Why grind an axe when you could say something inconsequential like "SuperWhoLock is trash" and then watch as the hate floods in like limpid tears of blood down my pallid face?
As for the edginess, it goes without saying. The first trailer was released to the distant moans of tumescent Furry fans the world over. You could hear it if you listened intently, by the favor of night's embrace... With the movie being finally released? I can scarcely imagine.
Whatever you do, just don't look for Rule 34 of Nick and Judy. Preserve thine sanity at all costs!
I'll never pass by an opportunity to quote My Immortal. Edgefest2016
Also one doesn't need to look for Rule 34 of anything; it <color=red>literally falls into everyone's laps when it's not being shoved in faces like "LOOK AT THIS CROSS-SPECIES ROMANCE EMBRACE IT"
a) Those arent animals.. those are anthromophized CGI depictions of animals. Aka "not real" and thus dont have to deal with allll the shit real humans have to deal with.
b) The reason they can "overcome" racism, sexism and ALLLLLL the other isms in the world is because the script said so.
c) This "cartoon characters tell you how to be a better person" nonsense isnt new, remember captain planet? Sonic the hedgehog? GI Joe? HE MAN? They all had moral lessons build into their shows. Did it matter? Pft.. no? All they did was being cringeworthy and come off as incredibly preachy.
So to answer the question "why we cant overcome these things":
We are human, we are real, with real problems that cant be simply overcome by "the power of friendship" or "love" or all that bloomy nonsense that alot of people simply dont care for. Least the mouse of all things for christs sake.
Enjoy the movie as it is, an optimistic, humorus, yet naive message like ALL THE OTHER movies ever produced that dealt with those themes.
And yes... im extremely fun at parties.
It just hits me as incredibly pretentious to ask why "These fictitious characters can overcome all these social problems in a span of 1 hour and 30 minutes yet us REAL people cant seem to do that?" I mean really?
Why grind an axe when you could say something inconsequential like "SuperWhoLock is trash" and then watch as the hate floods in like limpid tears of blood down my pallid face?
As for the edginess, it goes without saying. The first trailer was released to the distant moans of tumescent Furry fans the world over. You could hear it if you listened intently, by the favor of night's embrace... With the movie being finally released? I can scarcely imagine.
Whatever you do, just don't look for Rule 34 of Nick and Judy. Preserve thine sanity at all costs!
I'll never pass by an opportunity to quote My Immortal. Edgefest2016
Also one doesn't need to look for Rule 34 of anything; it <color=red>literally falls into everyone's laps when it's not being shoved in faces like "LOOK AT THIS CROSS-SPECIES ROMANCE EMBRACE IT"
What, you've never had images of Rule 34 dumped into your lap in a physical sense? 'Cuz I have. Some people after school are weeeeeeird.
Also google. Any art website where I'm trying to look for poses or textures and you literally(hah I did it again see) can't walk three feet without being bombarded by some thirteen-year-old's wet dream of MLP characters boning each other. Maybe ANY rule 34, to me, is considered "in your face" because I'm asexual so I think anything like that's grody. I'm not the best person to ask about this~
Why grind an axe when you could say something inconsequential like "SuperWhoLock is trash" and then watch as the hate floods in like limpid tears of blood down my pallid face?
As for the edginess, it goes without saying. The first trailer was released to the distant moans of tumescent Furry fans the world over. You could hear it if you listened intently, by the favor of night's embrace... With the movie being finally released? I can scarcely imagine.
Whatever you do, just don't look for Rule 34 of Nick and Judy. Preserve thine sanity at all costs!
I'll never pass by an opportunity to quote My Immortal. Edgefest2016
Also one doesn't need to look for Rule 34 of anything; it <color=red>literally falls into everyone's laps when it's not being shoved in faces like "LOOK AT THIS CROSS-SPECIES ROMANCE EMBRACE IT"
What, you've never had images of Rule 34 dumped into your lap in a physical sense? 'Cuz I have. Some people after school are weeeeeeird.
Also google. Any art website where I'm trying to look for poses or textures and you literally(hah I did it again see) can't walk three feet without being bombarded by some thirteen-year-old's wet dream of MLP characters boning each other. Maybe ANY rule 34, to me, is considered "in your face" because I'm asexual so I think anything like that's grody. I'm not the best person to ask about this~
Fair enough. I don't really browse many such sites, but I'm well aware pretty much anything that allows images and/or video will be stuffed full porn in no time. Even so, where ever Zootopia R34 exists, there will probably be regular furry porn anyway, so it's kind of a drop in the ocean. Still, I'm fully expecting each and every background character will appear in at least one piece of porn in the future. Mark my words, it'll be completely plundered for characters, no matter how minor.
Why grind an axe when you could say something inconsequential like "SuperWhoLock is trash" and then watch as the hate floods in like limpid tears of blood down my pallid face?
As for the edginess, it goes without saying. The first trailer was released to the distant moans of tumescent Furry fans the world over. You could hear it if you listened intently, by the favor of night's embrace... With the movie being finally released? I can scarcely imagine.
Whatever you do, just don't look for Rule 34 of Nick and Judy. Preserve thine sanity at all costs!
I'll never pass by an opportunity to quote My Immortal. Edgefest2016
Also one doesn't need to look for Rule 34 of anything; it <color=red>literally falls into everyone's laps when it's not being shoved in faces like "LOOK AT THIS CROSS-SPECIES ROMANCE EMBRACE IT"
What, you've never had images of Rule 34 dumped into your lap in a physical sense? 'Cuz I have. Some people after school are weeeeeeird.
Also google. Any art website where I'm trying to look for poses or textures and you literally(hah I did it again see) can't walk three feet without being bombarded by some thirteen-year-old's wet dream of MLP characters boning each other. Maybe ANY rule 34, to me, is considered "in your face" because I'm asexual so I think anything like that's grody. I'm not the best person to ask about this~
Fair enough. I don't really browse many such sites, but I'm well aware pretty much anything that allows images and/or video will be stuffed full porn in no time. Even so, where ever Zootopia R34 exists, there will probably be regular furry porn anyway, so it's kind of a drop in the ocean. Still, I'm fully expecting each and every background character will appear in at least one piece of porn in the future. Mark my words, it'll be completely plundered for characters, no matter how minor.
Ah yes, Blacksad4Kids: The Movie, isn't it? Hilariously (or not really) in Blacksad racism has less to do with the species and it's actually about the fur-/feather-/skin-colour. Then again, Blacksad wouldn't be much different if its characters were humans - Zootopia giving us a more fantastical scenario.
I hadn't heard much about this film up unitl now, but having heard in multiple places that it's really good, I really want to go see it when it comes out in the UK.
Maaaaaan I'm probably gonna hear all about how people feel about this movie on Tumblr since at a glance, movies about racism and sexism and anthro animals appeal to all the little SJW on Tumblr. And lots of hot fox-on-bunny action since Tumblr is also disgusting and doesn't know how to not insert sex into everything.
You realize of course that no one is forcing you to go to Tumblr, right? It's a fairly self-contained site, the only reason you would even see anything on Tumblr- be it politics or porn- is if you specifically went out looking for it.
Maaaaaan I'm probably gonna hear all about how people feel about this movie on Tumblr since at a glance, movies about racism and sexism and anthro animals appeal to all the little SJW on Tumblr. And lots of hot fox-on-bunny action since Tumblr is also disgusting and doesn't know how to not insert sex into everything.
You realize of course that no one is forcing you to go to Tumblr, right? It's a fairly self-contained site, the only reason you would even see anything on Tumblr- be it politics or porn- is if you specifically went out looking for it.
What are you talking about? "CHOICE"? What's that? I go to Tumblr because I have a gun to my head and the three guys in my closet say that if I don't, then they'll kill me. What an idyllic world you live in where going to Tumblr is a choice.
Also I feel it bears worth mentioning that stuff like politics or porn is actually really easy to find on Tumblr even if you aren't looking for it because it's everywhere. I could go to someone's page because it says they like Don't Starve or something and get a face-full of non-tagged NSFW of some gay pairing with no notice. I didn't LOOK for it but there it is in all its weird glory. Same thing with people supporting -insert political figure here-. I don't have to look, it just shows up. And that's fine, it's what other people like.
When I saw the trailer featuring the drawn-out "DMV run by sloths" bit in the trailer, I thought, "Yeah... No, thanks. I guess that one joke-bit is misrepresentative of the final product.
I just got back from the premier, and I can testify that the movie is really, really funny. The sloth scene was good, but it was certainly not the best in the film. This is probably the single best non-pixar film Disney has put out in years. I would highly recommend it.
As for the racism angle, it's definitely there, but it doesn't feel too heavy handed. The "racism" that exists in the film feels unique to the world, and not like an obvious parallel to real world racism. It's not like one group was enslaved, and the other was a slave owner. Instead, the prey feel a slight grudge against the predators for hunting their ancestors, and the predators feel a slight grudge against the prey because they make up 90% of the population, and sometimes see them as savage. It cuts both ways, which is much more interesting then if the film makers had simply made a film that was completely analogous to racism in America. The subject matter may turn some people off, but they're missing out on one of the best animated films of the year if they don't see it.
One thing I have to wonder about their world that I think was pointed out by someone else is what exactly the predators eat now. After all, many of them are carnivores, so they'd still need some kind of meat. I suppose they've probably evolved to be omnivores now. In fact, that raises further questions about omnivores as well; do any of them eat any meat, if so, what? Or have they all gone vegetarian?
Having watched it I'll have to agree that it's good, but I do have my criticisms, and most of them involve Judy (the bunny protagonist).
For a film all about prejudice and its causes, it comes of as rather strange that she's so morally pure and lacking in any real flaws or arc, especially considering the following:
A) They show her growing up in a small, isolated, rural town that's mostly populated by bunnies.
B) It's shown that her parents are terrified of predators, and foxes in particular.
C) She is shown to be bullied specifically by a fox.
D) The film is hammering home the theme that prejudice is largely the result of fear.
It just seems like a perfect recipe for her to develop some kind of prejudice/fear against foxes, so that by the end she can have an arc where she realizes her prejudice against predators is not so dissimilar to the prejudice she herself experiences as a bunny-cop, but instead in the first few minutes of the film she's already lecturing her parents on how unfairly they're stereotyping predators. I mean, she even teams up with a fox for most of the movie. By the way it's all set up it almost feels like they were going to go that route but bailed on it part way through; perhaps they didn't want their protagonist to not be a walking embodiment of morality or something.
I'm not saying it's impossible for someone to ignore their upbringing and life experiences, but if you're making a story about prejudice, especially one that puts forth the idea that prejudice often stems from fear, you might want to acknowledge the fact that fear itself can often be the result of traumatic experiences, ignorance, and people's upbringing.
I don't know, she just seemed way too tolerant right from the beginning for a film about intolerance.
She did though. Judy had several moments where she had visible prejudices against foxes, including when she first met Nick. That's the whole reason they met, she followed him because he was a fox (racial profiling).
Then later there's the instance with the fox-repellent. The fact that she's carrying that thing around suggests she does have some fears in general about them, and reaching for it even when someone she calls a friend is just raising his voice suggests there's some subconscious prejudice even if she's convinced herself she's not afraid of someone just for being a predator, especially a fox.
FirstNameLastName said:
One thing I have to wonder about their world that I think was pointed out by someone else is what exactly the predators eat now. After all, many of them are carnivores, so they'd still need some kind of meat. I suppose they've probably evolved to be omnivores now. In fact, that raises further questions about omnivores as well; do any of them eat any meat, if so, what? Or have they all gone vegetarian?
A question I had too. I think it's implied that only mammals became sapient in this universe so things like fish, reptiles, bugs, or birds are completely okay to eat. Nick was said to mostly if not completely subsist on plants according to the creator's twitter (which makes sense, foxes are omnivores), and some animals like Clawhauser have shifted to different diets. His being donut heavy.
Having watched it I'll have to agree that it's good, but I do have my criticisms, and most of them involve Judy (the bunny protagonist).
For a film all about prejudice and its causes, it comes of as rather strange that she's so morally pure and lacking in any real flaws or arc, especially considering the following:
A) They show her growing up in a small, isolated, rural town that's mostly populated by bunnies.
B) It's shown that her parents are terrified of predators, and foxes in particular.
C) She is shown to be bullied specifically by a fox.
D) The film is hammering home the theme that prejudice is largely the result of fear.
It just seems like a perfect recipe for her to develop some kind of prejudice/fear against foxes, so that by the end she can have an arc where she realizes her prejudice against predators is not so dissimilar to the prejudice she herself experiences as a bunny-cop, but instead in the first few minutes of the film she's already lecturing her parents on how unfairly they're stereotyping predators. I mean, she even teams up with a fox for most of the movie. By the way it's all set up it almost feels like they were going to go that route but bailed on it part way through; perhaps they didn't want their protagonist to not be a walking embodiment of morality or something.
I'm not saying it's impossible for someone to ignore their upbringing and life experiences, but if you're making a story about prejudice, especially one that puts forth the idea that prejudice often stems from fear, you might want to acknowledge the fact that fear itself can often be the result of traumatic experiences, ignorance, and people's upbringing.
I don't know, she just seemed way too tolerant right from the beginning for a film about intolerance.
She did though. Judy had several moments where she had visible prejudices against foxes, including when she first met Nick. That's the whole reason they met, she followed him because he was a fox (racial profiling).
Then later there's the instance with the fox-repellent. The fact that she's carrying that thing around suggests she does have some fears in general about them, and reaching for it even when someone she calls a friend is just raising his voice suggests there's some subconscious prejudice even if she's convinced herself she's not afraid of someone just for being a predator, especially a fox.
Oh yes, I forgot about her following him, and I remember thinking at the time that it seemed like it was supposed to imply racial profiling, but I feel like it kind of fell a bit flat. Partly due to how suspiciously he was acting at the time (which seemed more like what caught her attention to begin with rather than him being a fox), and the fact that her suspicions not only seemed justified at the time but also ultimately turned out to be correct (kind of). Plus the fact that she goes out of her way to stick up for him, and the extent to which she's nice to him (until she realizes the scam) kind of offsets it a bit too far in the other direction. I do see that they seemed to be going for some kind of prejudice there, but it feels like the context go way to far in justifying her actions that they cease to seem like prejudice.
As for the fox repellent, I honestly found myself far more confused by that than anything. In the scene where she first meets him she is shown to briefly reach for the repellent as well, but that's only after she walks into the ice-cream parlor and only while she believes there's some kind of altercation going on (as evident by the store owner shouting at him). But by the time that scene at the end comes around I had completely forgotten she even had it with her, and I still don't really see why she has it.
I'm aware that there are both conscious prejudices and subconscious, and the scene when she first meets him does seem to be implying some very slight subconscious prejudices against predators, but the decision to carry around fox repellent isn't a really a subconscious decision, it's a conscious one, which doesn't really seem to be supported by what's presented throughout the story.
The fact that she's still carrying it can be taken to imply that she's actually slightly afraid of foxes, but to me it didn't really feel like a revelation about her character, it just felt slightly nonsensical and more like a plot device to have the token "they're mad at each other" scene.
I guess you're right, the story does seem to be implying she has some kind of prejudice, but it feels slightly messy to me, especially since there seem to be so few examples of this prejudice, and so many examples to show how tolerant she is.
Thinking on it, I actually have quite a bit to say about the whole "biological" aspect of the film. In fact, as I sat down to write out this post and properly articulate my ideas, I've suddenly realized that the entire premise of the film seems to fall apart when you think about it. Spoilers ... I guess, even though there are plenty of spoilers already.
In the story there comes a time when Judy gives that interview with all the reporters, and she awkwardly manages give a response that implies there's some kind of biological reason for the predators to be going crazy (which we later find out to not be the case). It's quite obviously an allegory for racism, so we're probably supposed to be thinking about these statements in terms of how they relate to real world racism, and in that context it makes sense why the story is implying she was out of line to say such things, but I felt that it really doesn't make sense within the context of the story's universe.
After all, we're supposed to believe in this world where all these different species have evolved to become intelligent, but are we really supposed to believe that they've all completely abandoned any instincts they have? Humans haven't. Human's still have a great deal of behavior that is based on our evolutionary past, and while it makes sense that other races haven't diverged enough to have a difference in behavior, the animals in Zootopia have all come from completely different backgrounds, so it becomes rather hard to believe that they've all evolved to become so similar that they're analogous to races.
Obviously the question of whether or not there is enough biological difference between the species to influence their behavior can be answered by the screen writers, and they can give any answer they want. If they said it rains pizza every Tuesday in that universe, then it is so, regardless of how illogical it is, but the evidence presented seems to imply there is a significant biological difference between them that drives there behavior, whether that message was intentional or otherwise.
Just to give a few examples, there's that scene where Nick is selling the popsicles to what I'm pretty sure are lemmings, and they all follow each other mindlessly in a line, as is the myth about them. There are the sloths, who are shown to be extremely slow, and seemly dimwitted due to how long it takes them to understand other people. And of course, there are the wolves, who are shown to have a seemly uncontrollable urge to howl when they hear others do so. And the film is packed full of this kind of stuff, so the list just goes on and on.
In fact ... come to think of it, the entire idea that it would be wrong to stereotype the behavior of the different species just doesn't really work when all the evidence in the film seems to suggest there is in fact certain behavior that members of that species will exhibit due to their biology.
They're trying to push the messages about discriminatory hiring practices, yet, I'm left wondering whether they considered the effect the sloth scene would have on that. They are all shown to be extremely slow in their every action and line of dialog, but would that not make them completely unsuitable to work pretty much anywhere? Obviously the DMV scene is a joke about the bureaucracy and red tape that the DMV is known for, and I get that their ineptitude and unsuitability for the job is being played for laughs, but when you actually think about it beyond the comedic intent it seems to suggest that you would be completely justified in not hiring any sloths. I'm sure you could handwave it with an explanation that they're useful in other ways, but plenty of other jobs do require speed, so there is bound to be plenty of jobs that they couldn't effectively do.
I'm also left thinking about the wolves once more, and their superior sense of smell that's clearly implied. It seems like that would make them superior for certain roles as well.
As is usually the case with these sorts of premises, a lot of the comedy is based off of the animals all being some kind of humorous stereotype of animal behavior, and I'm now left wondering whether they considered what kind of effect this would have on the whole "don't judge others by their species" message. Unless I'm missing something here, it just seems like comedy ideas absolutely kill the message that the animal should be allowed to take on what ever role they want, when it's clear that certain species are better suited to certain roles.
I guess to put it simply, the story seems to be pushing the message of racial equality and anti-stereotyping ... in a fictional world that operates on an extreme version of scientific racism when ever the writers need to come up with a joke.
OT: Since I first saw the trailer for this movie I actually have wanted to go see it since it looked actually very funny. I'm happy to hear it actually deals with a lot of adult themes as well.
You thought internets people wouldn't get all anal and defense over a lighthearted commentary on stereotyping, Marter? You thought wrong! And so did i, apparently. Oh dear, we still have so far to go.
The clever writing, the clever pacing, the clever way that the characters solved their problems. Only a few times were the gags or solutions to issues telegraphed a little too obviously - but its a disney movie, not one aimed exclusively for a +30 audience
No, what I really loved about the movie was the "darkest before the dawn" moment if you would.
You know this: Its the point in the movie when all seems lost, when it looks like the hero or heroes are basically defeated and that the baddies have won. This is always followed by the hero getting that second wind, and then winning the day.
Like in kung fu panda 2 during the final battle when they shot the canon and it looks like they're about to shoot the panda for good. but then inner peace! And throwing explosive canon balls around barehanded, because kung fu!
Or the time in Big Hero 6 during the final battle when the bad guy has everyone on the defence, just about to win - then... "think outside the box" - and suddenly people start winning!
Pretty much all disney and pixar and whatnot movies use this - and its usually always during the final battle that at some point everything will look lost...
Zootopia does not do this.
Instead the main plot about the missing mammals is wrapped up, our heroes celebrate - but then Judy messes up with the press-conference really bad, quits her job, goes home, fade to black.
All the major plot-threads were wrapped up. The movie could simply have ended here.
I don't recall any disney movies where the hero gets defeated so badly that they just give up completely - never mind so much that they just go back to their old life and then even have a time-skip after that.
but they do here.
...and that makes this movie quite dark in some respects - and it makes it feel quite real, because I can quite easily imagine that a police officer would do that after basically spreading seemingly irreparable panic through the population after messing up at a press conference.
It makes the movie feel all the more real: The character took responsibility for her actions, including the consequence that by doing what she had done, she had caused a lot more harm than good - to which end she removed herself from the situation.
In a lot of other disney movies this kind of social realism is never approached - the hero would just brush off or hand-wave mentions of collateral damage during a big fight.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
