In his introductory scene, doesn't Buzz find it weird that he has pre-recorded audio clips of himself that he can activate by pressing some buttons on his armor?
If he thought he was the real Buzz at the time, then does that mean the Buzz Lightyear from the in-universe TV show also has generic audio clips? In the show, whenever he needs to say his thing ("Buzz Lightyear, space ranger of the Galactic Alliance, sworn to defeat Zurg" ect), does he press those buttons on his chest instead of actually saying it?
Buzz isn't just factually unaware of the fact that he is a toy, he is delusional. You might as well ask, doesn't Buzz find it weird that he is made out of plastic instead of flesh and blood, with blatant action-figure joints? As shown in the scene where he claims he can "fly", he edits reality to conform to his own views, he isn't really perceiving what is happening in a rational way. He probably either ignores the audio clips or thinks he made them by speaking, according to the situation.
The opening scenes of the first movie: Andy leaves his room. Hamm's contents are dumped out on the floor, and Mr. Potato Head is on the floor, his body parts scattered across the room. While he's downstairs for his birthday party, Hamm is shown scooping the money back into his slot and Mr. Potato Head puts himself back together. In this particular instance, Andy was too thrilled about getting Buzz to notice, but if behavior like this is common for Andy's toys, wouldn't he one day noticed that something's been changed since the last time he was in there with no explanation? I watched this movie again recently and noticed a lack of interest on the part of the toys of making sure to leave everything the way it was before.
Well, how many times in Real Life do we go "I could have sworn I left X here" or "Who put my X in this room?" or "When did I put this in here?" Now we know why!
It seems to be taken to ridiculous extremes, though. First movie: Andy leaves Buzz and Woody on his desk as he gets ready to go to Pizza Planet. Buzz "disappears," so Andy just takes Woody. At the end of the movie, Andy finds them in the box he JUST put in the car, and his mom comments they were "right where (he) left them," even though Buzz had NEVER been in the car. Second movie: The antagonist breaks open the cash box at the yard sale to steal Woody, and apparently Andy's mom never noticed, or she would likely have told Andy about it on the way home. And while Andy makes the reasonable assumption that his mom got him new toys while he was away, why would his mom never question where the toys really came from?
True, but if you found something in a place where you didn't put it, what are you gonna think? "OMGZ! IS ALIVE!!!!" Or "Eh, I probably put it there and forgot, or someone else did." Andy thinks his mom (or sister) moved his toys, while her mom]] just thinks Andy himself misplaced them and doesn't remember. And then she believes he got Jessie and the other himself.
I don't know about that last point. She probably thought either Andy was mistaken, or that she'd found them while cleaning and put them there without remembering afterward. Plenty of toys I don't remember getting somehow migrated to my room when I was a kid, it's not unlikely Andy or his mom would just shrug it off.
Lampshaded in the beginning of TS3: Andy notices that the toys moved around after 'Operation Playtime,' but blames it on Molly.
He noticed his cellphone was where it shouldn't be, not the toys.
Early in the first movie all the toys (except Woody) are terrified of getting replaced. I always thought this meant they were afraid of Andy getting an awesome toy that would make them look less appealing by comparison, and that makes sense, but then Andy gets a toy that makes all of them look pitiful by comparison and only Woody is bothered by this. Wouldn't all of the other toys have their fears of being replaced justified by the arrival of a Buzz Lightyear Action Figure? Or does being replaced constitute something else entirely?
Woody is Andy's favourite toy. That's why he is so upset- he's not anymore. The other toys were already used to being second best- it made little difference to them whether Woody or Buzz was the favourite.
Perhaps they knew that Buzz would take on the "hero" role in Andy's games, which meant that he wasn't a threat to anyone but the current hero, Woody. For example, it's a lot harder to replace the scary dinosaur in your fantasy with a space-man.
The above answer is the best explanation. Rex, for example, worried that he'll be replaced with a braver, scarier dinosaur in the first Toy Story. In other words, they don't particularly care about a new toy unless it's too similar to them.
Since Buzz didn't realize that he was a toy at first, why didn't he try interacting with any of the humans? Also, If Buzz thinks he's the real Buzz Lightyear, why does he allow Andy to write his name on his foot, freeze whenever he is around, and allow Andy to play with him?
Could be justified. Buzz thinks this is a foreign planet, and as he sees the other toys playing dead whenever their "chief, Andy" shows up, he thinks he should too. When in Rome.
Or maybe there's some underlying instinct in toys that tells them not to get seen by humans. I think the alien thing is a better guess, though. Everyone else dropped immediately at their approach, and if you were in a foreign place and everyone was quickly dropping at the arrival of some huge things you presumed to be aliens, you'd follow suit, at least lie low long enough to figure out what they were and such. There may, however, have been a scene in the film with Buzz refusing to lie low that I have not forgotten, so if this contradicts that, feel free to tell me.
I got the impression from the scene where Buzz shows the other toys Andy's name that he just accepted this as part of their culture and, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do."
From the second movie, it seems all Buzz Lightyears think themselves as real, and the freezing thing is part of some protocol.
I interpreted things as Buzz subconsciously knows that he's a toy (and thus follows all the toy-human conventions), but initially believes himself to be real.
But why did he never even realize that his laser wasn't real? Andy's played with it before and never done any damage with it.
Gee, thanks. Now I will never be able to watch Toy Story again.
Unlike the Weeping Angels though, the toys are not forced to stay frozen whenever they're being watched, right? Or else surely Woody wouldn't have been able to remind Sid to "play nice."
So really, it's semi-involuntary instinct, like breathing, or blinking.
When Sid put the head of one toy in the body of another. Do these toys retain the memories of their heads or they become a different toy with a totally new personality?'
I assume they become like intelligent zombies, considering they don't even talk.
The third movie establishes that certain toys don't necessarily need to be connected to their parts to feel them. Mrs. Potato Head could still see through her missing eye, and Mr. Potato Head was able to move his limbs independently without his actual potato. I would guess the toys have a consciousness, either in one part of their body, like Woody (who could not move his arm after it was lost in 2), or spread out through some parts, such as the Potato Heads. Any Frankenstein toys such as the latter category would still retain their ability to move their body parts independently, regardless of what they were attached to. Any in the former, however, would likely only be able to control what was attached to the part of their body holding their consciousness. The most likely assumption for this part is the head, but we don't really have confirmation one way or the other, and given the nature of toys, I don't feel comfortable assuming.
I think it depends, but that it would lean towards head. Hanna's headless toys appear to have their own personality, and the Doll heads in Sid's room don't talk. I think it also depends on the intention of the toy. Since your not supposed to remove Woody's or Buzz's arm they can't be used independently. Mr. Potatohead appeared to feel the attack to the tortia. The rule is proberly whatever the owner thinks.
Wasn't Andy suppose to be moving shortly after the birthday party? If so, why did he get a whole bunch of new Buzz Lightyear stuff like posters and bedsheets? Why didn't he just get that stuff after he moved?
The bedsheets, at least, were a gift from one of his friends at the birthday party. His friend is just a dork.
It wouldn't have been a stretch if Andy's mom told all the kids to buy Buzz-related merchandise as presents, as part of a themed birthday party. Andy opens his presents and gets a Buzz Lightyear lunchbox, Buzz Lightyear bedsheets, a Buzz Lightyear board game, etc., etc., etc., all culminating with the final present being an actual Buzz Lightyear toy.
I can imagine his mom being all like, "Don't get all that new stuff out, we're moving soon!" but he was so excited he did anyway. Kids.
What constitutes as a "toy"? In Toy Story 2, Hamm states that "the lawn gnome from next door" is alive, so what other things can come alive? What if someone makes their own toy, will that come alive too?
You'd have to ask Sid "The Kitbasher" Philips about that, considering an erector set fused to the mutilated head of a doll is about as close as you can get to making your own toys without actually casting the plastic or tin/lead yourself.
Why does Andy only write his name on some of his toys?
He only does that for his favorites. This is a plot point in the first movie.
So why do Bullseye and Jessie get marked immediately? Were they so great he instantly liked them more than most of his toys?
It was never stated that he only wrote his name on only some toys. Buzz thinks that Andy writing his name on him meant his accepting him into their culture, which implies that all the toys got Andy's name written on them. The other toys were, however, impressed that Buzz got permanent ink.
It's also possible that Andy tries to put his name on all his toys, but most of them are made of a material where most ink just rubs off. Buzz may have had a similar issue, but Andy was so worried about him getting lost/stolen that he convinced his mom to let him use a high-end sharpie for the job, which was why everyone was so impressed with the 'permanent ink'.
Or it's possible that he only puts his name on toys that he's likely to take out of the house. You wouldn't take your piggy bank to school to play with, but the new horse for your cowboy figure?
A small one from the first Toy Story: What happened to that burn mark on Woody's forehead? It was still there until the end of the movie but then disappears in the next. I assume it was painted over something.
It was painted over during the repair scene in Toy Story 2. Also, if you look closely in Toy Story 3the mark appears again during the incinerator because the paint burns off.
I once briefly held a burning lighter against the burners of a Thunderbird 2 toy, to give it some realistic effects. You can get that kind of low-grade burn marks off with your finger.
It was there when they landed in the car but gone during the Christmas party in the next scene. Presumably it either disappeared or was painted over when Andy cleaned him after they moved.
I'm guessing the plastic was just singed, and didn't actually burn a hole. You can get singe marks off rather easily.
With regards to an above trope, if Buzz's wings can sever duct tape, why didn't he do that immediately after being rescued? Obviously, doing it with Sid around would have caused everyone's favorite toy sadist to do a double take, but Sid was having a hysterical fit in his room. Buzz could have cut the rocket from his back and not got stuck in the fence instead of waiting until the last minute when he and the poster character were about to be blown to cinders. That would have saved everyone an uncountable number of headaches.
When did Sid have a hysterical fit in his room? Also, keep in mind that at that point, Buzz was still in Heroic Blue Screen Of Death mode after discovering he wasn't really a space ranger.
What I meant to say was "Sid was freaking out after witnessing his toys coming to life" but wanted to make it sound more colorful. But I suppose it makes sense that Buzz wouldn't have been thinking to use his wings straight away after everything that just happened.
Plus, he probably didn't know his wings could tear the tape. The only reason he opened them up in the air was to "fly" with them. The tape and rocket being torn off was just an added bonus.
Added bonus? The rocket was about to EXPLODE. When Woody mentioned it, Buzz said, "Not today!" and immediately deployed his wings. He knew what he was doing.
Also, without the rocket, they never would have made it back to Andy. The plot called for it not to occur to Buzz to remove the rocket. Willing Suspension of Disbelief, people.
It sort of bugs me how insensitive Woody seems about the Combat Carl getting blown up. I guess he's not being mean or anything, but it just weirds me out how they see it and all he has to think about is "Boy, I wish that would happen to Buzz."
Seemed to me like he was kinda, "Aw, that's terrible, but we can't do anything to stop it." Honestly, Sid likely does this every day, so Woody and the other toys might've been desensitized to it by now. But yeah, he probably was thinking that about Buzz.
Actually, in the first 'draft' of the movie, Woody was a sadistic, completely evil toy who had Slinky Dog as his slave. Although the article I read didn't explicitly say it, I assume the original idea for the movie was not supposed to be for kids. Compared to that, he was a saint in the real version. They seemed to just tone him down A LOT but keep a little of his jerkiness. I honestly think that his personality makes him slightly more relatable.
^ You are correct; when TS3 was coming out, I saw a brief documentary behind the making of the first movie, I believe it was John Lassetter who said the execs at Disney wanted their first CGI movie to be "adult", and kept pressing Pixar to make the movie more and more edgy; they even showed an animatic from said first draft, complete with Tom Hanks's voice-over, and Woody was constantly screaming and yelling at the other toys, treating them like they were less than shit. So, yes, Woody was a completely unlikable jerkass (and to call that version of Woody a jerkass is being too polite) in the original draft of the movie.
Why does the Woody doll have teeth if his "toy mode" doesn't have an open-mouth smile?
Probably the same reason Bo Peep and Mr. Potato Head have teeth even though they don't: For the purposes of anthropomorphism and not looking weird when they talk. As part of the premise, they have to talk, right?
Is Play-Doh considered a toy, even though it doesn't have a "true" form?
It keeps moving. Children won't be able to play with them, but they will be able to move on their own, like Hamm can move around despite being hard plastic. Point is: he has no articulations)
Hadn't thought of that. Of course, there's still the question of what people usually do with dried-out Play-Doh; presumably it would meet its end the same way Woody and crew almost met theirs in part 3.
What about the kids who eat their Play-Doh?
You should attend Mr. Spell's seminar on what to do if you or a part of you is swallowed.
The Potato Heads' eyes
I had Potato Heads as a kid, and from what I remember, both their eyes were attached together as one piece. So how come in the movies, their eyes can come out individually?
They could do more story wise with separate eyes? It probably made writing the Mrs. Potato Head storyline easier in the third movie. That said...
This wouldn't bug me if the other sequels didn't have 'em but there isn't one Star Wars reference at all,not even to the original. after watching the second with a scene parodying the "Luke I am Your Father" scene and the third with that scene parodying The Emporer's Death,it's really hard to watch the movie again and find no reference to A New Hope.
The storyline that Buzz thought he was following, that of having secret plans to a superweapon the evil emperor is building with the power to destroy an entire planet, is identical to R2-D2's mission in A New Hope.
Don't forget the scene where Sid torments Woody with, "Where is your rebel base now?!" Very much like what Vader's officer did to Princess Leia in A New Hope.
The Potato Heads' arms
In the movies the Potato Heads' arms are shown coming off fairly easily for a couple of gags. In all the Potato Head toys I ever had, the arms were a softer plastic and practically fused to the body. It was near impossible for the arms to come off without more effort and patience than I could ever muster at five.
Well, keep in mind that they modified the Real Life Slinky Dog, too.
The current Potato Head toys have very easily removable arms. (I know this from having a 3 year old)
When Mr. Potato Head was redesigned in the 80s, for a brief period of time, he did have bendable arms that were permanently attached to his potato body; it wasn't until the 90s or so that his arms became detachable (and were in fixed positions). Also, for the record, the accessories that were given to Potato Head in the movie were already existing accessories that came with Mr. Potato Head's Bucket of Fun, this includes: the black derby hat, the eyes with eyelids (however, the eyelids and pupils used to be blue, supposedly as a Mrs. Potato Head accessory), the orange human-shaped nose, the bushy black mustache, as well as red lips (again, for a Mrs. Potato Head).
If the story were real, couldn't Woody and the other toys have tried escaping Sunnyside during the day, when Lotso and his gang were (presumably) inactive?
I understand this made the story much more exciting, but, again, if it were real, couldn't they have tried escaping during the day? That's what I might have tried... I mean, was the monkey even watching the security monitors then?
They needed to move a large group. Can you imagine, say Rex, having as little difficulty as Woody did during his initial escape?
The monkey watches at night. A security guard watches during the day. Not to mention the kids who would play with them during the morning and afternoon times. And the adults who watch the kids. And the parents dropping their kids off.
I could have figured that he used to have a little gun in there, but the collectors both seem to think he's complete without one, implying he never had one in the first place. For the era of toy he's from, it being a choking hazard or having a real-looking toy six shooter as part of a toy wouldn't have been a big deal. It's not a big thing, but it dangling there empty just kinda makes me go 'huh'. It seems weird to even put it there if he never had a gun.
He may have originally had one, but lost it in his "alive" form. Although that would contradict his unspoiled status in the 2nd movie: he was to be collected.
I always assumed the collectors had one...
The producers just might not have thought it worth the cost of carving a little gun as an accessory. IIRC, accessories for toys only really started being common when the increased use of plastics made toys overall cheaper to produce and manufacture on a large scale; since Woody, being mostly wood and fabric, would have been pretty costly to produce en mass anyway, they might have decided that having a gun would be too costly to produce, especially since it would be a pretty fiddly little item to make anyway.
Alternatively; an accessory that small would easily disappear, get thrown out or broken. It would be the first thing to disappear. If the Woody doll itself is rare, then the gun that came with it would likely be even rarer, and likely so rare that the collector's market might simply consider the doll by itself as good as complete, since finding a gun as well would be too prohibitively expensive and time-consuming to bother with.
Frankly, it's some kind of miracle that Woody managed to keep his hat through all those years.
I've seen loads of toys that have holsters but no weapon, either because it was a chocking hazard, or because of 'political correctness' about putting a firearm into a children's toy.
Woody has trouble going through Andy leaving for college, like it was a new thing. But if Woody is an antique family toy, he must've felt this before!
Actually, Woody is the one who's handling it the best. I got the feeling that "Operation Playtime" was more for the other toys' benefit than for his. Remember, Woody is the one saying things like, "And some day, maybe Andy will have kids of his own," implying he's gone through this sort of thing before, probably with Andy's father.
Besides, having been hurt and abandoned before doesn't mean it won't hurt the next time around. In fact, reopening old wounds is probably even more painful than going through it for the first time.
That cowboy hat that Andy wears throughout childhood? Red with white trim? That's Jessie's hat.
Isn't it a coincidence? Pretty sure it's just a generic cowboy hat which happens to be in those colours. They're not all that hard to come by; they don't HAVE to be merchandise from that one TV show. And he got it before he knew about Jessie.
Why are the toys against moving in front of humans (sans Sid), while moving in front an animal (e.g., Scud, Buster) is perfectly acceptable?
You really think that a dog would really tell their owner that their toys are alive in some secret language that nobody knows?
I think the question was why are humans the only ones left out of the loop? Even if there's no communication between humans and animals, why is that the important thing? Now I'm wondering this too... I suppose it's something to do with the toys' purpose or something (as belonging to humans) but I don't really know. Because you have dog toys, too... Maybe humans freak out more than animals do when their toys come alive. I DON'T KNOW NOW I'M THINKING TOO HARD ABOUT THIS THING THAT I DON'T THINK MATTERS VERY MUCH AT ALL.
Maybe because dogs aren't intelligent beings?
Exactly. If humans knew toys were alive, they would probably try to use them in some way, which probably would destroy the purpose of toys: as playthings for human children. Animals, on the other hand, are not nearly as intelligent as humans and will, at worst, attack a living toy. And let's face it, some animals attack toys even when they're not moving.
Why did the toys think Woody killed Buzz?
This made me curious; the toys are minding their business when Woody yells at them from Sid's house. They don't wanna help Woody because he knocked Buzz out the window due to jealousy. Woody tries to get Buzz to come to the window to prove he's fine, but Buzz is too depressed to do it, and instead throws his detached arm at him. Woody, like an idiot, tries to use the arm to fool the toys into helping him escape, but the plan fails and everyone is disgusted by him. Everything is fine and dandy here, but one thing sticks out: Potato Head calls Woody a "Murderer". But think; Woody is at Sid's house. Wouldn't it have made more sense for the toys to simply think Woody was using another Buzz's arm while their Buzz was still out and about? Why would they think that it's their Buzz? And on top of that, even if it was, why would they think Woody killed Buzz? Why couldn't Sid do that? —Dingo Walley
The last time they saw Woody, he had pushed Buzz out the window as if to kill him. If the last you ever saw of a person before was trying to kill your friend, then later seeing carrying an arm that looks suspiciously like that friend's, it's not much of a leap to assume he did kill him. What's more, Woody dug his own hole by pretending the arm was Buzz.
Yeah, but here's the thing: 1) They don't know that their Buzz was with him. They were trying to rescue their Buzz the day before. They didn't know he got into the car where Woody was. Odds are, they just thought he ran off, or died in the fall. 2) He is in Sid's house. Sid is a sadistic kid when it comes to toys, and odds are, the kid has the ability to get whatever toy he wants to. Who's to say that he didn't get a different Buzz Lightyear for himself? I do agree though, that Woody did dig his own grave, but I just feel like Mr. Potato Head could have made a different conclusion; Instead of "Woody Killed Our Buzz!", he could have thought "Wow, Woody is so desperate that he's using a Buzz body part and trying to make us think that it's our Buzz? How pathetic". I don't get why he thinks that Woody murdered their Buzz when they don't know where their Buzz is, and that Sid could have easily murdered Buzz himself...
I would think they'd think that if Sid killed Buzz, Woody wouldn't be using his corpse to perpetuate his lie... Either way, as they already think Woody is a maniac who's trying to kill Buzz, they're likely predisposed to jump to the conclusion that fits with that.
In a moment of shock, which one is faster to conclude? The toys are shocked because it turns out Woody was playing with a severed arm in front of them, and are going to jump to the fastest conclusion. They're predisposed to distrust Woody because they know he tried to kill Buzz, they know he's been jealous of him for a long time now, and Mr. Potato Head and Hamm suspected something was up because Buzz suddenly being friends with Woody was too good to be true. If they ever considered the "maybe he used a spare Buzz arm" possibility later, they probably shrugged it off with "nah, he had been trying to kill Buzz for a while now".
And they were likely sickened that Woody would stoop so low to play with a toy's dismembered limb, regardless of whether or not they thought the arm belonged to their Buzz. (And they likely did, because as far as they knew, Sid never had a Buzz toy of his own, otherwise he would've blown that Buzz up a long time ago. They saw a Buzz arm and concluded it was their Buzz.) And let's assume they thought it was SID that killed Buzz and dismembered him. Judging from Woody's reaction, it's clear that Woody isn't at all affected that his fellow toy from Andy's room was torn apart as one would think and is happy to fake out the other toys with Buzz's arm. To them, he's profiting off of Buzz's demise to get his own freedom. That's why Mr. Potatoehead and Hamm did not believe him.
Why do toys keep in secret that they're alive? If kids knew that, it'd be a lot better for both parties. What kid wouldn't want toys that can move and speak on their own? And lonely kids could have a group of loyal friends. And they'd keep much better care of their toys, and wouldn't throw them away when they outgrow them.
Dude/Dudette, if I walked into my room as a child and saw my toys moving around on my bed like miniature people, I would scream bloody murder and run out of the house. My first thought would be, "OH MY GOD! THEY'RE ALLIIIIIVE!!!" like Sid, coupled with the fear of what if they killed me. I mean, Hollywood loves to make movies about killertoys coming to life to off their owners, true? Maybe this is why the toys keep the info that they're alive a secret. They're Genre Savvy enough to know that humans will explode into full-blown panic first.
Well, now you would, because we're used to the idea that toys aren't alive. But why did it turn out this way? Toys have existed for thousands of years. Were they always alive and hiding it?
Already answered by Lee Unkrich above. Toys acted non-alive is just a part of their nature, an involuntary instinct.
But they were able to overcome it in Toy Story, showing Sid that they are alive.
We can choose to not breath for a while, but it's still an involuntary function of our body.
Philosophically speaking, if children knew that toys were thinking beings, they might be ruined as toys. Toys exist for children to project themselves into, to expand their imagination and promote healthy play. If the toys are little people, children wouldn't feel comfortable letting their guard down and being natural. The toys seem to instinctively care about what's best for children. So their highest priority would be to help kids be kids. Naturally, in some cases such as lonely and depressed children, we might imagine a toy would be tempted to let the child know it was alive, in order to give the lonely child a friend. Who knows - perhaps in the Toy Story universe, some toys have done that under certain circumstances. It would be risky though. It would create the danger that the secret would spread, spoiling the usage of toys for all children.
Couldn't Al have just sued the airline for losing his extremely valuable luggage?
As far as anyone could've seen Al's bag came open during the transport process, which given how adamant he was on threatening the clerk about keeping the bag safe it makes sense that he would blame it on careless attendants and employees. He would probably have a pretty good case, as long as he could prove the toys were in the bag before being shipped.
Who's to say he didn't? We don't know anything about what he did after losing the toys.