Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-24870482-20150815040034

(Pics soon, iPad not uploading)

So I rewatched Dreamscaperers and noticed that the Stan (let's call him Stan X) in Lee's flashback doesn't really look like either Lee or Ford. Stan X has Ford's glasses, even though it's Lee's flashback. Also, as the Stans grow up, their chins turn from round to square, and Ford's chin has a cleft. X still has a rounded chin, which is strange. Another thing — you can tell from the outfits in the picture of the older Stan X that it's the 50's (from the poodle skirt and biker looks), whereas in the start of'A tale of two Stans' when the Stans are young and playing on the beach, Lee mentions that this was in "nineteen-sixty-something". This means that Stan X was in his late teens in 1950, but Lee and Ford were Tweens or pretweens in the 1960s, which definitely doesn't line up. I find it odd how the writers/artists would miss something like this, UNLESS it was intentional, meaning we have a whole new mystery on our hands. It could be that none of it ever happened, and Grunkle Stanley just made up that story to tell Dipper, but then why would Stan X look so different? We know now that Lee didn't wear glasses until Ford disappeared, which means Stan X could be Ford, but only Lee had blotchy skin like Stan X, so it could be Lee. The flashback is about Lee telling Dipper about how he was pushed by his father to start boxing, and even though he hated it, it toughened him up. However, we know from 'A tale of two Stans' that Ford has "brains" and Lee has "the other thing...punching" and this was when they were very young so it was obvious that Lee was never nerdy or wimpy or whatever, unlike Stan X. So far, Ford resembled Stan X the most. We know that Lee pretended to be Ford, but Stan X lacks Ford's defining features such as his cleft chin and six fingers.

What do you guys think of all this? Was it intentional, or just odd planning? 