA:
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. It wasn't confirmed as Kiara because Kiara didn't exist at the time.
Results in: the cub at the end is not Kopa in the film.
"They could all behind the scenes refer to him as Kopa, where's your proof that they don't or didn't?"
Here: The canon identity would be validly suspectable only if the creators didn't talk about the cub at all in a public and official situation. But they did. And the key words are 'public' and 'official situation'. It would be silly to doubt that they wouldn't say what they mean--especially in this case: The confirmation on the cub being Fluffy with no gender was made in 1995 before anyone else but Kopa existed in the official TLK universe. As in saying it's Kopa wouldn't have done any harm. It wouldn't have contradicted anything. And if they didn't know about Kopa, it only proves more that they didn't care about book universe chaaracters whatsoever.
SIMBA'S PRIDE OFFICIAL TRAILER uses Fluffy as Kiara's presentation, instead of their redesigned version. They needed to connect Fluffy into an official SP material but in the actual film they wanted to redesign it, so the solution was to make the point in the trailer. And yes, even if the trailer was made by the marketting people, The Walt Disney Company does see this trailer as official as it has the word "Disney's" on it and it was released on an official Disney VHS.
Fluffy = Kiara and no other.
SIMBA'S PRIDE MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO BE KOPA:
1.) Kovu's time of birth was before Simba returned to fight Scar, while Kovu's age in the cub scenes appears the same as Kopa's in the books. Kopa could not have been born back then because Simba and Nala hadn't even reunited yet and if he had, then he certainly wouldn't be Fluffy. 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 Fluffy to look the same age.
2.) If Kopa still somehow miraculously existed in the sequel film's story, he would've had to show in the film as according to the books' fact that he was the same age as Kovu, he would've been alive and with his family between Kiara's ceremony and the day she met Kovu. But even so, his existence would be contradicting because the books don't even mention Kopa to have a sister.
Thus, Kopa and Kiara couldn't be litter mates and Kopa couldn't have died or disappeared before the SP movie's time.
3.) Kovu's head tuft makes him around 2 years old which around the age male's mane starts to grow, 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 13+ months older than Kiara, which fits the timeline between Kovu's and Fluffy's birth quite well. And don't forget the three to four months a mother carries her unborn cub and that lioness' don't have new cubs until the current are at least six months olds. Thus, SP's timeline doesn't leave room for any older siblings to Kiara, the very least for Kopa.
Results in: Fluffy can not be Kopa but it can be Kiara. And it is Kiara. And there is no way Kopa could logically exist in Simba's Pride's story at all.
SBS, BDI, VO = SuperBabySimba, bendaimmortal and VampireOutlaw - as in my other screen names under which I publish my fan art on other sites.
// The Lion King, Fluffy/Kiara belong to Disney. The art is mine.
DISCLAIMER: I don't own the pictures used but they belong to Walt Disney Pictures. This is non-profit fan art for educational purposes only. No copyright infringement intended.
Thank you so much for all the favourittings! And for all the discussion too! It's good to know people even here appreciate this.
KOPA IS OFFICIAL ONLY TO THE BOOK UNIVERSE:
Alex Simmons, the author of the first book in the "Disney's The Lion King: Six New Adventures" series ("A Tale of Two Brothers" wherein Kopa first appears) does not work at the Walt Disney Company. ALEX SIMMONS' PERSONAL WEB SITE: [link] also makes clear that that novel is his original story based on the hit film.
But even if we ignore the fact that Kopa wasn't created by Disney...
THE LION KING PRODUCTION DENIES KOPA:
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. It wasn't confirmed as Kiara because Kiara didn't exist at the time.
Results in: the cub at the end is not Kopa in the film.
"They could all behind the scenes refer to him as Kopa, where's your proof that they don't or didn't?"
Here: The canon identity would be validly suspectable only if the creators didn't talk about the cub at all in a public and official situation. But they did. And the key words are 'public' and 'official situation'. It would be silly to doubt that they wouldn't say what they mean--especially in this case: The confirmation on the cub being Fluffy with no gender was made in 1995 before anyone else but Kopa existed in the official TLK universe. As in saying it's Kopa wouldn't have done any harm. It wouldn't have contradicted anything. And if they didn't know about Kopa, it only proves more that they didn't care about book universe chaaracters whatsoever.
SIMBA'S PRIDE OFFICIAL TRAILER uses Fluffy as Kiara's presentation, instead of their redesigned version. They needed to connect Fluffy into an official SP material but in the actual film they wanted to redesign it, so the solution was to make the point in the trailer. And yes, even if the trailer was made by the marketting people, The Walt Disney Company does see this trailer as official as it has the word "Disney's" on it and it was released on an official Disney VHS.
Fluffy = Kiara and no other.
SIMBA'S PRIDE MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO BE KOPA:
1.) Kovu's time of birth was before Simba returned to fight Scar, while Kovu's age in the cub scenes appears the same as Kopa's in the books. Kopa could not have been born back then because Simba and Nala hadn't even reunited yet and if he had, then he certainly wouldn't be Fluffy. 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 Fluffy to look the same age.
2.) If Kopa still somehow miraculously existed in the sequel film's story, he would've had to show in the film as according to the books' fact that he was the same age as Kovu, he would've been alive and with his family between Kiara's ceremony and the day she met Kovu. But even so, his existence would be contradicting because the books don't even mention Kopa to have a sister.
Thus, Kopa and Kiara couldn't be litter mates and Kopa couldn't have died or disappeared before the SP movie's time.
3.) Kovu's head tuft makes him around 2 years old which around the age male's mane starts to grow, 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 13+ months older than Kiara, which fits the timeline between Kovu's and Fluffy's birth quite well. And don't forget the three to four months a mother carries her unborn cub and that lioness' don't have new cubs until the current are at least six months olds. Thus, SP's timeline doesn't leave room for any older siblings to Kiara, the very least for Kopa.
Results in: Fluffy can not be Kopa but it can be Kiara. And it is Kiara. And there is no way Kopa could logically exist in Simba's Pride's story at all.
SBS, BDI, VO = SuperBabySimba, bendaimmortal and VampireOutlaw - as in my other screen names under which I publish my fan art on other sites.
// The Lion King, Fluffy/Kiara belong to Disney. The art is mine.
DISCLAIMER: I don't own the pictures used but they belong to Walt Disney Pictures. This is non-profit fan art for educational purposes only. No copyright infringement intended.
| Return to BratPrinceFan's gallery |
This image was created by BratPrinceFan and shouldn't be used without permission!
Please respect the artists!
Please respect the artists!
Comments
2775 visits
Report this image 
Last comments
| August 21, 2013 | ||
i called the disney hotline the cub was genderless the cub is nor kopa
or karia sorry but its what the creators told me |
| August 01, 2011 | ||
  | ||
| Not active |
people can think what they want to think, leave us Kopa fans alone, if
we want it to be Kopa, it can be Kopa! |
| June 30, 2011 | ||
Global Moderator  | ||
The animators changed them. ** And, speaking from a writer's point of
view - examining their muzzles, the darkness on Simba's and the
whiteness on Nala's, I'd say their a few years older than what they
were at the end of the first film. Coincidence? I think not. |
 | June 30, 2011 | |
As you can see, Simba and Nala have changed A LOT since the "first" or
"beginning" of the movie, same with the cub. Of course that is a
different cub or it wouldn't have made sense! Why would Simba and Nala
look so different? |
 Previous |  Next |
Return