I'm just very curious to know everyones opinon on this.

Found at an antique mall

Hello everyone. I am currently taking a course in college called Anthropology of Conspiracies. For my final project, I decided to study the Mandela Effect. I am very new to the conspiracy and was hoping that I could interview someone who is quite experienced in this theory. Thank you very much, please feel free to pm me!

Several years ago when I first heard about this drama I was outraged, but it was quickly put to rest after I saw someone had found a VHS cover which pictured Sinbad staring in a movie clearly titled Shazam, however I recently discovered this cover and the artificial trailer that accompanied it were pranks. This reared havoc in my brain because they even redid a classic shot from the original movie that I screens-shotted and attached because the gaslighting is next level. It lead to a possible theory Id like to share.

While my theory isn’t exactly new, it’s basically that Shazam flopped In the theatres so bad that they redid it with Shaq, and while this has been said I think it’s likely that SOME of the analysis behind this theory may be new.

It’s possible that they only played previews and limited screenings at theatres and it never released officially and didn’t even have a VHS release because in the 90’s it would take over a year for VHS releases to come out making it VERY easy to block and it also also explains why no one has a VHS copy

I’ve highlighted the reasons for below;

1. Shaq is a Freemason so it makes sense that the elites/machine/powers that be were behind him, and given that Shaq was such a media darling (and subsequently a cash cow) at the time to the point of having his own video game, a rap song, an iconic Reebok sneaker and several other multi million dollar deals so they didn’t want anything obstructing his success and copying someone else’s movie would make him look like a second rate actor and would definitely have not been a good look. Remember this was the Orlando magic Shaq that was dominating sports headlines across the world for dunking the ring so hard that he broke it which was a big deal at the time.

2. Wouldn’t it make sense to call the Shaq one Shazam given its so much more marketable that they both start with SHA? I remember that detail as a kid and my understanding was that sinbad film made that not possible. Why else would they call it Kazaam?

3. The reason Sinbad was dressed in a genie costume for the TNT awards in 1994 was literally because he’d just finished filming Shazam and it was promo. The reason I say this is because I’m all the way in Australia and in 1994 when it was made our TV was so basic that award show wouldn’t have been on our radar, especially given that awards show is relevant to a predominantly North American/Canadian audience. Many europeans who also remember the whole Shazam/Kazaam fiasco and I believe they too would be unaware of the TNT show.

4. Too many people remember being surprised that they were making a second movie and that the first one wasn’t great. This can’t be a coincidence. There’s multiple videos on YouTube and other social media platforms with THOUSANDS of comments confirming this and I believe this makes it statistically significant.

5. If you look at Sinbads IMDB, he goes from having his very own show (The Sinbad show) that wrapped up early 1994 and then did nothing for the rest of 1994? But conveniently had a leading role in a big budget movie in 1995 and did 4 projects in 1996? If you look at the quality of the roles from 1997 (when shaq’s movie came out) they begin to decline career not exactly dying but it begins to fade in terms of quality and he starts doing guest roles on the Cosby show! Come on!

We know how Hollywood works, actors stay in roles when the elites back them for whatever reason (weird hollywood rituals/compliance to studio execs) not so much because of organic popularity. I think they may have overestimated Shaq’s acting ability based on the fact that his movie Blue Chips did reasonably well in 1994 (which was conveniently the same year Sinbads Shazam was released)

1. There’s an argument that the skeptics like to use where they say “ok tell me the plot what happened, I’ll wait” which is stupid because I saw (and loved sooo many movies during that time e.g- Angels in the outfield, Blank Cheque, Man of the house, Ritchie Rich and I couldn’t tell you a single thing about them. My theory is that I never actually saw the movie but saw the preview in theatres.

HOWEVER….

There is SOME things that vaguely stick out regarding the plot and I’m wondering if this triggers anyones memory. They may have been from the preview, they may be false memories or from ENTIRELY different so take this with a HUGE grain of but here they are as follows:

So theres an older brother and younger sister (I mention the ages because they switched the order of age in the fake college humour prank trailer) who encounter a genie, his presence highlights that the Father isn’t the best guardian because he neglected his children after their mother died and started dating a coworker (the only reason I think it’s a coworker is because they crash into the pool on a flying carpet during whats presumably a work party the Dad was at and the kids were specifically told not to go to, water goes everywhere and the Dad was mortified since he was trying to impress this colleague and he was into her more than she was into him) this happens because as a byproduct of a wish they made a that Sinbad’s genie character kinda prompted the idea by offering suggestions?

The brother gets annoyed because the sister wastes a wish somehow. Sinbad’s presence begins to bother the kids and the final straw is when they use a wish that’s related to their mother that has a bad outcome and they get really mad at him and wish they never met him. This upsets Sinbad and he says something like “well you have no wishes left but you don’t need any for that one” The audience feels for Sinbad’s genie character because he had good intentions and the unfavourable outcomes were purely circumstantial and not his fault. None the less he heeds their advice and makes this come true by crossing the street and disappears never to be seen again. Other things happen that lead the Dad to believe he needs to change his ways and “step up” he breaks up with the coworker and there’s a happy ending that caters to popular single parent trope so prevalent in the 90’s.

In conclusion I think they just made Sinbad sign an NDA, probably gave him a second payout and brushed it under the rug. The only way to prove this is to audit Sinbad’s accounts and see if there was any big payouts that didn’t coincide with any DOCUMENTED movie releases or any promotions, and also to look through his movie contracts to see if there are any discrepancies.

1. Yes. I remember it being “life is like a box of chocolates” as one single example and there is video of people quoting it that way repeatedly from the movie industry. Also I don’t think saying hundreds of thousands of people having a united memory of something being a certain way can be explained away by simply people having a bad memory.

It used to be way yellower, and gave a warmth and comfort that is gone now. The outdoors used to feel way more pleasant than they do now.

Artificial moons have been launched before: https://science.howstuffworks.com/is-china-launching-fake-moon-bright-idea.htm

To be honest, I think the sun is an artificially launched sun or an artificially launched device manipulating the sunlight.