People have been concocting wild theories tying different movies and TV shows together in various ways, some more outlandish than the others. One of the more recent ones to gain traction on the internet is that Anna and Elsa’s parents in Frozen – the king and queen of Arendelle – didn’t die in a shipwreck, but rather were stranded in a seaside jungle and had a son before they died, who grew up to be Tarzan from the eponymous Disney movie. It’s a clever idea. It’s also complete hogwash.
The Frozen–Tarzan link theory got a bump in the past ten days or so, after Chris Buck – who directed both movies – supposedly confirmed it. Anyone who says he confirmed it, though, has either not bothered to track down his statement as he originally said it or has selectively edited the quotation, because if you read the whole thing it’s obvious that he meant the exact opposite.
The Tarzan theory falls victim to the fallacy that disproves most such theories eventually: cherry-picking, or confirmation bias. It’s natural to fixate on the evidence that supports the theory you’re trying to prove, and to ignore the evidence that could contradict it. In some cases, the evidence against the theory is as questionable as the evidence in support of it, or is hard to find. And sometimes, as in the Tarzan theory, it’s right there in plain sight of the people proposing the theory; they’re just not seeing it. Look:
That’s an image I’ve seen on many sites used to support the theory. Let’s look at the portrait on the right side of this image. Here’s what the whole portrait looks like:
What do you see here? Setting aside questions about how much (or how little) Tarzan’s parents look like Elsa and Anna’s parents, what do you see? There are two really important things to note about this portrait. First, it is a black-and-white (or grayscale) or possible sepia-toned image. Virtually nobody who wasn’t doing so ironically has ever painted a formal portrait in anything but full color – why would you? So we must draw the conclusion that this is not a painting. It’s a photograph. Since a photograph of animated characters looks a lot like a painting, it’s an understandable mistake to think it is one, but the fact that it’s black-and-white can only mean that it is intended to be a photograph. But it’s a pretty sharp picture, and until the late 1800s subjects had to sit still for a fair while while a photograph was taken, and there’s that baby in the photo. And even in his mother’s arms, how often does an awake baby who isn’t eating really hold still for more than 20 seconds?
And that brings us to the second thing to note about the portrait: the baby. Obviously, the baby is meant to be Tarzan. That means that the photograph was taken after he was born. That had to have been done before his family left on their final voyage, because the notion of it having been taken on the ship is ludicrous (even if it was, how would it have been developed?). So Tarzan couldn’t have been born after his parents were stranded.
Now, most sources seem to agree that most of Frozen (starting with Elsa’s coronation) takes place in the early 1840s. The earliest publicly available daguerrotypes were introduced in 1839, and it took a good couple of decades before the resolution got anywhere near that of the photo in Tarzan. The photo not enough for you? How about the typewriter?
This is clearly the Underwood style of typewriter, which didn’t appear until right around the turn of the twentieth century. There’s also a disc-playing phonograph in the camp (an elephant uses its trumpet as, well, a trumpet), and a Penny-farthing bicycle as well.
I could go on, but there’s no sense in beating a dead theory. Tarzan is clearly supposed to take place in the very late nineteenth or early twentieth century, or between 53 and 73 years after the king and queen of Arendelle are lost at sea. It just doesn’t work, and it’s pure confirmation bias to think otherwise.
All images copyright © Disney.
how about the fact that Tarzan is an Englishman, named Greystoke?
That was never mentioned in the movie, so can’t be considered officially part of the Disney version of Tarzan.
jane and her father didnt show up into the movie until later on, Tarzan was older, things change over time so a type writer could exist as well as a vinyl player. I believe hes related because there is a lot of things that fit that show he is.
Where’d you hear that?
How about the fact that Frozen is wildly popular and any article linking Frozen to other Disney movies is irresistible click bait to anyone with a computer, tablet or smartphone?
You are using the precise timeline of the history of photographic technology to disprove a theory set in a world with trolls and magical princesses. I’m not sure that’s a workable approach.
But why would you have a family portrait without Elsa and Anna in it?
Because Tarzan was the FIRST born! It makes a little sense, right?
Not really.
Oh? How? It makes sense because if they didn’t want Elsa and Anna, its not really a FAMILY pic. If Tarzan was first, they couldn’t of had Elsa and Anna in the pic.
It just doesn’t make sense because if they had Elsa and Anna LATER, wouldn’t they have wanted to take a newer picture? It makes sense.
For a writer, you sure do hate fun stories…
It’s not a fun story. It’s just stupid.
respect this is so many levels?
also, the theory states that the king and queen had the baby on the island. if you watch tarzan, he was born before they reached the island. i completely agree, the theory makes no sense.
If you read the right theory it says he was born on the ship. Obviously in the movie hes a couple of months. And how is it that people try to tell the director that he’s wrong. Lol smh.
Ok, Here’s the thing everyone on this site that’s trying to disprove the fact the they may be kin needs to grow up!!!!! I mean seriously these are children’s movies, you people are all full on adults trying to disprove a CHILDREN’S MOVIE!!! Grow up and let KIDS enjoy KIDS movies!!!!
That’s amusing, because it’s not kids making the theories. It’s adults. Yet for “playing along”, we need to grow up?
So true because the kids that are watching Frozen now weren’t even born when Tarzan came out and even if they have seen Tarzan they would be to young to try and make a connection between the two movies.
Nobody’s trying to disprove a children’s movie. We HAVE disproved a FAN THEORY that exists entirely SEPARATE from the movie.
What if that’s a photo of Anna as a baby? Sorry, I know that’s pushing it, but that would further tie together the other theory that Anna is the only daughter to the King and Queen and Elsa was born to Rapunzel’s parents. Of course they’d only have a photo of Anna as a newborn in their arms and not Elsa if she wasn’t born to them.
Umm, didn’t we all agree that the baby on the picture is Tarzan? I mean, Kalah confirmed it. Also, I thought it possible that Elsa had been adopted, but then again, that theory blowes over once you hear their mother’s story.
Anna is the YOUNGER daughter. If they were trying to pass off Elsa as their own and keep her heritage a secret, they’re not going to keep around a photograph that would raise questions about the elder daughter’s absence.
Okay, I just have one thing to ask. If the theory IS true, how did Elsa and Anna’s parrents leave Norway on a ship bound to Germany and end up in AFRICA?
It was a very big wave…
No wave is That big, unless they went through a portal, the geography doesn’t add up
They were in a storm which dragged them to a totally different location (Africa).
Also, here’s what I don’t get. If “Frozen” does in fact take places in the 1840’s, around the same time the original story was published. Why don’t the guards use fire arms?
A bunch of grown ass people analyzing, and arguing about, a fan theory based on a bunch of Disney movies…
Who gives a shit!
Your guess is as good as mine
Sorry, this was ment for the coment bellow
Please explain me also why the bloody snowman can talk… Do not you you think it is a little bit bigger crap mistake in the movie?
Your guess is as good as mine
Welp the producers just came and said it is true. Tarzan is thier little brother, so…. over analysis null and void.
Just because the producers say it doesn’t mean it’s true
“So in my little head, Anna and Elsa’s brother is Tarzan — but on the other side of that island are surfing penguins, to tie in a non-Disney movie, ’Surf’s Up.’ That’s my fun little world.”
Actual quote. So, no it was never confirmed. Keyword here is “IN MY HEAD”
Thank you!!! I tell everyone is not related! There’s too many theories that just sound weird.
Also, isn’t Tarzan older than Anna and Elsa? Wouldn’t that mean that they got “lost at sea” before Anna and Elsa were born?
Just because Tarzan came out after Frozen doesn’t mean that kids can watch it again and again, esspecially on Netflix. Besides that type writer in that photo wasn’t theirs, it was Jane’s and her family.
So true because the kids that are watching Frozen now weren’t even born when Tarzan came out and even if they have seen Tarzan they would be to young to try and make a connection between the two movies.
Disregard this comment⬆. I was trying to reply to someone else’s comment and somehow it ended up as its own individual comment.
Well the queen and king could of had Tarzan after reaching their destination, they could of had gotten stranded on their way back. And remember Anna and Elsa were older when their parents “Mysteriously Died”. And the theory with the type writer It showed up in the movie, sure, but it showed up when Tarzan was like in his 30’s or so.
he producers just stated that is it true.
Yeah, but that doesn’t make it true. It’s like George Lucas saying Luke Skywalker is the most bad ass Jedi of all time, just because Lucas said it doesn’t mean it’s true
Yes it does, he wrote Star Wars! You can’t argue with the person who created it. If you’re gonna make a comparison like that, you better know the facts.
JUst because he created it doesnt mean that that OPINION is true! That is exactly what is an OPINION. Only difference is, it’s coming from the guy that created Star Wars still doesn’t make it true!
I love this article. I never understood why people believed such a dumb theory. Oh and to the people saying “it’s been confirmed” ummm NO it actually wasn’t. Actual quote “So in my little head, Anna and Elsa’s brother is Tarzan — but on the other side of that island are surfing penguins, to tie in a non-Disney movie, ’Surf’s Up.’ That’s my fun little world.”
Keyword here is “IN MY HEAD”.
Google it, click on the article and ACTUALLY READ the article.
Geek dad Tarzan was made yrs before frozen. So maybe they tried to connect frozen with Tarzan. Maybe it wasn’t there intent to connect Tarzan to frozen when they made it bc frozen didn’t exist then. So when frozen was made they would of intended to connect frozen to Tarzan with what they have got. Aswell Disney is all about ur imagination and so far u ain’t using ur imagination ur just being technical.
But….. Anyways…… I agree that Anna and Elsa’s parents were not Tarzan’s parents. And one more thing….. I agree with the one (I forgot her name) who says that the guards should have used firearms. And Jacob is absolutely right, we should not think much about Disney’s creations. They will always remain a mystery. (But I still can’t agree that Tarzan was the younger brother of the princesses of Arendelle ?)
I guess the only way it could work is if time travel was involved.
Anna uses a bicycle with pedals in the movie as a child and they weren’t invented until 1863. So Frozen takes place at the earliest around 1870s. If Tarzan is their brother, Tarzan would have to take place around 1880-1890. With the shotgun and typewriter in Tarzan that timeline adds up. There could be any number of reasons the parents ended up in Africa, one being there are talking snowmen and magical powers in the world of Disney so don’t take it so seriously.
Who are annas perents.Ithought that tarzans perents were not stranded and i forgot how did they die.
Confirmed …… Tarzan is the younger brother to Anna and Elsa.
Frozen director confirms fan theory January 6th 2017
Its been Confirmed by the Director of Frozen that Tarzan is the younger brother, as stated above.
I know a bunch of other people already commented that Tarzan being their younger brother is confirmed but… CONFIRMED. I demand this post be taken down.
That’s not a confirmation. He comes out and says in his head he likes to imagine that, and that Surf’s up is set on the other side of the island. Reading comprehension, people.
This post must be taken down.
Wow, you suck! You’re trying to disproove a cool story about movies where the majority of watchers still believe in Santa Clause.
Signed,
A dad who loves watching Disney with his daughter.
Apparently this theory is suddenly current again.
https://www.google.com/search?q=extend+life+pushups&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&ie=&oe=#q=tarzan+elsa&tbs=qdr:m&start=0
There’s another problem with connecting Frozen with Tarzan: The timing. We all know Frozen is Disney’s version of Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Snow Queen.” What is not common knowledge is that “The Snow Queen” is based on an actual event. There was a mini ice age in 1816.
“Tarzan of the Apes” was first published in 1912 and from every indication I know, that is the approximate time the story takes place. I don’t think Tarzan’s age was established; every indication puts him younger than thirty. Let’s assume the story does indeed take place in 1912 and Tarzan is thirty. Tarzan would have been born in 1882.
Assuming Queen Iduna was eighteen when she was married, she could have been nineteen when Elsa was born. Elsa, who was twenty-one in 1816, would have been born in 1795. Realistically the most recent year Iduna could be born is 1776.
If we can agree that 1882 is a realistic year for Tarzan to be born, Iduna would have been a 106 when she gave birth to Tarzan.
Theories are just theories!
You are trying to disprove a theory from a movie that already doesn’t make sense! Mrs Potts and chip from beauty and the beast are in the Tarzan movie, owned by Jane’s family. But Mrs Potts and chip was staff members of beast that were transformed BEFORE meeting Belle, and turned back to human form once beast became human again. How in between, did they make it to Tarzans jungle? Stop trying to ruin fun for people.
Well actually there’s no proof that the camio are of “THEE” mrs potts and chip, its a tea set in the same design , just as i’m sure there would have been clocks that looked similar to clocksworth made at the time =)
there’s nothing wrong with theories and fn but it on average takes 4 years to make a disney movie a lot of work and effort goes into stuff like this and nothing is an afterthought, if they were the same people disney would have made that much clearer like how Andy’s mum is emily jessie’s original owner, there’s a lot of facts proof and evidence , i’ve yet to see real proof on the tarzan theory, even more baffled that disney seem to be going along with this for now , they dont even look similar xD
Actually Andy’s mom is not Emily regardless of how much fans try to connect that. Her name is Jennifer Davis and it was confirmed by Disney in the Art of Toy Story – which officially gave her a name.
About Mrs. Potts, I watched “the Little Mermaid #2” and guess who I saw? Yeah! The tea set of Mrs. Potts! Totally weird!
I think that Mrs. Potts WAS on the ship or plane or whatever people are saying that the king and queen crashed on! And, I saw them in “Little Mermaid Two”!!!! Freaky!
I know how the teapot and tea set got there. Jane is the granddaughter of Belle in “Beauty and the Beast”.
It’s fine to make a classic story kid friendly and all, but don’t decide to connect time lines and world’s that the original Authors never did. Quit giving into “fans” that can’t just enjoy the story that is before them.
While i agree with you completely and its sooooo good to have someone like you understand this theory is impossible as they characters simply look nothing alike ,it kinda sucks that having things shown in a time they weren’t made don’t matter in a disney movie…
Im sure they have researchers but for some reason they make a lot of mistakes like having beauty and the beast set in mid 1700s because after 1789 there is no monarchy in France so the Beast wouldn’t be royalty if the movie/book occurred after the French Revolution, however there’s also an image of the eiffel tower in be our guest and construction on that hadn’t started until 1887. Or calling the greek movie Hercules the Roman spelling instead of the greek xD
Another point to back up the fact that frozen and tarzan aren’t connected tho is that Anna and #ela’s dad was modeled after the likeness of Walt Disney himself, however there’s no mention of tarzans dad being inspired by the image of walt even tho when tarzan was made things like that would have been more relevant , so they’re 110% not the same people, not to mention the clothing tarzan’s mum and dad wear are much lower class than the king and queen of arendelle right =)
Dude, It’s. A. Cartoon.
Agreed. We should not mess with it and leave it be.
But, its a mystery. Duh!
Interesting.. however, one thing, how do we know that the baby isn’t Anna or Elsa?? To be honest, some babies are hard to tell their gender. I don’t mean to be sexist or anything, seriously, but many people see baby girls as boys because of short hair.. and the hairs the same colour so it might match?
Toni the clothing doesn’t matter they are not on tour or anything so probably would have been casual, especially at sea. However one more thing, in Tarzan his dad lowers him and his mum out of the boat. If it was the king and Queen, surely they would have sailors and servants immediately there to assist them? And the lifeboat wasn’t properly invented until after then
The Disney Tv-serie “Legend of Tarzan” mentioned WW1 and in the one episode Tarzan met president Roosevelt. This is possible only after year 1918. In the Tarzan movie, we can see the steamship. Steamship only became popular circa in 1885, and this ship style was created circa 1918.
In the shortmovie “Frozen – Fever” mentioned that is now year 1840! This ruined that theory.
Tarzan is Elsa and Anna’s younger brother. It has been confirmed by Jennifer Lee co-director of Frozen, and Chris Buck co-director of Frozen and director of Tarzan. ” According to her Frozen co-director, Chris Buck, Elsa and Anna’s parents didn’t die at sea like most believed, but instead, had a baby at sea before they were shipwrecked, and then they all washed up on the shores of a jungle island where they built a tree house to live in before meeting a tragic end when the parents were later eaten by a leopard.”
Tarzan’s parents crashed in an airplane…it wasn’t a ship. Tarzan was on the plane with them (already born) and survived the crash with them.
Childhood favorite. what a creation this is
With as many glaring plot-holes as Frozen possesses, the idea that the writers thought about it enough to not have a black and white painting or even fitting time lines together is pretty silly.
Not that i believe they originally had any intention of making Anna and Tarzan related but anything after the fact is likly no different than JK Rowling changing intentions after the fact to please fans like later saying Dumbledore gay…it doesnt have to make sense or fit the previously established plot line if it catches the fans interest and generates more buzz and more money, then it is canon.
Edgar Rice Burroughs is revolting is his grave!
Edgar Rice Burroughs is revolting in his grave!
Its just a kids show! Cant you just except that? Let the kids believe that they are related so that they’ll be kept quiet! And I think that he was their brother, cause the point of the photograph, what if the parents had taken the pic on the ship? They couldnt of had elsa and anna cause they weren’t with them! Ariel is also a part of this because she swam through the parents shipwreck and didn’t find any bodies! The parents survived on the desert island But then that brings up the point of them blowing off course. What if the Disney producers decided to put monkeys on a random island off of Germany? Even if there aren’t any apes or monkeys in Germany, what about the accent of the bad guy? What is that accent? If we figure that out, then the clues may fit together. And besides that, maybe Elsa was adopted from Rapunzel by the parents. And that would explain elsas powers. Rapunzel had powers, right?
What if Tarzan was adopted on the ship?
Maybe…
I think they adopted him.
It is possible that Tarzan was the first born. That would explain why Elsa and Anna aren’t in the picture. And maybe the parents wanted to take one picture with one kid then a picture with another kid and maybe they wanted one picture with each kid alone! I’ll bet they could have afforded that.
Maybe if we can figure out how old Tarzan and the princesses are, we’ll figure out if they are related or not!
Really? That would be cool!