Pixar Theory Timeline (headcanon)

[Oliveoil2]

I feel if they made the intentional choice to make it ambiguous, then you shouldn't use the original scripts as a basis - they changed it for a reason. I've based this off a lot of actual dates in the movies, most notably the calendars all being able to align the days the months begin on this way

Last night you were saying 1995 instead of 1996, and i was like yeah of course it's 1995 that's the only thing that makes sense, now you say 1994, so if you want to say 1994 you have a good rebuttal for all of the evidence for 1995. Because there is a sizeable amount of evidence and confirmations. The calendars might point to it being one way but if the movies themselves consistently show it to be the other way, idk it seems less of a stretch to me that maybe he just had the wrong calendar. I mean it's not like that doesn't happen in pixar, the calendar in Finding Nemo apparently doesn't line up with any year that'd actually make sense. I'm willing to accept 1994 if you can explain all the evidence away but it is something that needs to be explained to make any sense.

 

[stphylcccs]

When did I say 1994? I may have made a typo at some point, if I did that's my bad.

The Finding Nemo calendar does line up with the respective year, people are just stupid

 

[Oliveoil2]

When did I say 1994? I may have made a typo at some point, if I did that's my bad.

The Finding Nemo calendar does line up with the respective year, people are just stupid

Oh sorry, misunderstanding then LOL. You've got on the timeline ts1 as 1994 and ts2 in 1995 and i was like whats up with that? that doesnt make sense. But it must've just been a typo lol.

As for the finding nemo calendar, i haven't looked into it i just heard that in an old Theorizer video lol.

 

[stphylcccs]

Lemme double check that then if it's like that on the timeline…

 

[stphylcccs]

I'm actually going to move Toy Story all the way back to '94, so that Al's numberplate's fine, and the August calendar lines up (there are 2 August calendars, both with writing on them, and with different designs, so it's most likely an intentional decision)

This is the main reason for the 1994 placement, I guess I misread it yesterday (or whenever we started this conversation)

 

[Oliveoil2]

Okay so then if 1994 is what we're going with, we DO need to come up with an explanation for all the 1995 evidence. Because as we talked about last night there is plenty of evidence for 1995 that we'll need to explain away

 

[stphylcccs]

Somehow I read 1994 as '95 yesterday, all the evidence I provided for '95 was meant to be for '94. As for the Buzz Lightyears not selling in '95, I feel that only places the first movie in a range of anywhere between '94 and '95. I doubt the people working on Lightyear actually bothered to work with the Toy Story timeline, and just googled when Toy Story takes place, hence the 1995 date in that. I don't see that as Lightyear retconning the year Toy Story takes place

 

[Oliveoil2]

Somehow I read 1994 as '95 yesterday, all the evidence I provided for '95 was meant to be for '94. As for the Buzz Lightyears not selling in '95, I feel that only places the first movie in a range of anywhere between '94 and '95. I doubt the people working on Lightyear actually bothered to work with the Toy Story timeline, and just googled when Toy Story takes place, hence the 1995 date in that. I don't see that as Lightyear retconning the year Toy Story takes place

Alright then that's fair enough i guess. Lightyears pretty hard to take seriously anyway