Animation Source Forums

I have no idea what you are trying to prove. Clearly most of those books you posted have the masculine terms and only after the sequel was released were they changed to feminine terms.

Disney approved every single one of those books, so they confirmed them to be official. That is that. Whether there are errors or confusion in them, they are official lion king storybooks.

Saying that the people who made the Lion King didn't write the books doesn't make it official is like saying Harry Potter isn't official cause it wasn't directed by J.K Rowling.

do you have scans of your books ?

No, why?

cause i wanted to see more scans.

I really do hate to get into the middle of these kinds of fights, but it's about time we all grow up and stop picking on each other depending on whether someone if a Kopa fan or not. It's immature and just plain mean. This topic was to discuss why Kopa didn't make it into the movies, not to debate whether he exists or not.

And on that not, I just want to say that anyone who has said that Kopa doesn't exist is in fact wrong. He is a character in a book. He exists. Maybe not in the Lion King movies, but you can't deny that he isn't in the Lion King Universe at all. Besides, saying Kopa doesn't exist is just like saying Kiara doesn't exist because she wasn't in these books. What I think is that the 6 Lion King books tells the story as it would be if Simba and Nala had a son. The Lion King: Simba's Prides tells that story if Simba and Nala and a daughter. Obviously, these both cannot happen at one time since they never appeared in either media together.

Now, can we please all realize that any character, no matter how controversial, exists because they are a character? Kopa is his own character, Kiara is her own character, and even Fluffy is his/her own character. To be honest, ths fight is stupid and no side will ever win because you are both wrong and right at the same time. So, please, stick to the topic about discussing why Kopa never appeared in any Lion King movie, and drop this pointless arguement.

*Claps* I agree. It's pointless to keep an argument like this going. It got a bit out of hand and it stops here.



*Clears throat* Alright, now back to what this topic was meant to be about...

I think that the reason Kopa was not in The Lion King: Simba's Pride, was because they didn't want the movies to repeat themselves. If Kopa was in the movie, it would be almost exactly like the first one, but with different characters. With Kiara, they created a whole new story even though it was practically based off of Romeo and Juliet. I wouldn't want Kopa to be in a film, personally, because the character was too much like Simba and Kiara had her own personal personality. ^^

i agree.

The only thing I was debating was his existence in the movies' storyline. Because this person seemed to be claiming that he really does exist in the movies' storyline and simply isn't shown in the sequel film. Excuse me if I misunderstood her means.



Please point out an official source stating that that's the reason. Otherwise it's just your opinion.



The elbow tufts belong to only Scar's type of lion design, so Kopa wouldn't have them no matter what age he is in. The same with the black ear rims; perhaps Scar-design never had any more of those as a cub. But good point with that larger mane tuft. Though I wouldn't necessarely say Kovu was meant to be older than Kopa as there is a great chance the film's makers didn't even know Kopa exists anywhere. But the mane tuft indeed would make them come off slightly different age if put together.



Your question was why would Simba fear that Zira might kill Kiara if Zira hadn't done anything terrible yet. The entity of the quote was talking about how Scar had proven capable of a murder in order to gain the throne and how Zira sided with and loved Scar. How that would make it very potential for Zira to be capable of and willing to do the same as Scar had. So it points to that there was not a murdered child but only the fear of ending up with one - because this child was in the same position Mufasa and Simba himself had been and Zira was kinda replacing Scar.



The books wherein Kopa appears were not written by Disney but by outsiders while Disney approved also books which stories contradict the stories wherein Kopa is, which means that they did not mean Kopa to absolutely be the cub but just one possible version for people to entertain. And in the end it doesn't matter how much hand The Walt Disney Company had on the books. See, the original film's makers were just as much part of The Walt Disney Company as were those who slapped the label on the books. And the film's makers refered to the cub as "Fluffy" with no gender given, AFTER the books were released. This means that to The Walt Disney Company it was a boy in the book universe but genderless in the movie universe.

2 things

1:I watched TLK with comentary and i found where fluffy got his name

2:Where did this whole Kopa/Vitani thing come from?

fluffy is genderless.

^I know but where did this whole kopa and vitani thing comefrom?

The Kopa/Vitani 'thing' is fan made.

yep.

I know that beining an avid Fanficiton reader.

But How is the Question.

^ The same way any fan pairing/whatever else starts...