We Have Some Unanswered Questions
"In 1995, Andy got a toy. That toy is from his favorite movie. This is that movie."
This announcement of self-importance proceeds the beginning of Pixar's latest film Lightyear, inviting a new understanding of the Toy Story universe and, in merely a few sentences, tearing it down. The slapdash world-building created here invites more confusion than might first appear. While the Toy Story films have always had their fair share of involved, often dark questions about the toys' sentience and impact on the world, Lightyear's existence as a movie within a series of other movies recontextualizes everything we know about the Buzz toy, Andy's relationship with him, and, oddly enough what it was like to grow up in Toy Story’s version of the '90s. In our current cinematic world of multiverses, this newly expanded TSU (Toy Story Universe) is definitely one of the strangest. Hang on to your Sox as we dive headfirst into the contradictory implications of those first few sentences on Buzz Lightyear lore.
While nobody asked any questions that Lightyear hopes to answer about why Andy might have been excited about the Buzz Lightyear toy, from its opening credits the film brings up several questions under even the quickest glance of scrutiny. Does Disney exist within the Toy Story universe as the production company behind Lightyear? This would explain the Disney copyright that eagle-eyed viewers have spotted on the Buzz toy’s rear end since the first movie. But what about Pixar? If this is a live action movie within the Toy Story Universe, then does Pixar make live action films in this universe?
It's worth noting that the creators of the film uphold this to be true. In interviews about the film, producer Galyn Susman and director Angus MacLane have tried to contextualize the movie, claiming it to be a live action movie that Andy saw. This makes sense at first glance; Bonnie could easily coexist alongside the animation models for Keke Palmer’s Izzy Hawthorne or Taika Waititi’s Mo Morrison, which should clear up the live-action vs animation debate. That would also imply that Chris Evans, Palmer, Waititi, and the rest of the gang exist within the Toy Story universe sometime in the early '90s. If he’s acting during that era of film, what other '90s action movies would this oval-jawed version of Evans be in? Does he replace George Clooney in Batman and Robin? Face/Off with John Travolta or Nicholas Cage? Play Sam Niell in the original Jurassic Park? Did Andy get to watch him reprise his role for Jurassic World: Dominion?
Alas, this whole live action angle wouldn’t make sense, as Lightyear is presented as “a Pixar Animation Studios Film.” And what about the animation credits at the end of the movie? Did Andy see all of those, or were they only for our benefit? Considering there are not one but three different end scenes after the credits start rolling, assuming that they must be a real part of the film Andy viewed is a safe bet. Yet the models are so close to the “animated” humans in Toy Story¸ implying that Pixar had developed beyond futuristic photorealistic animation as far back as 1995. Their models perfectly captured their version of what humans look like, which to us looks like our Pixar’s 3D animation. So that obviously can’t be true, but then why the animation credits? Why should we accept that filmmaking had gotten to such a place special effects-wise that Lightyear could exist in live action, but not accept that animation could get to a similarly insane place in photorealism within the same amount of time?
If your head is spinning right now, don’t worry; it’s only an indication that you are sane. There’s even more disorientation at a single glance towards the actual lore behind Buzz Lightyear. In the first Toy Story¸ Buzz lands in Andy’s room with a speech prepared about being stationed in the Gamma Quadrant of Sector Four. “I protect the galaxy from the threat of invasion,” Tim Allen’s Buzz proclaims, “from the Evil Emperor Zurg, sworn enemy of the Galactic Alliance!” This gets expanded upon when, under the car with Woody, the toy Buzz claims that “Right now, poised at the edge of the galaxy, Emperor Zurg has been secretly building a weapon with the destructive capacity to annihilate an entire planet! I alone have information that reveals this weapon's only weakness. And you, my friend, are responsible for delaying my rendezvous with Star Command!"
With Lightyear in mind, all of this becomes hogwash. Contrary to many fan theories and even interviews from the director that claim some The Real Ghostbusters type animated show (perhaps even the real life one called Buzz Lightyear of Star Command produced by Disney) might have been the true inspiration for the Buzz toy, Lightyear announced itself as the movie from which Andy acquired his action figure. So why doesn’t any of this match up with the movie? In the original Toy Story, Buzz thinks he’s the real deal Space Ranger on route to Sector 12. So where does he get this idea about his mission? The “real” Buzz ends the film heading towards a signal in the Gamma Quadrant of Sector Four, a far cry from being stationed there.
These connections become even stranger after Toy Story 2, in which both a Buzz Lightyear video game and a delusional Zurg appear. In that movie, Zurg claims to be Buzz’s father, and since he’s at the same toy scale as our Toy Buzz, it’s likely that he’s based off of the same movie. Why would he think he’s Buzz’s father? Even stranger, the second toy Buzz (yes, second toy Buzz in case your headache wasn’t strong enough), who still believes he’s the real space ranger, claims that he killed his father before being told the truth, which he accepts as truth, Star Wars style. The two then accept their new roles as father and son and have a nice game of catch. None if this lines up with Lightyear’s villainous Zurg, which is actually a version of Buzz from an alternate future.
There are plenty of other smaller details that don’t match either. Both the toy Buzz and the version of him within the game inside Toy Story 2 have suits that glow in the dark. In Lightyear, even the suit that Buzz and his company wear at the end of the film don’t glow as they pass through dark hallways, although this could probably be explained away by the illuminated paint being representative of a light up mode on the suit rather than a literal paint job. The Buzz toy also claims to be part of the Universe Protection Unit, rather than the Universe Protection Division that movie Buzz helps found at the end of the film. Finally, Buzz’s signature catchphrase seems to be more of a secret handshake than something he might say as an individual one liner as utilized in the Toy Story films.
Batting away these inconsistencies with the explanation that there was a Lightyear sequel film or television show in which Zurg was someone else could almost have worked. The toy could still be based off of the film we see “technically” without having to be as direct as it first appears. However, due to a very small detail, this would have to be delicately handled. At the end of Lightyear, Buzz gives one of his famous mission logs, Star Date 4071. Why is this at all significant? Well, the Buzz Lightyear toy logs his mission when he arrives at the beginning of the original Toy Story movie as, as you may have guessed, Star Date 4072.
That doesn’t mean that this log is necessarily immediately after the last one. While never specified, it is implied in Lightyear that Star Dates just indicate regular human years; the film’s opening lines are a mission log, Star Date 3901. After a jump in time, Buzz gives a second log, claiming to be one year out from the crash, that has the Star Date of 3902. Thus, the Star Date 4071 at the end of the film places it 170 years after the beginning of the film and only a year out from the Toy Buzz’s crash landing in Andy’s room. That Buzz truly believes he is fresh from Lightyear, or at maximum a year out from it.
At least the director of Lightyear is quick to admit that it wasn’t that well thought out. In an intensely nerdy interview with Uproxx, MacLane reinforced ideas that this movie is some kind of origin for Buzz Lightyear that came out in 1986 and that the sequels and eventually a cartoon show was what the 1995 toy was based off of. Although even that explanation doesn’t completely suffice, as it excludes lots of wonky conversations about why the actors, sets, props, special effects, tone etc. don’t match up with the '80s or even '90s era, MacLane eventually gives up the pesky Andy related bridge that raises all these constricting questions. “I’ll level with you, we just said that, so we could just make a cool sci-fi movie.”
Fair enough.
ncG1vNJzZmibn6G5qrDEq2Wcp51kuaqzx62wnpmiYsGwxYysq6iqqWLCr63NrK6eqpWZerLBxKyroqeeqHqktNGiqmadppa7tHs%3D