2017 Mar 29, 13:14:27


Author Topic: Zootopia Review [possible spoilers]  (Read 369 times)

Offline Dusky Hues

  • Traveling Artist
    • View Profile
Zootopia Review [possible spoilers]
« on: 2016 Mar 04, 11:57:44 »
So I went and saw Zootopia last night with my partners and my daughter. All four of us really enjoyed it!

I want to give you guys a review of the movie in case you're interested!

If you're not interested, don't read any more, because that's pretty much what the rest of this post is, haha.

Nothing I reveal in this review will surpass the details found in this trailer.

According to that trailer, the plot I surmised was that it was going to be about a small town cop moving to the big city, and trying to figure out why these animals seemed to be going savage, with the help of a smarmy fox that was not so willing.

I was pretty close...
The plot was actually about a small town bunny who dreamed of being a cop, and thanks to their 'mammal inclusion act', she was allowed to try out to become a member of ZPD (Zootopia Police Department). After a lot of hard work and determination, she gets there, only to be assigned to parking duty (also something I surmised from the trailer). Eventually, without proper authorization to the case, she starts down the 'rabbit hole' of this mystery of why animals seem to be going savage- with the help of a smarmy fox that was not so willing.
Put in a spoiler in case you want to go in blind.

Okay, so what was my review? It was gorgeous. I cried within ten minutes of the movie because their world creation was that beautiful.

The way the world is created is really unique, but my favorite aspects are the fact that there are individual, artificial biomes in each sector of the town. This was something that has been talked about and touched on in every trailer, sure, but they really only scratch the surface of how much thought and care went into creating the sets. Someone with a lot of love designed those city sectors, and I think everyone should take a moment to appreciate that.

The movie was very PG. The animals actually looked just like real animals standing on their hind legs. There was only one character that had what you would call 'revealingly low cut' clothing, and her chest was very flat. In fact, they were all rather androgynous, aside from posture, clothing and those animals that are dimorphic (such as male lions with manes, and rams with horns). Because they took special care in making the movie look and sound clean (there was one toilet joke in the whole movie), they were allowed to make the movie more serious and more intense when the plot started to thicken and still keep the PG rating. Violence was animal. As in, when a character did something violent was pretty wicked like the way it would look if an animal actually did those things. However, there was no blood and gore. You're safe if you don't want to see all of that.

I counted probably 6 different fur textures, not including wool, and there were four distinct different wool textures, including wooly animals besides sheep. On top of that, there were at least three different skin textures I saw. The number of animal species was unfortunately no where near as diverse as our actual planet, but it was still very diverse. At any given point where there were crowds, beside the species specific locations, there had to have been about 7 different animal species on the screen. Because they kept up with the diversity of the animals, the backgrounds never got boring. I had just as much fun watching what the background characters were doing as I did the main characters, and those of you that are FiM fans (I'm hoping all of you, haha), will likely get the same enjoyment!

The creators had to have been furry. They just had to have been. There were a few insinuations and jokes that I don't think all non-furry people would get (though they might, because they could double as animal jokes). The whole movie was very furry friendly while remaining family friendly. From the personalities of the species, to the way their world was built to accommodate the shapes and sizes of animals, furries will appreciate it.

The only complaints I really have about the movie are that in some scenes, there were graphical short cuts that kind of ruined it for me, and there weren't enough characters I could personally connect to that made me want more. My partners very much connected to Judy and Nick. It was like watching a movie about the two of them, haha. I'm really glad that they got as much enjoyment out of the movie as they did, but I personally, did not connect to any of the characters on that level. They all just felt like they didn't have much personality beyond the jokes that made them their characters on the screen. Now, we get to see Judy's background and what made her the person, er, bunny she is today, but the rest of the characters felt very flat to me. Even Nick felt flat at times.

If there was a sequel, yeah, I'd go see it, but I wouldn't be waiting at the door to see it like I was for this one. I rate it a 4/5, because it was just that gorgeous and the world creation was that stunning. I just can not ever see it as a 5/5 because I felt the design team spent more time on the world than the characters in it- even though they obviously spent lost of time on the world! (4/5 is still really high!)

Did you see it? Will you go see it? I want to know what you think!

Re: Zootopia Review [possible spoilers]
« Reply #1 on: 2016 Mar 12, 21:57:05 »
I saw it with my old roomie.

And it was amazing!

What really struck me was how much they thought out the system of Zootopia. As you mentioned they accommodate all sizes.

There is a few things however that the movie left unquestioned, one of them is, what does the carnivores eat?
It was stated that 1/10th of Zootopia is carnivorous, scientifically the ratio for food necessary to keep a carnivore running is 10 times their own weight.

that leaves them 1/10th short on food and that isn't even considering that eating fellow animals are legal. Does animals get taken into a food conversion program? To sate the need of their fellow Zootopians? Also it was stated that (if my memory does keep up) only mamals live in Zootopia. Is non mamals considered non sentient? Would they be allowed as a valid food source?

Spoiler
It was shown that Clawhauser was eating donuts, but can carnivores survive on a non eat diet in that world?

Since they are anthropomorphic we can also assume that other changes has been made to their physiology, one of them is that they no longer need to eat meat, either through science or they were omnivorous all along.


Offline Dusky Hues

  • Traveling Artist
    • View Profile
Re: Zootopia Review [possible spoilers]
« Reply #2 on: 2016 Mar 16, 18:01:20 »
The lack of meat and meat foods was something I noticed too. I even looked over the concept art (at least all that was available to the public) at one point trying to find a restaurant or grocery store sign that had anything to do with meat, or even synthetic products or processed proteins like tofu, and never saw any. I'm not sure what the implications there were.

Maybe they don't eat meat in that world because they are more "civilized"? Sure, many of those carnivores were primary or obligate carnivores, but maybe after generations of body training and vitamin supplements they don't have to actually eat meat products? There are lots of vegan ways they could potentially get the supplements they needed, for sure, but they would have to have groomed themselves that way over many generations, in my opinion. I don't really want to start a conversation over vegan vs. non-vegan diets, but I honestly feel that's what the movie was implying...

Maybe someone else that saw the movie saw something we missed! Maybe there was a carnivore in the background munching down on a ham bone that we didn't notice, or maybe they eat fish and birds!