Disney had, essentially, built its company on cute cartoon animals. So it was hardly surprising that after John Lasseter took over the Disney animation studios in 2006, he encouraged the animators and others to continue to pitch stories about cute, funny, cartoon animals that could easily be converted into toys. What was surprising was that despite this history, corporate encouragement, and a strong box office performance from the dog-centered Bolt (2008) it took animators nearly ten years to develop another film featuring only animals, Zootopia.
Almost instantly, it became one of Disney’s all time most successful films.
MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD.
The idea behind Zootopia—that is, the concept of a world without humans, where predators and prey have learned to interact and create a city featuring sections built to accommodate different ecosystems—was the brainchild of director Brian Howard, who had started his career as a Disney animator before working as a co-director on Bolt and Tangled. Howard had a distinct fondness for cartoon animals, and was particularly inspired by the anthropomorphic Robin Hood. Chief Creative Officer John Lasseter approved his pitch, and animators started working on concept art shortly after finishing up Tangled.
To explore this anthropomorphic world, though, animators needed a plot. Their initial idea of a spy movie slowly shifted into a buddy cop movie, which shifted again in 2014 when test audiences liked sidekick bunny rabbit Judy more than crafty fox Nick, and when animators realized that good-hearted, idealistic Judy made for a better protagonist. Instead of a spy film or a cop buddy film, Zootopia became the story of a small rabbit beating the odds and achieving her dream of becoming a cop—and in the process, exposing a major government conspiracy and making new friends. Complete with various hijinks and jokes, and a great sequence focused on a bunny and a weasel stomping through a neighborhood scaled down for tiny rodents.
Not content with cute animals, Disney’s marketing staff reportedly requested one more touch: scenes featuring newscasters were tailored to individual countries, with audiences in different countries seeing different newscasters—similar to what Disney had done in a small scene in Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
The marketing staff, however, did not change the release date, keeping Zootopia locked into a March 2016 premiere, even as the filmmakers found themselves needing to make multiple changes. It was not the first or the last time that Disney animators had found themselves scrambling through last minute rewrites, ADR sessions and plot changes (indeed, as they were rushing through this, story artists in the same building were realizing, grimly, that a number of hasty changes would also need to be made to the upcoming Moana). Still, the questionable bits that remain in Zootopia can probably be blamed on a lack of time to iron out various issues.
Most notably, the problem that Zootopia wants to be deeper than it is, becoming a meditation on current issues of racism and sexism, viewed through the eyes of an animal metaphor, with the now-familiar lessons of Don’t Judge By Appearances and Stereotypes Bad, Judging Individuals, Good. It’s not that I don’t approve the message, or that I can’t appreciate some of Zootopia’s sharper—mostly visual—comments on this. A few scenes in particular stand out: Judy and Clawhauser discussing whether or not “cute” is an appropriate word; Bellweather blathering about how her boss consistently underestimates and underuses her, and the consequences of that underestimation; and a moment when a fox apologies for letting his anger issues overwhelm him. Judy and Nick’s angry confrontation over stereotyping predators is another emotional highlight, and one that focuses on just how much pain these stereotypes can cause. Judy’s later realization of just how not heroic she’s been here is also great.
The film makes a quieter, more subtle point as well: most of the characters in Zootopia are men, and of the five women with major speaking parts (Judy, Bellweather, Bonnie Hopps, Fru Fru, and Shakira—oops, I mean, Gazelle), four are from the smaller animal species, with the animation making a point of how much they move in a world of larger animals. Granted, this is also true of at least one of the men—Mr. Big—and to a certain extent of Nick, who is considerably smaller than the various polar bears, jaguars and even bighorn sheep he encounters. But this is still a film that for the most part shows us smaller women (and Shakira) moving among larger animals, many of whom can literally eat them.
But that element also illustrates just why the prey versus predator metaphor is sometimes an uneasy fit for the racism issue Zootopia is trying to tangle with. For one, Zootopia takes place in a world that is deliberately designed to segregate certain species in order to accommodate their needs. That is, small rodents have their area sized down to accommodate them, polar bears get to live in the cold, and so on. Cars are sized to fit various species, from tall giraffe cars to tiny mouse cars. We don’t get to see all of these various environments, but the film shows many of them, suggesting that although the animals do interact in certain locations, they often live separate lives.
Wheelchair user sidenote: Disney animators later stated that they worked with Americans with Disabilities specialists to design some aspects of Zootopia, to explain how these different sized/needed species could interact, an approach I found fascinating largely because portions of the film design seem to deliberately go against the spirit of the ADA. That is, the general idea is to design buildings and other items so that people with disabilities can have the same access to the same places.
And yet Zootopia has a number of places where that accessibility is not available. The miniaturized rodent area, for instance, is pretty much inaccessible even to the relatively smaller rabbits and weasels; on the other side, the reception desk at the police station is evidently designed to accommodate larger animals, being nearly inaccessible to smaller animals—a touch that I, as someone often unable to access high check-in stands at hotels, banks and airports, appreciated.
Most blatantly, several police training areas are shown to be inaccessible to smaller animals, and the film celebrates the way Judy figures out how to overcome those inaccessible areas, rather than showing us police trainers changing these areas to accommodate her needs. It’s almost a message against creating accessible places: No ramp? No problem—the wheelchair user can figure out some other way to overcome those stairs. It may not be the intended message, since elsewhere, Zootopia seems to be trying to make the case that everyone should be treated equally, and have equal access to service, regardless of size or abilities, but the message is still there.
Related thought: given that Zootopia makes a major point that Judy is the hands down physically smallest member of the Zootopia police force, to the point where her fellow cops believe that her size means she cannot be an effective cop, how on earth is the rodent area policed, given that in that area even the comparatively tiny Judy looks like Godzilla—and is nearly as destructive—as she and Weaselton chase each other through the area. Do the rodents really rely on the large, elephant and lion sized cops to police that area, and if so, how do they get INTO the complex to do the standard sort of policing?
But I digress. Back to the predator/prey as an analogy for racism. As said, I like the concept, but the execution has a major flaw: the plot, which centers on the idea that predators and prey have a very real biological difference, one that can be triggered by chemicals, causing predators, but not prey, to revert back to their more primitive selves. Which makes this a rather poor analogy for racism. I’m all for the anti-stereotyping message, but as presented in the film, it’s not exactly anti-stereotyping.
It doesn’t help that the film itself engages in several stereotypes. For instance, with the exception of Judy, the rabbits are all shown to be breeding like, well, rabbits. Nick the fox is a trickster. The sloths are, well, slothful. In some cases, these include ethnic stereotypes as well: the mice with Italian accents are mobsters; the Indian elephant is a yoga instructor. Nearly all of the animals have legal names connected to their species.
To counter this, the film does show several characters that move beyond those animal stereotypes—Dawn Bellweather, who, as it turns out, is not all that sheep like, for all of her blather; the noble lion Leodore Lionheart has been doing some not entirely noble things; and, as it turns out, one of the sloths is perhaps not quite as slothful as he’s led people to believe. And, of course, Judy, who manages to jump beyond her rabbit beginnings.
But if Zootopia doesn’t quite work as a Deep Film, it does work very well as a buddy cop movie, a mystery, and a fond, lighthearted parody of film noir, particularly when Judy and Nick find themselves working to uncover a vast conspiracy, and in a moment near the end of the film, when the two team up to escape from an Evil Sheep. Quite a lot of this is not just adorably cute, but clever, if occasionally a bit too obvious—as in the Godfather rip off scenes—and all of it is fast moving.
Plus, Zootopia has something rare in Disney films- a genuine mystery, complete with scrupulously placed visual and verbal clues and plenty of misdirection. It’s not a mystery that will really puzzle or surprise any adult viewer, but small viewers might well be tricked for a time—that, or thrilled to work out the mystery all on their own.
Where Zootopia really shines, however, is with Judy Hopps, the bunny who is determined to surpass her bunny destiny and become far more than anyone thinks she can be. But she’s not just motivated by ambition: she genuinely wants to do good and help people, no matter what the terrible odds.
That inherent goodness works against her more than once. Several characters easily trick her by taking advantage of her need to believe that most people, including tax evaders, health policy violators, and mobsters, are honestly good deep down inside. In some cases very deep down inside. On the other hand, her inherent optimism about animal nature often proves true—to her advantage. And her fierce determination to protect people gains her some powerful and important allies, not to mention Nick’s reluctant but growing admiration and friendship.
Judy has some other admirable qualities as well. When she screws up, badly, she admits it—faster than her superiors do—and unhesitatingly faces the consequences. She’s a workaholic. And best of all, Judy thinks. Oh, she can sometimes react too quickly, or not think enough—that issue of trust again—but over and over, the film shows us Judy facing a problem and carefully thinking through how she can solve it, despite her limitations. No claws to climb over a wall? She can hop on people and things. Too small and weak to defeat her opponent in the ring? Use a slingshot effect to knock him down. Demoted to meter maid? Work to outdo expectations so that she can become more.
Oh, and as one small child pointed out, Judy can JUMP ON THINGS.
In summary, Judy is great.
Almost great enough to let me overlook some of Zootopia’s other flaws. These include what I feel may, long term, be too great a dependence on popular culture jokes, to the point where some aren’t just jokes, but actual plot points. And clever though many of the references are, as I come to the end of this Read-Watch, I can’t help but wonder if, long term, these will end up working against Zootopia. We’ve noted, both in the posts and comments, the way so many of the various references and casting jokes in earlier films are already lost on many viewers—even though all Disney films, even the 1937 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, are still within living memory, if increasingly distant living memory for many. Granted, I laughed, but I found myself wondering if, forty years from now, viewers still would be laughing.
Plus, I have some major plot questions. One—why hasn’t a fox joined the police force before this? Bunnies, sure, I get—the rabbits are all smaller than the other police officers, considerably less intimidating, and most of them, unlike Judy, seem perfectly content to settle down to a farming life. But foxes would seem to be nearly ideal undercover detectives in this world; why isn’t Zootopia using them?
And, sure, SPOILERS FOR THE ENDING IN THIS PARAGRAPH Zootopia might be divided up into about 10% predators, 90% prey—though notably, the characters with speaking parts don’t fit into that ratio—allowing the prey to vastly outnumber the predators, but, and I think this is a pretty important but, the predators still have the ability to EAT the prey, so really, is turning them back into uncontrollable predators who would love to eat a nice tasty sheep in order to convince everyone to get rid of the predators really the best approach here? It’s not that I’m not sympathetic to the issues faced by the bunnies and sheep in the film. I’m just thinking that perhaps there was a safer way to handle them.
Disney, incidentally, did answer the question of, er, what are all of the obligate carnivores eating given that they aren’t eating adorable bunny rabbits. The answer: “fish.” If you pay very close attention, a fish market can be seen in one scene, and not a single fish speaks in the film, implying that they, unlike mammals, never evolved and therefore can be an ethical source of protein.
Most adults, I think, can look past these flaws, or enjoy the jokes. And for small children, I think Zootopia offers a different appeal: it’s a visual example of a physically tiny person outwitting and defeating larger people. Even Nick, to a certain extent, falls within this category: as a fox, he’s smaller than most of the predators and even some of the prey that he and Judy encounter, and the final scenes show him surrounded by larger cops. But the centerpiece here is Judy, a tiny rabbit who constantly hears “No,” from larger creatures and finds clever ways to turn that into “yes”—and finds ways to get around objects that seem too big or high for her. It’s wish fulfillment at its best, and I think this helps account for the film’s popularity among small humans.
That popularity helped make Zootopia one of the surprise breakout hits of the year, despite its unusual release date of March 2016. As I type, the film has taken in $1.023 billion at the box office, putting it among an elite group of 27 films that have passed the $1 billion mark (presumably soon to be 28, once the next Star Wars film hits theatres.) The June DVD/Blu-Ray release was also a phenomenal success, and I spotted a number of small children happily clutching small rabbits and demanding Zootopia trading pins at the theme parks, one happily repeating that “JUDY CAN JUMP ON THINGS,” which if not exactly the message I took from the film, is an accurate assessment of her character.
The unexpected success has led to rumors of a sequel, or at the very least a Zootopia TV series, though as I type, Disney has yet to confirm any of these rumors. That might be because they’re a bit busy with their other 2016 animated hit, Moana, coming up next.
Mari Ness lives in central Florida.









I saw Zootopia on DVD a while back, and I actually didn’t like it as much as I’d expected or hoped. Certainly I admire what it had to say, and I respect the effort quite a lot, and I think it’s an important statement in these times (“Fear always works” was an even more relevant message than they realized), but I found its execution as a movie to be a bit underwhelming somehow, a bit ordinary. I love the idea of the movie better than the actual result. Maybe it’s because I watched it right after watching Kung Fu Panda 3, which was so visually spectacular and innovative that Zootopia was kind of bland-looking in comparison. Maybe it was just a bit too Disneyesque for my tastes. (I think I mentioned in the Lady and the Tramp rewatch that Judy and Nick remind me visually of Lady and Tramp, and their story is kind of similar, allowing for the fact that Judy’s looking for career success rather than romantic success.)
It didn’t help that the featured Shakira song irritated the hell out of me. It pretty much ruined the big reveal of Zootopia, which might’ve been really impressive if that awful song hadn’t been distracting me so much.
By the way, apparently the film was renamed Zootropolis in Europe, due to some sort of trademark issue.
I was pretty astounded when I realized Steve Buscemi did NOT voice the weasel – that it was instead Alan Tudyk.
Anyway – I really love this movie, and my son really loves it, I love the character development we see in Gideon Grey, I love the meta humor of Kristen Bell voicing a sloth, I love the commentery on ‘fear always wins’ as the basic MO for a lot of corrupt politicians, I love that silly dance party at the end and I love Judy/Nick’s relationship. On one hand I kinda ship them because they had so much chemistry together, on the other they work so well as a strong friendship it seems a shame to take away from a good example of a cross-gender friendship like that. (I tend to ship all the things so…)
But I do remember feeling like the metaphor fails in some ways. Of course racism is bad, we know this – except in this soceity, there actually IS truth to the idea that there’s a biological component to their drives and instincts. Then again I guess in an anthropomorphic world we don’t have to hold these versions of foxes and rabbits to the same biological standards as earth foxes and rabbits ;) And I like that they do show that the toxin works on prey species as well, so that lessens some of the biological justification (at least in this universe). Also, is it undermining its own message when the sloths actually ARE slow? I don’t know – probably the answer is that things are complex. There are stereotypes/generalizations (not necessarily negative) that arise out of observations of a whole, but it’s important to know they don’t define us, or apply to every individual in equal amounts.
I did appreciate how the tensions and racism weren’t easily applicable to one specific issue – in this case it’s actually the people who were once in power/priveleged who are now facing the brunt of prejudice and fear, and I think in some ways that’s an interesting thing to look at.
I think you bring up some really interesting points regarding the city and the accessibility of it. First of all, I think the movie posits that Zootopia isn’t actually as progressive/utopian as it claims to be. Perhaps not out of malice, but just out of obliviousness. So in some ways it makes sense that there are still a lot of places where there isn’t equal access (too tall desks, etc). But on the whole it does seem like the city center was MORE integrated than other parts; there were establishing shots of places serving animals of various sizes in the train station, etc. But it also makes sense there would be climate specific enclaves too – and I think that is actually a cool thing. I like that it’s not a totally homogenous city. Perhaps access needs to be something that could be handled a little better, but then again, would a gazelle even want to go into an arctic environment in the first place? So I think it at least makes sense that tose areas are more or less created to be optimal for the beings that inhabit those climates – but the city center should definitely be more integrated. As for who is policing Rodentia, obviously it’s the Mob :P (Does it bother anybody else that Judy is basically colluding with the mob??)
Regarding your question about turning them back into uncontrollable predators – of cours eit’s not the best/safest way, but Bellweather doesn’t care about that. She’s basically a terrorist and doesn’t care who gets hurt, as long as she is in power and is able to effectively turn the prey against the predators and since she IS in power, she’d probably be able to enact some kind of policy to expel them, remove them, etc (and remember, she is the one who controls who turns into a savage and when).
I absolutely adored this film, perhaps more than it deserved. But the deep care put into the way environments differed for size and needs, the quite sincere message, the adorable characters, the nicely constructed mystery… They all really grabbed me.
Because pedantry is obligatory, I will quibble with one point! “the plot, which centers on the idea that predators and prey have a very real biological difference, one that can be triggered by chemicals, causing predators, but not prey, to revert back to their more primitive selves.” This is actually not the case! Judy finds out about the way that chemical works when her mother talks about an uncle who went mad and bit someone, taking a chunk out of their arm, when exposed to that chemical. Prey species actually react the exact same way to the chemical: they just aren’t the ones being targeted with it.
I like that the themes are a bit of a confused mess. If it had been more coherent, I think it would have felt too much like a after-school special. Our own structures of privilege and discrimination are complicated and contradictory enough that the way Zootopia gets it sort of wrong and sort of right makes it feel more like a real society. It helps subordinate the themes to the story rather than the other way around.
I am somewhat surprised you left out mentioning the fairly graphic sexual-assault-metaphor early on. (Also, I came away from the movie convinced Gideon is gay.)
I agree that the racism metaphor doesn’t work quite as well as the writers hoped, but it’s still a good effort for what it is. You commented on the gender issue, and while it’s true that there are a lot of male characters, I think it’s worth noting that both the primary protagonist and antagonist are female, which I didn’t even notice until well after I’d seen it. I did note that Judy’s training instructor was a female polar bear. She’s not a huge speaking part, but she is one of the few large female animals in the movie. I suspect it was because her primary plot function is belittling Judy (which is part of her job, and likely not malicious), and that having a male predator character do that would be a bit too much.
Now I can’t stop thinking about who patrols the rodent district. This is going to bother me as much as when a friend pointed out that none of the animals in the movie have visible whiskers, despite several (Nick especially) having visible markings where the whiskers would be rooted.
My assumption was that there were no foxes on the police force because of racism. The same stereotyping that was keeping bunnies off the force was also keeping foxes off the force – while the people in charge saw bunnies as too weak to be cops, the foxes were too dishonest and couldn’t be cops either. In fact I could have sworn that this was actually made explicit in the movie by Nick at one point, but I guess I’m misremembering.
Also fadeaccompli @3 is correct – the chemical would drive anyone hit with it mad, not just predators. It’s easy to miss because it is just that one line of dialogue about Judy’s uncle and they never actually show any prey going mad but it’s there. The conspirators were very careful to only target predators with it to make sure that nobody figured that out – hence the meth lab setup in the subway to protect the sheep extracting the chemical from being exposed to it.
Yes, it’s established via dialogue that the rabbit who accidentally ate some fresh night howler injured his own relative so badly that she still has the scar under her fur.
@2/Lisamarie: What’s meta about Kristen Bell playing a sloth?
Incidentally, I assume that the “Breaking Bad” reference is one of the ones that you think won’t age well. I’ve never seen that show, and only know the basic premise. That was enough to tell me that there was likely a deliberate reference going on there, but it didn’t detract from my understanding or enjoyment of the movie.
The fact that the animals fit their stereotypes can be seen as commentary on how we will fulfil people’s expectations of us. It can be very difficult to break out of boxes that people have placed you in and without consciously fighting the stereotype, we will often live up to them.
That’s my take on it anyway. I loved the movie and consider it to be Disney’s best animated work in many years. Better than many Pixar films.
@5 samesies!
@9 Kristin Bell loves sloths. Look on youtube, there are some adorable clips of her interacting with them.
Mari, I’m a little confused by your commentary on the police desk being inaccessible to smaller animals – what do you mean by appreciating it?
Tiny town should have it’s own set of cops – after all, there are plenty of pint sized predators. Ironically despite everything animated would tell you, weasels are the smallest carnivores, with stoats, martens, minks, ferrets, otters and badgers all being increasingly larger members of the family. So Duke Weaselton should actually be a barely a third bigger than the shrews, not a giant like he appears.
According to the Disney wiki, Judy was originally supposed to chase Nick into Little Rodentia, which makes a lot more sense scalewise.
@9 – Am I the first person to introduce you to this? To say Kristin Bell loves sloths is…an understatement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5jw3T3Jy70
@11 – good point! :)
Also – I forgot to mention the other funny thing about this movie that cracks me up – realizing that Alan Tudyk is (yet again) playing a character that is referred to as both Duke Weaselton and Duke Wesselton in the same movie ;)
Apparently the plot got changed a lot in development. Based on some deleted scenes, the original setting involved predators having to wear shock collars.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkJGLCleFmI
It’s … pretty unsettling.
@12: She probably means that she’s experienced having trouble with high countertops and the like, before. I don’t know how Mari is built physically, but she seems to imply that she’s pretty short by what she says there.
@16 The deleted scenes are pretty dark. I’d be surprised if they could make it into a coherent kid’s movie.
@17 – I would assume she means that she has experience with this sort of thing because she uses a wheelchair. I know she’s talked about it before in other columns, and that part of the review is prefaced with ‘wheelchair user sidenote’.
Now that we’re nearly at the end, let me repeat my earlier suggestion/hope that you’ll consider doing a read-watch series of Disney’s live-action adaptations.
“…of the five women with major speaking parts (Judy, Bellweather, Bonnie Hopps, Fru Fru, and Shakira—oops, I mean, Gazelle), four are from the smaller animal species…”
If you’re going to count Fru Fru and Gazelle as “major speaking parts”, you really should count Nangi as well. Incidentally, one thing that bothered me is how small Bellwether is; she’s about the same height as Judy, when she really should be closer in size to Doug.
“Most blatantly, several police training areas are shown to be inaccessible to smaller animals, and the film celebrates the way Judy figures out how to overcome those inaccessible areas, rather than showing us police trainers changing these areas to accommodate her needs.”
I take your point, but I don’t think that your example is very well-chosen. Firstly, the police’s lack of accommodation isn’t presented as a good thing, and secondly, it’s not discriminatory to bar someone from a job they’re physically incapable of performing.
“…is turning them back into uncontrollable predators who would love to eat a nice tasty sheep in order to convince everyone to get rid of the predators really the best approach here?”
I don’t think she was planning to do that to all the predators, just a small handful in order to turn public opinion against them.
Couple of other miscellaneous points:
Is is just me, or does Duke Weaselton look a lot like Scrat in that still frame?
Mr. Big and his daughter are shrews, not mice (not the same thing at all; shrews aren’t even rodents).
As for who polices the rodent district, naturally it’s the Rat Patrol!
Failing that, there’s always The Great Mouse Detective…
@21. Or the Rescue Rangers.
I mildly enjoyed the movie, liked the different environments, but loved the character Judy. Like Mari I appreciated her ability to acknowledge having messed up–this is far too seldom presented as a key trait in someone we’re supposed to admire. Like noblehunter, I would say that the fact that the prejudices in Zootopia don’t map directly to racism is a feature, not a bug. Brings up the issues around prejudice and stereotyping in a way that isn’t automatically slotted as a particular human political position, and therefore lends itself better to conversation.
Overly picky note: it’s “Bellwether,” no “a”. A wether is a castrated ram, and a bellwether, the flock-leading sheep, while not always a wether, is said by some sources (e.g. dictionary.com) to be always a male sheep. The flock-leading sheep got its name from usually being a wether wearing a bell.
I think one of the takeaways at the end of the movie was that “life is messy”. Judy says that while surrounded by all these different critters, and I think the point she makes isn’t that people have to be treated exactly the same, but that people ARE different, and it’s that diversity that can make a society strong, so long as we don’t let stereotypes make us overlook the important things they can accomplish. In doing this, people are going to make mistakes, small ones like Clawhauser calling her cute, and big ones like Judy herself had to own up to, but a desire to work together can overcome that. Sloths aren’t going to become fast. Judy isn’t going to lift cars off people like her rhino colleague. But they can’t and won’t be dismissed, whether it’s by cracking a case or… somehow managing to run the DMV effectively. XD (Seriously, Judy might’ve been frustrated but the lines in there were shorter than any DMV I’ve been too. :D She might’ve gotten out fast enough if it weren’t for Nick sabotaging the process!)
@24/Bluebell: The messiness is one of the things I liked best about the ideas of the movie. It didn’t reduce things to a single, simplistic “racism is bad” allegory; it acknowledged the complexities and ambiguities of a society where people with differences try to live together and respect and navigate each other’s differences. What was particularly good was how it wasn’t just about obvious, hardcore hate, but about all the little preconceptions and prejudices that well-meaning people can have about other groups without even realizing it, and the way we all have to recognize those blind spots within ourselves and work to overcome them.
Never seen it; still not really interested. I’m just not into computer animation of the ordinary world, i.e. not the highly textured world of bugs or toys or fish. But I’m glad it tried for depth and message. It sounds a lot more intellectual than all of the films I saw previews of when I watched Finding Dory this summer, except Moana.
Following up on #3 and #7, because I came here to say the same thing… You seem to have missed the crux of the ‘regression’ plot, in that Bellwether was specifically targeting predators in order to play on that stereotype and they weren’t ‘regressing’ at all – granted, the film didn’t spend much time on the explanation, but Judy’s revelation that “a bunny CAN go savage!” was the driving point for her leaping into the truck and haring (heh) back to the city. There is no biological difference that makes predators more dangerous, yet the ugly stereotype and racism remains – that’s the whole point.
Plus, there may well have been a safer way to handle the predators, but ‘safe’ wasn’t Bellwether’s aim. She needed an attack to turn the prey population against the minority predators – the nastier, the better. In that, I don’t think the film missed the mark at all (and gave me a good way to talk to my 10yo about issues of prejudice, stereotypes and unscrupulous politicians willing to exploit them).
My only question is: why is a Columbian pop star playing an African gazelle? Sure, she sang for the South Africa World Cup, but wouldnt it have been more appropriate to choose something from South America?
I am watching Zootopia right now, even without my kids around. I really love the movie, the way they explore discrimination in all its different forms. I especially appreciate the way Judy is sidelined as a meter maid, and the knowledge that being a great meter maid won’t actually help her be a real cop. It also includes the best WORST parenting advice ever. “Its important to have dreams, just don’t believe in them too much”.
My main concer with the movie is that Judy seems somewhat corrupt. She trades a health violation for a favour, and then is going to be godmother to a mob boss’s grandson.
Part of the reason the metaphor is messy, I think, is that it’s not always a metaphor about racism. There are times where it definitely is (the “go back where you came from scene”, for one), and other times where it tracks more closely with, for instance, sexism (the resistance cute little Judy gets to being taken seriously as a cop). I don’t think it’s a bad thing to have the movie be about prejudice in all its forms, but collapsing all its forms down to speciesism inevitably results in some awkward jostling.
Re: who’s policing the Tiniest Borough:
I actually thought that the presence of the mob here was a nod to the fact that it wasn’t being policed by the large predators on the force.
As others have pointed out, that’s not the case at all- and actually makes the racism analogy stronger. The revelation that comes at the beginning of the third act (right after where Judy quits and goes home), is that there isn’t REALLY a biological trigger causing predators to go savage, but that they were under the influence of some sort of toxin that can affect both predators AND prey.
In fact, the villain’s plan was to make everyone THINK that there was a biological trigger that causes predators to revert to their primitive state, and that prey did not have this trigger. This is what allowed them to prey (see what I did there) on the fear that any predator could just snap at any time, rallying a huge chunk of the population around their platform of protecting prey animals from the “Savage” predators that kept randomly mauling people- a legitimately scary concern that would cause even the most open-minded of people to take a more careful look at those around them. In fact, when I first saw the movie, up until the point where Judy realized what was actually going on, I thought that they might be dealing with an outbreak of rabies. But as it turns out, that was exactly the illusion that the villain wanted to create- and they did so EXTREMELY effectively, fooling not only the general public, but also the protagonists, and even the audience- and critics such as yourself. Don’t worry, you’re not the only one who fell for it- even I did before the reveal of the Night Howlers.
It’s what makes Bellwether’s plan so ingenious. It tricks you into thinking that they’re right- preds can go savage at any moment, so you’d better give them a wide berth. Not necessarily promoting outright racism at first, but encouraging people to take the small steps away from inclusiveness and towards full prey-supremacy.
In my opinion, it’s the smartest plan of any Disney villain ever. Bellwether only messed up once, after she had already won, which led to her downfall. Her mistake was thinking that Judy was the same naive rabbit she had met at the graduation, and who she had helped track down the missing mammals. She was counting on Judy’s trusting nature to outweigh any suspicions she may have had. And even when that failed, she is so good at improvising that she came within a fraction of an inch of recovering from her mistake and winning. Seriously, if she hadn’t called for the police when she had, and hadn’t taken into account how close the natural history museum was to the ZPD headquarters, she could have shot Nick with a second dart and destroyed that carrot pen before the police even arrived.
TL;DR: the whole point was that prey CAN go savage, but the villain convinced everyone that only preds could, which led to a rise in racial tension that could be subtly exploited. The hero only managed to beat them by the slimmest of chances, and that was mainly due to pure luck and poor timing on the villain’s part.
Oh, one other thing- despite how obviously toyetic the movie could have been, there’s been almost none of that! Seriously, it is nigh-on impossible to find zootopia merchandise in the sea of Star Wars, Marvel, and even Finding Dory merch! And the whole time Zootopia was in theaters, I did not see a single ad for it anywhere- and I live in a major city, I expect at least a billboard.
Not only that, but a majority of the merch they have released is for the wrong version of the movie entirely. Not even joking. There was a version of the script where Judy would meet Nick by giving him a parking ticket, and another version where Nick was on the run from Judy for breaking out of jail. And there’s official merchandise reflecting this! There are toys for scenes that never made it in! It was changed so late in production into what we see today that the marketing department didn’t even bother to try and promote it in the typical disney manner.
And despite all that… despite being released in the absolute worst time for a movie to release… despite having its theatrical release being cut short by a far-too-early DVD/Bluray release date…it still got 99% on rotten tomatoes (98% now), and grossed over a billion dollars in the box office. And if it had been able to stay in theaters for as long as Frozen did, it could easily have become the highest grossing animated movie of all time.
But I may be a bit biased. I do run a website that is all about Zootopia and the Zootopia Fandom (Zootopia News Network, or ZNN for short), and have been studying everything related to it with intense scrutiny for the past 9 months.
One odd thing I noticed is that this is the fourth Disney film in a row (after Wreck it Ralph, Frozen and Big Hero Six) in which the identity of the villain is kept secret with the revelation being a plot twist. Prior to these four, I struggle to think of any animated Disney film that did this. If there is a villain, their role in the plot is always obvious, to the audience if not the characters, from their first appearance.
The only possible exceptions I can think of are Clayton in Tarzan and Bowler Hat Guy in Meet the Robinson’s and the latter’s revelation was clearly of a different kind from the four above.
I wonder what, if anything, can have lead to this change.
@34 – interesting point.
Maybe this is related, maybe not, but I read/watched something that was comparing the new Star Wars movie to the previous, and mentioned how one of the main differences is that TFA is built on mysteries; there are a lot of things we don’t know, and that we KNOW we don’t know (as opposed to the twist of Darth Vader being Luke’s father – before that twist, the story still mostly stands on its own)…I think this was chalked up to Abram’s particular style but maybe it does represent some kind of shift in storytelling that is more built on twists, questions, secrets, etc. Then again, none of those things are really ‘new’.
I loved the movie. Love is probably a strong word, but I think this movie earned it for me. In my see, it was intended purely for entertainment and refreshment – it did just that; yet too long for its type.
I enjoyed the general message it bore. The movie accommodates audiences from all age groups – which makes it good for family!
The Music was well in place. I liked the Shakira featured song. Graphics show that the makers of the movie put a lot of effort and have done so out of respect for the audience.
I watched this movie twice, and I still want to watch it again!
You missed a few pretty critical things here.
The idea that only the predators could “go savage” is outright wrong. In fact, that was the crux of what made Judy realize what was really going on.
When she goes home to visit her parents, it’s mentioned by her parents that her uncle once ate a night howler flower whole and went crazy and “bit the dickens out of [her] mother”.
The villains of the movie were using the pellets exclusively on predators to trick people into believing that only predators could “go savage”, but the core insight of the movie was reliant on the fact that it worked on everyone. We only see the sheep use them on predators because using them on prey species would damage what they were trying to set up.
Secondly, I don’t think that the predator/prey thing was meant to just be about “racism”, and in fact, I think that the pred/prey and big/small thing was deliberately not directly mappable onto anything human for a reason. It was supposed to be about bigotry and stereotypes in general, rather than our real-world things. It’s meant to be a parable; they could have used humans, but by not making it directly mappable onto humans, it makes the message both broader and less threatening.
And this ties into the third thing. The theme of the movie *isn’t* “stereotypes are wrong”. The message is “stereotypes exist for a reason, but we *still* need to treat people as individuals”. Indeed, the way that the movie both reinforced *and* subverted stereotypes was very conscious of this – many of the stereotypes were correct, but following them could also lead to disaster at times, and some people (such as Nick) were clearly playing up their stereotypes. Moreover, some of the setereotypes had additional layers to them – the villain was a metaphorical wolf in a literal sheep’s clothing.
This is part of why the world is often uncomfortable – becuase they aren’t all living together in perfect harmony, they all do have needs of their own, and that’s okay. Not everyone should be expected to live the same way, and it is uncomfortable to expect everyone to live in the same way. I think the point of that was to show acceptance of different ways of life.
I think it is also a presentation of the reality of the situation – that sometimes people fail to accomodate you, and while they should do so, they won’t always, and you still need to deal with it – and sometimes, they won’t actually even acknowledge it needs to be dealt with until someone does so forcibly (as Judy does). If you wait around to be accommodated, you might not be able to reach your dreams.