Theories: EMILY DAVIS

After watching theory videos, I decided to start another-side blog post/thing where I post theories.


Today, I am going to explain about the Andy's mom-Emily theory. You may have come across this...  but it basically means that Andy's mom form the Toy Story films is Emily, Jessie's previous owner.

The main piece of evidence is this hat:
Image result for andy davis toy story 1

Why does Andy have this Jessie hat? He doesn't even know WHO Jessie is, as evidenced in Toy Story 2, when he's like "New toys! Thanks Mom!" not "Cool! Jessie and Bullseye!"

In case you need a refresher, this same hat is in the flashback "When She Loved Me". 

Image result for emily and jessie
Look! It's THE Jessie hat.... but it just means Ms. Davis HAD a Jessie hat that she passed on to ANDY,  not THE Jessie hat. Well, there's another piece of evidence.  In "When Somebody Loved Me", you get a glimpse of the donation box Jessie was in, and though all of Emily's Jessie stuff is in it, except for.... you guessed it... THE HAT. Also, on the Pixar Wikia, on Emily's page,  it states "There is a remote possibility that Emily is actually Andy's mom. She has the same physical build, hair color, and is the right age. (She is seen wearing 50's style saddle shoes, has 60s decorations in her room, and later drives a 70s-era car that Jessie uses to help Buster to relieve himself at the end of the movie. She presumably got Andy his Woody doll, even though Woody's Roundup was long since outdated, and she showed no surprise, at least on screen, at seeing Jessie and Bullseye when they became Andy's toys). Although, if she was  born sometime in the early 50s, that would mean she is in her early 40s during the movies.       

  • Emily also had a life-size replica of Jessie's hat that is the exact same one which Andy owns, giving another reason towards the possibility of Emily being Andy's mom.". 

See, someone is  posting on Pixar Wikia about this theory and officials have not removed at least adds some speculation about the truths of this theory.










Comments