Every once in a while, someone manages to create a pretty convincing fan theory about the Pixar movies. Most of the time, these theories are pretty lackluster, but Jonathan Carlin of “SuperCarlinBrothers” has recently come up with a great theory you might believe in.
Now, if you enjoy my theories and speculations on this site, then I have little doubt you’ll enjoy Carlin’s work on YouTube. We’ve shared multiple theories from each other on our own platforms over the years, and he’s certainly one of the most entertaining vloggers out there when it comes to fan theories.
And so is the case with his latest argument for why Andy from Toy Story has a monster we know from Monsters Inc. I’ll outline and evaluate his theory below, but you can also watch his video on the subject if you prefer (it’s only about 6 minutes long).
OK, so let’s go over SCB’s theory in detail, starting with the overall premise that Toy Story and Monsters Inc. share the same universe.
Of course, longtime readers already know I’m sold on this. The litany of easter eggs shared between the movies (from Jessie’s appearance in Boo’s room to Randall’s imitation of Andy’s wallpaper) share a lot of credence to the idea that these films are connected. And if you believe in my unifying Pixar Theory, then that’s that.
SCB himself points out that in Toy Story 3, we see a young girl who looks like she could be “Boo” (real name is Mary) because they look alike, though it’s not 100% certain. He also makes a connection between a poster we see in Monsters Inc. inside a child’s room and the same poster being on Sid’s wall in Toy Story.
As you can see, though, the posters aren’t situated the same way, and the monster we’re seeing has just been scared by a young girl, not a sadistic kid like Sid. For that reason, I think this is just an easter egg and NOT an indication that this was Sid’s monster.
Next, SCB points out that the movies sort of collide in a comic book series called Monsters Inc: Laugh Factory. Published in 2009, this 4-part series is about what happened after the events of Monsters Inc. Interestingly, a kid who looks like Sid Phillips (minus the skull t-shirt) shows up.
You can actually see several easter eggs in Boo’s room, here. And that’s kind of the point. Laugh Factory is filled with tons of references to other Pixar movies, as this was written by Paul Benjamin, a comic book writer for Marvel (not Pixar).
Keep in mind that Disney bought Marvel in 2009, likely explaining why this comic book series came about. For that reason and several others (including blatant continuity errors), I don’t actually consider these stories canon. They’re very over-the-top and portray situations and overt nods to other Pixar movies that don’t fit the framework of what Pixar has made themselves. Still, it’s a very interesting comic book series you can check out here.
Now on to the crux of SCB’s proposed theory. Could Andy have a monster of his own? Monsters Inc. takes place in 2001, which is 6 years after the events of Toy Story and Toy Story 2 (which takes place the summer following the first movie’s ending Christmas scene).
Monsters have been scaring kids for centuries, as we know from Monsters University revealing that the school was founded in 1313. So if the movies are connected, then it’s reasonable to assume that Andy could be one of the children assigned a monster.
In Monsters Inc., I always found it weird that there are commercials and advertisements for what is essentially a power plant. Why would Waternoose be so concerned about awareness?
Monsters Inc. doesn’t sell anything.
Well, it would seem that Waternoose is concerned with recruiting new scarers. The university trains these monsters to make them the best, but as we saw in Monsters University, Sulley was able to climb the ranks without an education, possibly explaining why Waternoose is interested in hiring recruits anywhere he can find them.
This all leads me to believe that there are lots of children, but not enough scarers. The problem they have is getting enough energy from the kids they scare (because kids are harder to scare these days), but another solution is to hire more scarers to scare even more kids. Scary.
That also explains why kidnapping children was such an appealing solution to Waternoose. If he can’t keep up with demand, then stealing the kids outright can give him enough energy to last years.
Though Roz tells Mike and Sulley that they’ve been onto the kidnappings for quite some time, it’s doubtful that Andy as a kid in 1996 was ever stolen. There’s just no evidence or reason to believe that.
Back to SCB’s theory. He argues that Andy’s closet door looks remarkably similar to a door seen in Monsters University (though he couldn’t find the same door in Monsters Inc.) Specifically, this door from a promo reel on the Monsters University website matches Andy’s door.
The doorknobs even match up because on this side of the closet, the doorknob should be on the right because the one on Andy’s closet door is on the left.
SCB argues that this evidence — in tandem with Randall practicing his camouflage with wallpaper from Andy’s room — proves that Randall is Andy’s monster.
Unfortunately, I don’t agree.
The issue is that Monsters University takes place years before Randall becomes a full-time scarer (he’s just a freshman at the start of the movie). If this is Andy’s door, then that just means Andy had some other monster while Randall was still in school.
That also gives a more logical explanation for the wallpaper thing. Sure, Randall has it as practice, but that doesn’t mean he’s scared a kid with that same wallpaper. It probably just belongs to Monsters Inc. in the same way they have the practice rooms for scaring. Why and how would Randall have this for his own personal use unless he got it from the company?
I think it makes way more sense for the wallpaper to be passed down because it belonged to a kid who moved, giving them an opportunity to collect it and use it for practice. That may even be why the university has this door in the first place. It’s not being used anymore.
Of course, who else would need wallpaper to camouflage themselves against? It’s not like everyone can be stealthy like Randall. Well, I’d say the simple explanation is that Monsters Inc. builds its practice rooms from real rooms, and Randall and his assistant are using wallpaper from these rooms for their specialized training.
Here’s a question that’s bothered me for a while: How much time passes between Monsters University and Monsters Inc.?
This is a question of age, to be sure. In the original movie, Mike and Sulley appear to be grown, well-established adults. From their voice actors, you’d assume they’re in their late 30s or early 40s.
After watching Monsters University, however, you can tell that their voices are basically the same. Mike is in a relationship with Celia not long after he and Sulley get their dream jobs, and neither of them seem settled down romantically. I’d honestly argue they’re really in their mid-20s, which supports the idea that Monsters University occurs during or after Andy’s move in 1995.
SCB also brings up the “Newt Crossing” sticker on Andy’s door in Toy Story 3 as evidence that Andy remembers Randall coming through his closet. But I don’t find that very convincing because why would Andy plaster something that scared him on his closet? I’m more inclined to believe that it really is just a reference to the Newt movie that never came about.
I really enjoy this theory, but I don’t think it’s complete. SCB is certainly on to something, and I definitely want to believe a monster we’ve seen has an old scare card for Andy somewhere. But for now, we can only guess.
Thanks for reading! If you like this blog, you can subscribe for weekly updates by clicking the “Subscribe” button on the right sidebar. Or just follow me on Twitter for the latest updates – @JonNegroni
59 thoughts on “Did Andy From ‘Toy Story’ Have His Own Monster?”
Already did. They are geniuses!
OMG! This is actually kind of funny. I discovered the Pixar Theory when I happened upon J’s video. I have since been a huge fan of you and the Super Carlin brothers. I have watched every single one of J’s videos so seeing that you mentioned him and praised his video, makes me happy
Nooooo, I love your work on the pixar theory sooo much, but Jay from SuperCarlinBrothers has WAY TO much evidence! He is totally right! Srry!
Well, I don’t believe this is a super awesome fact, but there it goes (with some things I’ve been thinking about recently). Someone else noticed that Andy and the boy from the simulation room are alike? My “theory” (if I can call it like that) is that Andy actually had a monster, but his door was destroyed since he was brave and hard to scare. This fact would explain why his door does not appear in Monsters Inc., why his wallpaper is being used as training for Randall and the fact that the child in the simulation room look like him. They probably are using things to train the monsters that came from a child that was hard to scare, so they will be more prepared for this new generation of kids. (I’m Brazilian, sorry by my possible grammar mistakes)
Honestly I think…… Jay is right! (sry he sent us here to say that )
You know sid has a sister so it could’ve been his sister in his room and she was desensitized to being scared because of her crazy brother that could explain the poster.
That is EXACTLY what I was going to say. She could’ve been spending the night in his room, possibly if he was sleeping over at someone else’s house.
I’m watching the Toy Story 2 movie right now and I just had an idea for this thery. So in Toy Story 2, Andy goes to Cowboy Camp, and in Monsters University near the end, Mike and Sulley end up in that cabin at some camp ground. So what if that door they went in took them to Andy’s Cowboy camp at the same time that he was there and they were his monsters? Makes sense to me but I can’t be too sure.
I also forgot to add that maybe that was his only experience with monsters if it fits
I know this is suppose to make sense and all, but I get more and more confused. Don’t get me wrong, everything you said added up nicely! It’s just that for dumb people like me, it take at least three rereads to make it all understandable. I love how you put everything together, though. Once I get what you’re talking about, it truly blows my mind. You’re clever, brother.
My daughter and I were just talking about this as she’d just seen Monsters Inc. 1) Hardscrabble was Andy’s mother’s monster and that scream saved in a can that they ruined during class was her scream. 2) Andy’s door was destroyed during the door tech lab explosion. His monster was one of the active monsters the Oozma Kappas saw when they watched from the roof.
sorry i still think scb are correct on this one
I actually heard of your blog from J on SCB! I’m interested in reading more of your theories since it seems like you and J have similar theories on most occasions! I’m glad I got to see your perspective of J’s theory. While I still stand by him, I do support you and can’t wait to show my sister your website. <3 🙂
I LOVE your work on The Pixar Theory but I agree with J on this one!!!!!!!it has too much evidence not too
Yesss Jay is right
It depends on the situation whether verbal communication is adequate or whether the capacity to write down thoughts is required. geometry dash meltdown It is crucial to have efficient two-way communication.