Already watched it last weekend. Will watch it again next Saturday

I try not to get hyped over movies before their release. I didn't follow Zootopia too closely, but when I did see it, it went above and beyond my expectations, it was just great. :3

Also, before watching, I thought people were going a little crazy with the fanart this soon, but now I can't get enough.

Watched it since February (Was premiered in Mexico last week of the month) It was amazing! I loved it and now I just can't wait for it to go on BR so I can add it to my video collection hehe

must see it... TT_TT

So what will your first fan art based on the movie be?

Man I dunno. I always feel like I lose all my creativity when it comes to fan work

Gideon Grey because there's not enough of that sexy adult fox ;D

But, just imagine the fanart possibilities!!

It was quite a lot of fun. I liked it.

After seeing it and reading your review I have to agree that this is why I liked it so much.

*hugs!* cx

This Journal gives me new life. I'm just so happy that you're excited!!
Ah, and yes. I plan on watching Zootopia with my cousins this weekend! X)

I'm still going to see it again with more friends.

But I still had a few minor issues. While the social commentary narrative becomes necessary for the second half (where I feel like it redeems itself), it felt REAAAAALLY forced in the first half.

It's awesome! \OwO/ What we need now is some fluff pics with Judy and Nick.

Zootopia is the sixth movie I've seen with my policy of intentionally going into a theater ignorant. The only trailer I've seen was the DMV one.

And it was worth the effort.

It's also a damn good example of "Furry as a Genre", giving the one-step-remove from humans to allow for better discussion or usage of themes and ideas that might hit too close to home and ruin the movie or story for people. I feel that Zootopia was formulaic - Whodunnit + Buddy Cop + Idealist/Cynic Teamup - but that isn't a bad thing in of itself when the formula is well implemented. Which it was.

There were only two scenes which broke me into analysis and "okay, so this will happen here", which led to three correct guesses as to how the plot was going to go (based upon said formula). That's a fairly damn good rate for me, I usually can't help but analyze and guess what's going on while watching the movie. Or reading a book (I rate Angels and Demons highly for this, as I wasn't able to guess the ending. Da Vinci Code, by the same author, was obvious).

The various themes hit me personally fairly hard, although I cannot explain in further detail without spoiling, but suffice it to say I've been in the spot a character has been in. I chose a different path, but certainly it had the impact.

Zootopia also passes the bechdel test (Two named female characters talking to each other on a subject other than a man or male character) fairly easily, and while we see a lot of Nick Wilde, the camera is stuck to Judy Hopps the entire time. Zootopia is her story, and she's the main character of it. It's a strong female role and a strong female story, without the character's gender playing an important role in of itself. Gender is set aside for other issues, but the themes and morals certainly would apply here.

In storytelling, there were a lot of callbacks and foreshadowing, and a Checkov's Gun or two - all of which I appreciate. I love it when elements of a story show up earlier than when they're given import, even if it's just a scene or three beforehand. I didn't even catch some of the references until the day after and thought about them some more.

Music-wise, the only thing I noticed is main theme Try Everything. I can't recall noticing any of the orchestration, as opposed to Kung Fu Panda 3, where the background music and themes were very tightly enmeshed with the action.

I wish I could give a good rundown on further themes and morals inside Zootopia without spoilers; discussing events in the movie within their context and drawing parallels to real world issues would be an interesting thing to do.

All in all, I fully approve of this movie. It has a good setup. We feel for the characters, whom are not two-dimensional - their motivations make perfect sense in context, and it introduces several concepts in an understandable way for children, and hopefully adults as well.

I'd say I'd have to rate this a good solid 10/10, would be willing to see in theaters again (Joining the ranks of Guardians of the Galaxy, and the original Toy Story).

The score was definitely not its strong point.

I personally didn't feel like for the message the movie was trying to convey, it properly addressed the source of conflict being a learned behavior. There were a lot of easy-shot jokes at the expense of the movie's narrative, which felt forced.

I have mixed feelings on the Bechdel test. While it's a great thing to have female characters that aren't solely there to progress a male character, the test itself makes it seem that it's a commonality in movies, where the movies chosen to support the need for the test are cherry-picked, at best. On that note, most female-female conversations push the "Us versus Them" idea, so that could be just as bad as the female-female conversation being solely about men trope.

As a response to the Bechdel test:

"the test itself makes it seem that it's a commonality in movies"
It is. A significant number of movies fail the Bechdel test, with just under 58% of over 6000 films passing all three requirements ( http://bechdeltest.com/statistics/ ).

"where the movies chosen to support the need for the test are cherry-picked"
Misunderstanding of the point of examples, and ignores or disregards large-library analysis (as per bechdeltest.com's >6000 films).

" most female-female conversations push the "Us versus Them" idea"
Misunderstanding of the point of contention, which is that the conversation can be about anything except discussing a man. The point of that test is to see if the female characters have depth to them, or as Virginia Woolf said, "without exception they are shown in their relation to men", a criticism she had of fiction in her day (A Room of One's Own).

The issue with the Bechdel test itself is twofold: First, good movies with strong female characters could potentially fail the test. Second, movies that by setting or other reason do not have any female characters would also fail.

The benefits of the Bechdel test is that it's an easily quantifiable test to look at the subject at hand, which is "Are women portrayed as equally in depth as men in this media" - and quantifiable tests are difficult to come to when considering sociology.

However, the Bechdel Test is not and should not be the final judgement on the issue, much less how good/enjoyable the film is. Full context of the movie would need to be looked into. As an example, the original Star Wars (New Hope) fails the full Bechdel test - the only two named female characters never meet in the film, and in Aunt Beru's case, we only see her discussing Luke. However, saying that Leia is entirely a passive character without as much depth as the other characters would be mostly incorrect.

While there are some criticisms to be had about people solely misusing the Bechdel test to criticism individual movies, that is not an argument I see advanced very often. Instead, I more frequently see denunciations of the test itself and a defense against the accusations, implied or explicit, of sexism.

Someone can be using a hammer on screws, but that doesn't mean the hammer has no proper use.

I looked into it a bit on its wiki, and the 58% is of movies that PASS the bechdel test, as of April 2015 (of only 4500 films though)

I'll concede that I offered criticisms poorly to specific parts of the Bechdel test that did not deserve said criticisms. Though it seems that the criteria for the test are far looser than I originally thought. Because of these loose criteria, films that feature female protaganists will fail for simply requiring to have the need for a conversation about a specific man or that this is no secondary female character, as you mentioned. So one of the criticisms the wiki mentions is that the test isn't actually useful for determining gender equality, or even female media representation.

Responding to both comments:

"I looked into it a bit on its wiki, and the 58% is of movies that PASS the bechdel test, as of April 2015 (of only 4500 films though)"

That's what I said. "with just under 58% of over 6000 films passing all three requirements" Also the Wiki may be out of date, as the actual database says 6391.

", films that feature female protaganists will fail for simply requiring to have the need for a conversation about a specific man or that this is no secondary female character, as you mentioned"

There's two points here I'd like to address:

1. The Test doesn't require talk about a specific man. It requires talk about *ANYTHING* but a man.
2. The lack of a secondary female character with which to have a conversation with is part of what the test is looking for.

Extending on point 2, "In film, a study of gender portrayals in 855 of the most financially successful U.S. films from 1950 to 2006 showed that there were, on average, two male characters for each female character, a ratio that remained stable over time. Female characters were portrayed as being involved in sex twice as often as male characters, and their proportion of scenes with explicit sexual content increased over time."

The 'problem' that the Bechdel Test is supposed to identify is over both the lack of depth of female characters, and addressing a 2:1 ratio disparity in film. A single female character in a cast of 8 would still all three parts of the Bechdel Test, and without an in-context cause from the setting or plot to give a reasonable explanation why, you've got an unbalanced gender representation.

Seeing as the ultimate complaint is over fair or proportional portrayal of women in media compared to male, it is still a valid thing to note.

I kept misreading your 58%. Sorry about that.

My point on the females talking about a specific man is that if talking about that man is required for the story, the movie fails the bechdel test. By requiring the women talk about anything but a man, it is requiring them to NOT talk about a man to pass.

I can still say that the Bechdel test does not address character depth or gender ratios because a full female cast can still be sexist and fail the bechdel test, and a cast ratio of 100 men to 2 women can pass the bechdel test. It's such a loose structure that passing or failing are virtually meaningless.

Also, the wiki addresses the passing of the bechdel test compared to the relative success of the movie. Correlation =/= Causation

"My point on the females talking about a specific man is that if talking about that man is required for the story, the movie fails the bechdel test. By requiring the women talk about anything but a man, it is requiring them to NOT talk about a man to pass."

The reason this exists is because in many films and much of literature women are only portrayed in how they act to men, react to men, or are centered around men. The point is to show that the women have *some other depth* to them aside from how they are set to the men.

"I can still say that the Bechdel test does not address character depth or gender ratios because a full female cast can still be sexist and fail the bechdel test, and a cast ratio of 100 men to 2 women can pass the bechdel test. It's such a loose structure that passing or failing are virtually meaningless."

A cast of 100 name men to 2 named women would pass the test yes, but fail when considering why that portion of the test was put in place - gender disparity in named roles. (Also your 102 named character movies would mainly outliers, or reducto-ad-absurdium). Talking about a cast of all-women is a red herring, as the point of the Bechdel Test is showing the wider trends and individual movies as part of that wider trends. Outliers cannot be used as an example to prove or disprove.

"Also, the wiki addresses the passing of the bechdel test compared to the relative success of the movie. Correlation =/= Causation"

I begin to think you're not actually reading my posts. "However, the Bechdel Test is not and should not be the final judgement on the issue, much less how good/enjoyable the film is. Full context of the movie would need to be looked into." This isn't a point that supports your argument.

The Bechdel Test is not and never should be used to judge how GOOD a movie is. It should never be used as a hard and fast rule for judging if a movie is sexist. It is a rule of thumb, a heuristic ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heuristic ) that allows for further discussion, as well as gathering data to be used for further discussion.

I saw it twice now. Really enjoyed it. Visually stunning and the story and characters were wonderful. Personally I can't understand some of the negative critiques but to each his or her own.

yeah was really great
even liked the parody ads

now I wants the soundtrack on CD!

I saw it, loved it and am going to see it again today. Then wait feverishly to buy it on DVD.

I got distracted from the amazing furriness by getting caught up in how good a movie it was. I was really not expecting that.

saw it . loved it ^^

I am going to see it again this weekend with friends. This movie is like a blueprint on how good talking animal movies can be without relying on the usual formula. No bathroom humor, no abundance on musical numbers except the one song. I really enjoyed this movie.

Well there was the one toilet gag, but it was, unusually, setting up a (not gross) point that happened later on

Either way, it was not as blatant as the toilet humor in the Secret Life of Pets and Angry Birds trailers

Yeah they really need to stop with that stuff. >.<

A gag involving an actual literal toilet, yet still was not actually "toilet humor." :3

Yeah, I ment the really blatant kind.

Just saw it today. Really enjoyed it. They didn't make the rhino's out to be bad guys, which I was apprehensive that they would. I'd like to see it again already ^^

I just got back from my second showing earlier. Took Mom and niece, who both loved it. I am SURE I'll manage to squeeze in at least one more viewing this week.

To be honest, I felt really Eh about it. The gay(I think?) couple next door to Judy was the best part for me, due in part to how blatantly shameless they were in their rudeness, the Shrews were also great. Everything else felt really typical to me, just the usual Disney fare. Nothing really stood out or wowed me, they just made the 'eager naive newbie' character capable of doing things herself.

Quick thing from your last link (I'm not on tumblr):

And I keep seeing a lot of reviewers saying the message is muddled, and I’m not sure why.

From what I've seen, it's because a lot of them are trying to map the predator/prey dynamic 1:1 onto either race or gender in the US, and getting confused when it's not a perfect fit. They seem not to understand why furs and aliens are used as metaphors for this type of thing.

Well I'm trying to figure out how it doesn't work in terms of the allegory it's aiming for--that it doesn't matter *what* the specific grievances or stereotypes are, they can color one's perception in negative ways that not only are unfair but can seriously hurt.

Because of things like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8UTj8lQJhY

There's an odd form of racism that's been slowly getting more prominent in recent years, where it's okay to treat people by their group instead of as individuals, but only so long as prejudice is only aimed at the group deemed more powerful than the others. So for the people who think like this, until they can figure out which real-life groups the predators and prey represent, they can't decide how to take Judy's statements mid-film. The message that prejudice can hurt anyone, and to take people as individuals, just doesn't get through.

(As an example: Predators are in positions of power (police+mayor) so Judy's statements are okay and not *-ist, except prey outnumber them 10-to-1, which makes predators a minority, so Judy's statements are not also not okay. The contradiction then leads to confusion and the supposedly muddled message.)

The sequel, if it's green lit, will feature outback island and kangaroos. :) Byron Howard has talked about it a bit in Comus's review/interview.

Oh? Do they actually have a plot concept for the sequel already?

I also heard them saying that they had a scene where Nick had dinner with Judy's family, but they said that'd be an ENTIRE movie. I so hope one of the sequels has a major "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner" plot.

Read it for yourself, it doesn't give any details, it just mentions a few ideas they want for the next movie at the end of the article.
http://www.awn.com/animationworld/z.....animal-kingdom

Hope they don't go for a sequel. The movie really lends itself to a series format. Heck, the movie felt like a really long episode of a show to me.

Edit: I should point out that I'd totally watch a Zootopia show.

Well the problem with a show format is that it would lessen the animation quality, which is a huge chunk of why this is so good. They'd have to be very certain in order to pursue a TV series and it look good

I'm not totally on board with that sentiment. While the animation quality would suffer, I don't think that is why the movie is good. Appealing, yes. Pretty, yes. But good? It stands on well-rounded characters and clever writing. That makes it good.

Also, Kung Fu Panda did well, and Zootopia lends itself far more to a series than KFP. You don't have to stretch the imagination to make a fun show about police enforcement in a world that imaginative. The main issue, in my mind, would be ending the series before the writing declines.

My fear with a sequel is we're going to see really stretched writing and padding, such as a contrived way to split the main characters again. If Zootopia does make a sequel, I sincerely hope they ditch the previous main characters (or regulate them to cameos) and tell a new story within the city. They have a lot to work with but a feature of Judy and Nick again will likely be the next Monsters University. Not bad, but not memorable either.

The art book has so much materiel that they can use, i mean, there are people demanding reptiles and birds to be shown, plus 10 other zones not mentioned

But to be honest, I'd rather have a zootopia sequel than a frozen sequel (even though i'll still see it), there just so much stuff to build on now

That's exactly my point for the argument of a show over a sequel. You've got a cop show set in an inventive world that we barely got to see. It lends itself to so much exploration and so many contained stories that a sequel film will probably still feel like a stretched out episode of some show. XD

That is a good point, though at this point, this is the first time I'm seeing outside people (and including this fandom) demanding Disney to make a sequel (or just anything to continue it). That tells you something about what the creators did if it takes people to say this

They will have sequels, perhaps in theater, but certain direct-to-video. Just look at the amount of fan art in the past few months and journals like this one. You can bet Disney's going to want to milk that gravy train for all its worth. A TV series, albeit with simpler animation than the movie Whether they succeed at making all that decent is another matter altogether.

See, I'm not certain about direct-to-video anymore

When you see the numbers that in-theater sales pulled for the sequels to Shrek, Despicable Me, etc, they are at least gonna try to gun for that.

Shrek did between-theater-movies specials directly to video (or via TV first, although I don't know as I don't watch TV) presumably to help fill demand for new material (but mostly to help sell more DVDs). Many franchises released movies directly to video when they determined the theater wouldn't give the monetary return they were aiming for (G.I.Joe: the Movie, Care Bears in Wonderland), but they still had a film they wanted to release. Or perhaps there'll be a spin-off series of some type (Penguins of Madagascar).

I don't know. Since the franchise just started, I can only speculate. Give it ten years' time, and then we'll see. For all I know, they might inexplicably decide to stop with just the one movie.

If Disney is going to do as shitty a job with a Zootopia series as it did with Guardians of the Galaxy, I'd rather they stick to movies only.

Haven't seen it yet and now I don't even want to because all the hype around. Maybe next year or later, when the internet will calm down a bit.

The movie was so sweet and heartwarming that I wanted to vomit. Loved it, 5/7

You put what I was thinking into words much better than I ever could!

I also didn't mind the "BIG ZOOTOPIAN PARTY" ending because it was a credits sequence. Otherwise it would have been kinda gratuitous. Kind of like Gazelle's character in general. :P But they at least did a decent job making her relevant. I just am not a big fan of "one celebrity syndrome" in fiction. It makes the world look much smaller than it should be, which is something they otherwise did a great job of avoiding.

It's the first movie I've actually gone back to see a second time - and that second time being the first time I've been to the theater alone haha. Mainly because I wanted to ogle at Nick's adorable eyes and facial expressions some more (#furrycrush). The animation of the characters overall was amazing! The slow reaction of Flash as the joke hit him....brilliantly done! But damn was it a good movie altogether. So much detail! Even the second time I felt like I couldn't keep up and see everything....guess I'll have to go again. *sigh*

I loved it! I also really love how they were the type of anthromorph that could (model-wise) drop down on all fours and look incredibly close enough to being feral. This is my favorite presentation of anthro :D

Also the quick bears in the nudist area! I WAS SQUEALING with laughter xD bare bears!

What was your favorite part of the film so far?

Immediately after the press conference was my favorite part overall. It's so rare for me to connect with characters like that.

Favorite action sequence though, I think the abandoned hospital.

True, And the best part is that they didn't overly push it too hard, just kinda "hey this is what is happening right now"

Oh yes that part, add in the fact that its wayyyy outside of town

Almost forgot, 3 fave important characters you enjoyed in this film, and three fave side characters?

Fav main characters are Judy, Nick and Bellwether

Fav side characters are Finnick, the Oryx-Antlersons and Duke Weaselton

But I seriously find almost everyone adorable

Good choices, and true. Even Class-C-characters (characters that show up in backgrounds or just 5 mins scenes like the guards or policemen) get a good enough time to show off

The term "deus ex machina" gets thrown around too easily these days. Judy has been established as a "super-cop" overachiever, so of course she possesses encyclopedic knowledge of the laws.

It's astonishing this movie could get made, and by Disney of all things. The subtext flies right over the heads of the intended target audience, but it's a small wonder they greenlit a movie that not so subtly references the rabble-rousing against Latin immigrants and Muslims.

Managed to avoid pretty much everything spoiler before it hit here in Australia (somehow!) and HOMG your COMIC on that 8333
Riiiccckk why you so AWESOME brah? XD

Could be because I'm an obsessive workaholic!

and some! X3 (so prolific!) I feel lazy! X3

My first viewing floored me.

I want to see it in Imax.

In this movie, did you have a scene that you really liked?

For me, it was Nick's backstory. Him as a pup was simply ADORBS!

Yet, the scene really stung for me since a similar situation happened to me in High School, and even though it brought back a bad memory, it also shows how bullying can really affect a person's lifestyle and choices; AND, how to respond to it.

My favorite scene happened to be the press conference and immediately after

When Nick was like, "Judy, what are you doing? Judy?"

And then so happy they made up and hugged, that was a sweet tender moment.

I KNOW!! I cry every time

So touching....I ship that coupe to the moon!