Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Pixar Theory

pixartheory.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 46 posts

Re: The Pixar Theory

#31

Post by mistercow »

sdoering wrote: post #5

Having studied literature, I was taken aback by this, as it really is a nice story, that fit the facts after the fact. It is the classical "post hoc, ergo proter hoc", that is so common in (at least German) literature science. Some small factoids are taken from "texts" (or here movies) and over them a nice story is fabricated, to "explain" these factoids. For example the timeline. Does Cars for example mention the ti…

>Fun to see, non the less, but not explaining anything.

Actually, the problem is not a lack of explanatory power, but a lack of predictive power. If Pixar comes out with a new movie, is it possible for it to refute this theory? Not really. It's already been demonstrated that if a date is explicitly mentioned, it can be dismissed as using a different calendar system, and the theory doesn't change.

It seems that this dragon is incorporeal, so spray paint won't stick to it.

Re: The Pixar Theory

#33

Post by ctdonath »

That all the stories occur in the same universe is a given. Oddly, The Pixar Theory gives no reference (much less credit) to the long-running proliferation of Pixar characters appearing in other Pixar movies. This includes characters from future movies, like Wall-E seen in Toy Story. The Pixar Theory, in its long-history view, fails to address proof most of the movies occur within a narrow timeframe, via facts like Heimlich (from A Bug's Life) appearing in Toy Story 2, and the Pizza Planet truck appearing in every movie (partial exception for Brave, where it appears as a carved-wood toy alongside a bas-relief of Sully).

The Pixar Theory takes a vague notion and just, as noted "post hoc, ergo proter hoc", creates an elaborate and baseless theory to justify it a la most conspiracy theories. Alas, there is a great deal of facts available to both destroy the theory as presented, and at the same time prove the "one Pixar universe" premise to far more comprehensive and compelling effect. Instead of a few vapid paragraphs, the website should be a collection of the dozens (hundreds?) of images tying all the stories together.

Re: The Pixar Theory

#34

Post by omegant »

scrrr wrote: post #12

Category: Entertaining B.S. Reminds me of Leonard Nimoy in "The Simpsons": "Hello. I'm Leonard Nimoy. The following tale of alien encounters is true. And by true, I mean false. It's all lies. But they're entertaining lies. And in the end, isn't that the real truth? The answer is no."

Sorry! I downvoted you trying to upvote..(the arrows are damn close at the iphone)

Re: The Pixar Theory

#35

Post by jbrooksuk »

thejteam wrote: post #25

cracked.com did a skit about this almost a year ago. http://www.cracked.com/video_18459_why-pixar-movies-are-all-...

The author of the original article, Jonne Groni cites that video as the inspiration of his "theory":

> Several months ago, I watched a fun-filled video on Cracked.com that introduced the idea (at least to me) that all of the Pixar movies actually exist within the same universe. Since then, I’ve obsessed over this concept, working to complete what I call “The Pixar Theory,” a working narrative that ties all of the Pixar movies into one cohesive timeline with a main theme.

Re: The Pixar Theory

#36

Post by crusso »

officemonkey wrote: post #21
Ygg2 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? I'm pretty sure it's non confirmed. It's basically just nerdy banter (like Dracula vs Hulk). They base their assumption on the fact that movies contain models from other movies, when those are merely Easter eggs. It's like saying MSFT wanted to turn accountants into pilots for 9/11 by including a flight simulator into it. It breaks down under scrutiny.

Hulk obviously.

Vampire Hulk would be a great comic series.

Re: The Pixar Theory

#38

Post by devgutt »

Monsters vs Aliens is not a pixar movie but fit well between Bug's Life and Monster Uni...maybe something bigger...I hope anyone try to put this as the "new bible" :p

Re: The Pixar Theory

#40

Post by walesmd »

ctdonath wrote: post #33

That all the stories occur in the same universe is a given. Oddly, The Pixar Theory gives no reference (much less credit) to the long-running proliferation of Pixar characters appearing in other Pixar movies. This includes characters from future movies, like Wall-E seen in Toy Story. The Pixar Theory, in its long-history view, fails to address proof most of the movies occur within a narrow timeframe, via facts like H…

Or, the more likely theory: one of the animators was bored and thought it would be neato to give the pizza truck a cameo appearance. Of course, he pointed it out to a few of his close friends and a free of the people he worked with. As Pixar continued making movies, someone would always sneak the pizza truck in, to the point it's become an integral point in their corporate culture. A Pixar movie wouldn't feel the same without looking for that cameo appearance - for the employees just as much as the consumer.

So yeah, you're right. They do all take place in a unified universe: ours. Where people are people and they do silly, fun things for the sake of them being silly and fun. Like discussing unified universe theories of movies as if there's been any shroud of evidence that would lead anyone to believe one should exist.

Post reply on HN