Obviously!

lol I missed lizards and monkeys.

Prety sad on that, well its true im wonder why any species of the family of the colds never appears, too bad for that.

As well as no winged beasts, fishes or aliens along them. Zootopia 2 would perhaps revealing them if Judy got a promotion...

uhm the aliens sounds something out of the context xD

It was just a joke.

It was hinted at by the writers that reptiles/birds and maybe fish have their own cities. Really it was just a cheap cop out because winged creatures and reptiles would have probably made animation harder and longer to do. I strongly suspect they will introduce them in the inevitable Zootopia 2 probably with a very similar 'racism' plotline with Reptiles/Mammals disliking eachother because creativity is hard.

Thought so. But hey, at least they made Zootopia movie and it's very successfully, compare to Ghostbuster remade (which had zero people came in).

apparently there was nearly a whole draft of the entire movie that was scraped which was a much more darker approach

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkJGLCleFmI

https://youtu.be/eNY3TBMILgI?t=2m26s

still not lizards but i guess its sorta close to a underbelly theme sorta

yeah that whould ahve been much better then Nicks little flashback to the one time some kids was mean to him. kids do far worse to their peers in real life. a Mussel was fucking nothing

at least it spawned endless amounts of r34 from the furries~

I enjoyed this movie enough I seen worse....but I see your point of view too. When this movie came out I was joking around telling people "Hey how come everyone in this movie gets a redemption except for the weasel family members?" Then I realized Disney REALLY hates weasels, I mean almost every weasel they have is a villain. If not villain then most likely just a dumb underling to the villain.

Indeed, only coming to the irony...



Dawn Bellwether, the lamb, was a true villain. Meanwhile, couple weasels were asshole, but yes, anti-hero.

yeah basically OuO

Disney did a great job hide the villain until the giant revelation.

oh yeah defiantly a good Noir film for kids

As well as little to no blood, let alone a couple of scratches. (Judy's cheek and her thigh in a single movie, but no blood were seen.)

eh I don't mind blood in a kids movies

Yes, I understand.. but it's based on the rate. If it's Kid friendly, then only scratch is showing.

yeah

of course, but hey, at least it's only the start of Judy's cop job. If coming to Zootopia 2 and she got promotion to working anywhere, then let's see if winged beast and ocean animals can make their appearance on that movie. Other mentioned on TVTrope was that the staffs who worked on Zootopia were limited to at least 63~66 species in a single movie, which explained why there were enough for Zootopia.

yeah that makes sense

The Zootopia theory was coming from the rumors that I heard. Most from YouTube, usually.

ah it still makes sense lol

Indeed, but it's speculation as of now. At least, I am glad that they showed how prey can work out well with predator, instead of being hunted and died.

yeah XD

Well they are a business, they didn't make Zootopia as a art project.

I also wondered why they left out reptiles and birds from the movie, technically there was nothing that stated that those aren't around in that universe though, but nothing really confirmed it does. Maybe they'll do a spin off film that takes place on a different part of their planet that has more scalies/birds compared to mammals.

the most real reason is simply this. mammals are oftens ee as cute and reliable. reptiles has a cultural stigma to them. they are seen as cold,posionus and unreliable. theres a whole trope on it called Reptiles are abhorent

I'm aware of the reptile clichés (oh boy am I...), but one would think Disney wouldn't go there with this movie since the city is supposed to be a place "Where all animals come together" and last time I checked the watering hole the city was built upon usually has some reptiles too (example: crocodiles), not to mention with the supposed moral of "don't judge a book by its cover" and all that.

in my head it take son this feel of the southern USA at the 40´s and the 50´s. why i have the " mammals only" sign kind a less than subtle though, but yeah. Ironicly, Dreamworks Kung-Fu panda does have characters of all species as both good guys and as villians. Master criocodile annyone?

Or in the series Master Chao, not to mention Oogway.
Funny enough that both Kung Fu Panda and Zootopia kept reminding me a Hungarian cartoon we have about a similar animal based world, but it mainly oriented around an owl doctor and all the wacky treatments he had for his patients. And you can guess what animal handed him his diploma, a snake (reference to the pharmaceutica symbol used )

Also they skipped a lot on the "food chain" thing. As what do carnivores eat exactly, ma nnrder to stay alive and healthy? (Note this happened too in lion king where is never addressed that yes lion rule and devour zebra even if simba apparently grown healty eating way ,uch less calories than he need or eqting a ff load of bugs) or thenparafox of duck tales where at times we saw ducks eqting eggs?!

yeah the ammount of food a large carnivore like a lion whould need is staggering, but nah they eat bugs because its full or nutrients..... the metric fuckload of bugs needed to feed one lion for one day is astronomical

Yes that is one of the problem of making everyone sentient you eventually reach the gumball universe paradox where EVERY FUCKING THING IS SENTIENT ! And the line between normal feeding and cannibalism become thin!( a cop that is a donut eating donuts?!)
At some point some species will eventuallly had to be on the uhmmm bottom.
Personally i think that for further development of zootopia world they should go the route of usagi yojimbo...theropods, dinos if you prefer. Going for the correct version would even be better(raptor looked like chubby feathery toothy chickens btw and looked tasty...)
(Btw i loved zoootropolis and i think is the best disney movie of the decade)
(...and gumballl is the most disturbing world of the fictional universe on par with land of oo)

i get you. and that be fluffy chickens of fury and death

Actually, it wasn't cause of that, they couldn't really figure how to make it work, see here https://youtu.be/PGyxWozKbUI?t=290, the reptile part comes in about 30 seconds.

Racism....wait would that term even apply here?

It would work for Zootopia. It just doesn't necessarily apply to human race. Since were all humans, we just come in an assorted range of colors, and flavors. The hardware the same for each female and each male mostly with few both mutations or the other way round. It's the software that has conflicts with other software.

SPECIESISM.

No lizards or scaled, monkeys, avians of any kind, how about seals? No armadillos, don't recall a single CAT! You have your lions and tigers but how about calicos? They played with a limited hand when there is a universe of animals to play with, played it safe. Yet this is but ONE of the cities, maybe in a sequel we will see others, just like Hogwarts is not the only wizarding school.

There is an armadillo - Judy's Landlady.

Oh crap you're right...been a while since I saw the movie, it was odd to think of an armadillo to begin with, maybe that's why X3

No worry, that's one-shot easy-to-missing appearance. At least I kept Zootopia Wikia up for my coming up story, the image of her landlady was there whenever I tried to check which ear Judy had damaged during her training days.

I honestly thought they would keep her scarred face from her fight with Gideon when she was little, would have made a more on the nose point about trusting foxes. But eh, maybe a scarred female lead bunny is too much in a movie about political corruption and substance abuse and discrimination?

That was purposed to get her to confidence in the police job more seriously. If the story had not scrapped, she was originally went to helping the poorly scary feline get down by using the laser light from the tree, then the police came in and witnessed what Judy did. That police told her that she did great and she should become police because of that. This scrap was mentioned in TVTrope section instead.

Gideon was bully because of his intelligence level, which later he was forgiven and became Stu and Bonnie's partner when she left the police force at one point. He actually gave a purpose to get Judy to realize what went on.

So to answer your question, no - she's one stubborn hare to be "scared" of those details. All she wanted to living in the perfect world, known as Zootopia. Only to misled that it was not perfect as she thought it would be.

Not scared, SCARRED as in the scars made by the injury she sustained while fighting Gideon when she was little. It would have been interesting to see het keep those scars on her face as an adult.

Well, yes. But do not forget, her fur covered that well. And she trimmed and brushed her muzzle that well to hide her injury.

No Humans, which means no Domesticated Animals. No Cats, No Dogs, No Cows. The Pigs and Sheep slipped by, but otherwise the setting was founded on some solid consistent bases: only Wild Mammals Evolved to Humanoid Sapience. And even then, the Animals' anatomy has to stay more Animal then Humanoid, which is why the female characters only had slightly feminine features and nothing like actual breasts.

Oh, as for the matter of "Reptile Representation", the creators teased we might get Birds and Reptiles in a future movie: http://legionofleia.com/2015/08/d23.....he-filmmakers/

So before starting any Shitstorms about how the first seriously Pro-Furry Disney Movie since Robin Hood is not catering to YOUR particular anthro kink, maybe you should take the sand out of your vagina and be happy Hollywood is finally starting to throw us a fucking bone. Especially since the fucking movie you hate is a seriously much-needed message about tolerance and acceptance, a message that we need more then ever in the era of the Trump Candidacy.

Directing your preching to the wrong guy, I actually loved Zootopia, and honestly until someone else brought up what was missing I did not notice or really care, I do believe it is kinda weird that some species and animals were left out but I am not gonna light a torch or wield a pitchfork because of it.

Sorry, the Shitstorm comment was actually directed at LordStevie himself.

Gotcha

There's no cats and dogs cause it's a world where humans never existed, so there was noone to domesticate canines and felines.

Huh. Well, I guess we know what's what :p

Even though i loved the Movie, i Do agree, the Lack of Any Lizards or Scaly critters was a poor choice.
The lack of Cats too made me sad.

I could see a snake having lots of problems because of his lack of hands. that could lead to a pretty good metaphor for the physically disabled and the problems they face

thye did a cool thing i talespin two parter, for whom the bell klangs, where the villian being a snake ahde two mechanical arms

As someone else mentioned, there were no humans around to domesticate anything, so there were only wild mammals and no like...housecats or domesticated dogs. There's a reason they weren't there.

there were Cats planned to be in the movie, but it got cut, along with the shock collar idea they had.
but if you look up stuff about it, Nick made a yarn chasing station or something at his theme park.

Aren't cats a result of domestication? I don't remember any dogs either. Any human influenced development wouldn't of been in the movie

Listen guys lizards are closed blooded they obviously just physically can't live in the climate and unsanitary environment a city creates the warm blooded birds and mammals would be the only ones who have the immune systems capable of achieving globalization if reptile and and amphibians cities do exist they are probably closer to the equator far away from the movie location

they have entire sectors replicateing the enivroments of savannas, raindforest and deserts next to a tundra. so that dont hold up

I saw this movie and I enjoyed it, heck I even got the DVD for it.

Though I will agree with you that there should have been more species other than mammals. It would have been really cool to see different types of animals in the movie, why they didn't do that is beyond me, but the movie is still good.

I don't think that they purposely discriminated against scalies. There are only so many animals you can put in a movie, you have to make models and since the theme was predators and prey there was a high concentration of African animals where animal planet spends most its time. They also did not have a lot of other animals that were in fact mammals. There were no sea mammals. Honestly I think you are overeating a little. Don't see me being all "They had no birds! Must be nice to not have feathers!" Or "Where are the extinct species? Guess only the living species count." Remmus has a point, just because they didn't appear didn't mean they intentionally excluded them.

there is a common theme in medie regarding talking animals and reptiles. and that is that reptiles are all vile. most of the myths of western culture centres around that idea. can you name a single snake or lizard from western myth that has anny good traits?

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.p.....esAreAbhorrent

Quetzalcoatl, the winged serpent deity of wind and wisdom. Your kind of limiting my response by saying western mythos, because china's sky serpents are also attributed with wisdom. Also I can name TONS of evil mammal type creatures too, if it was just being portrayed badly, mammals have that too. In fact Most legends and myths are about a human hero killing some evil creature. Not the best place to choose in favor of animals over humans.

Also the trope even says it wants to see an evil Hamster villain? http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Dr._H%C3%A4msterviel Disney did that one already.

Also, isnt in Mulan the dragons good guys?

eastern myths. almost all our western animal stories stems from Aseops fables where in animals are given human characteristics, foxes are smart, wolf ravenous, donkies stubborn etc etc. western myths , or rather myths from europe , all ahve reptiles in some shape or form as villians, the snake from the bible, lucifer described as a dragon, greek and roman myth are full of mosnterus snakes and dragons, typhoon the titan has snake features, his bride echidna is described as part human part dragon. norse myth as the linnorms and dragons etc etc

So what? Cerberus, gaurdian of hell, 3 headed dog. Chimera, head of a lion, goat AND a snake, twice the evil mammal. Mermaids and Siren, fish people that would lure sailors and drown them. Centaur, Horse people that attack and sometimes rape women, same with Satyr, the goat version. Minotaur, evil bull man who kills anything he finds in his maze. Kraken, evil squidapus. Wendigo, evil snowman of canibalism. Vampire, evil bat person. Werewolf, evil wolfman. Norse mythology also also describes Fenrir, a wolf so powerful it can kill gods and when release it will kill everything. Bible also describes multiheaded beasts. Yes some reptiles are evil but SO ARE mammals. there are many many more I could list. There are also some good reptiles and mammals.

Harping on the fact "Everyone sees reptiles as negative! Thats specist!" instead of saying "Look at all these good examples of reptiles! We should put them in." benefits no one. Instead of reptiles being the victims for being bad in mythology, try to make them prime examples of good quality's and change culture view in a positive way. You cant change the past, only the present. Here is the difference:
People who like fluffy animals are so overrated.
I LOVED our pet snake. Let me tell you about how awesome it is! (Also yes pet snakes are adorable)

Dragons.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2788732/

This movie is brand new. How to Tame Your Dragon as well. Dragonheart. Plenty of good dragons appear all over the place.

I agree, it's shit. Doesn't help that the good plot was scrapped in the 11th hour and turned nick and judy into unlikable assholes for the whole thing.

They aren't even good for porn. Nick is fucking generic as fuck fox and judy is a stupid basic rabbit.

Fuck it.

i found nicks character to be a smug douchebag. i never seen a animated charater over act to compensate for her partner

He was SUPPOSED to be wearing a shock collar for the whole movie that paralyzed him if he ever got into a violent mindset. Therefore, the only way he could "fight back" was by being a snarky asshole and being passive aggressive. This is WHY Judy is even allowed on the task force; allowing a prey animal that CAN'T physically fight off her predator into a position of power over him because of the society of having shock collars on all the predators, who are also treated as second class citizens.

hell, the entire reason she ends up on the case to deal with Nick was supposed to be because a possum who didn't like Nick tried to assassinate him with a silenced handgun and she ends up there to find out "what nick did wrong". Commence Nick making life hell for her every time she flexes her authority until she finally puts 1 + 1 together. She was SUPPOSED to be an asshole up until the point she realizes how bad Nick's life has been, and all for no real good reason, then it's up to her to try and advocate equal rights for the predators.

Instead, Nick is a douche for the sake of being a douche and Judy is on the task for because she's a "strong womyn who don't need no man" and forced her way onto it.

Lets not forget that she is SO inept at her job that it falls to the MAFIA to save the day.

Technically it was an 'over excited' mind set, it could happen whether they're happy mad or heck even just startled

This would make a lot of sense and still carry why Nick hates everything.

As it is, it's not possible to like either of them. Nick is just an asshole, Judy is an authority abusing bitch which garners no sympathy. "Oh, I forced myself onto the police force but am so small and pathetic, I couldn't wrestle a tiger down like, say, a rhino could, but I am a strong independent bunny! Why am I just a parking meter attendant? Where is the equality!? Oh no, push came to shove and I actually have to do stuff and I'm a total failure at it. I'm so lucky I accidentally the daughter of the Mafia who can now take care of everything for me!"

I knew there was trouble when the plot of the movie being told in trailers were: trailer 1: "look, anthro animals!" trailer 2: "look! anthro animals in an anthro animal city!" Trailer 3: "look! sloths work at the dmv, because they are slow and the dmv is slow AMIRIGHT?! Oh, and nick is an asshole".

It shouldn't take 4 trailers to get an idea of what the movie's basic story is about, nor make me detest the characters.

Im honestly suprized you have such a hate boner for it. While it wasnt a perfect movie by any means, and there are several things they could have done better. For what it was I though it was a decent movie. Unlike the Secret life of pets which didnt even focus on the life of pets and went off on a dime a dozen buddy bonding adventure plot, not to mention if you want to talk playing it safe.... Life of pets is in kindergarden compaired to zootopia.

At least life of pets doesn't try to be anything more than it is; a short movie made to get some additional funds to pet shelters.

Zootopia has this disgusting cult around it, trying to pass it off as "the next robin hood" but failing to understand why Robin Hood was good.

Zootopia is still kindergarden and other than the "cute fluffy animals", there isn't anything for the kids to like since nick is a" a big meanie" and Judy has no personality other than authority abusing bitch.

I think your honestly treating it a bit worse then it is.... Zootopia might not be the best thing we could have gotten but it is the first big animal based cartoon movie to come out in quiet a while and who says everything has to be focused for kids? Cartoons can be enjoyed by adults as well, I mean hell do you think the deadpool video game was made for kids? Hes a super hero right, thats a kids thing. And its a video game.... thats definantly a kids thing. Jokey fourth wall breaking wise ass characters, very kid centric thing...... yet its not.

If you want a more kids centered movie go check out ice age. On another note a disgusting cult? I think your being a bit harsh considering your part of a "disgusting cult" known as furries. Do you treat MLP fans with such disreguard? Be mad at the movie, Be mad at the directors and developers all you damn well want. But stop judging people who liked something you did, Stop telling people what they should or should not love. An Experience is different for every one, some people may have gotten a different experience out of Robin hood then you did, same with zootopia.

The origional plot for example was scrapped because the writers didnt like the dark plot and though people wouldnt like it and felt uncomfortable about making it the origional way it was written. Could it still have been a good movie? Yes. But the developers made a decision to change the plot because they didnt want to tell that story. As far as the characters go, Its played safe, We watch and applaud many movies that are played safe, and dont push the boundry. Same with games, hell for fuck sake how many call of duty games have we bought before the developers made a decision to change it cause they are tired of it?

It's terrible, that's the long and short of it. i detest it because it is starring two unlikable characters that we are supposed to like, but have no redeeming factors due to the gutted plot, which now falls flat.

The plot actually got shifted because Disney cracked down at the 11th hour and said "no serious adult movie here".

The Good Dinosaur was SHITLOADS better and actually made me like the movie for what they did.

Zootopia is a movie for kids and carries no extra bonuses for mature crowds other than to serve to infuriate them.

Even the porn is entry level casual with a god damn generic fox and generic rabbit.

I will call out every movie on "playing it safe", because it means we will get the same fucking thing over and over again and nothing exciting or new will be tested.

I say this about movies and about games.

Congraduations, just like most major religions you are taking your opinion and trying to force it down every ones throats with no cares for their beliefs or values as if it was writen in stone fact. Iv lost alot of respect for you as of late and Im almost glad we drifted apart if this is who youve become.

?

I dislike zootopia and I'm saying why I dislike it.

I'm not cramming my opinion down anyone's throat. Everyone is free to enjoy what they want, I personalty don't like it for the reasons I stated.

but using our relationship as a crutch to slam me?

That's a very cold, very low blow...

Thats not how it came out. You where, at least to my perspective, yelling it out as if I was attacking you.... Hell im still on the fence about the movie myself, I liked some parts, hated others. But im just trying to bring up a few points of how you are negatively thinking and critizing not only the movie but its fanbase as well and you got super defensive and even attackative. No Fandom is perfect, just like no movie, no game, no community, or anything is perfect. Hell people say "flawless" diamonds are worth the most yet the internal flaws are what make a diamond beautiful.

Im sorry I brought our relationship into this but dear. To be honest I was suprized when I saw your comment in this shit storm.

I've had to take a new view on life where I hardly sugarcoat what I have to say when it comes to opinions. This comes off as an "attack", but look at my target. I'm not lashing out at anyone here, just the subject matter.

Regardless, I've finished what i had to say and choose to leave this topic behind now.

Oh now I remember why I blocked you

Feels like something silly to get mad over. At the end of the day its just a movie for kids of all ages, not political propaganda or an anti-reptile movement. And if they were included, this journal would probably be about how they're villains or something. Does this mean the Pete's Dragon is bad because Eliot has fur instead of scales? Hate and complain all we like on Zootopia, the movie will likely clean up at award shows and Disney will cry all the way to the bank.

offcourse it will win awards. iam just angry with it its all. dosent get better to be reminded of how much all loves it and whean i talk about it iam told not to think on it because its a kids movie. It jsut agrivates me that a movie with a premiss of showing animals joining together skips out the majority of the animal kingdom. i just used reptiles as the msot obvious point, but i could ahve hade birds or ampibians or fish or insects, dosent matter. th epoint is i dont like this movie and the exclusion of animals are amongst the major reasons i dont like it

Do you think you would have enjoyed it had all species been represented? Even if they were just background characters?

To be honest, I actually feel the same way with how tigers are almost always represented. We're either the villains with no redeeming values or complete jerks who have to have a 'redeeming moment' to become good. (Kung Fu Panda, Madagascar 3, Animalia are three that come immediately to mind) Apparently tigers can never be good, we have to be evil or redeemable assholes. But lions on the other hand. No, they're almost always the paragons of virtue. All I can say is, thank god for Calvin and Hobbes.

And in Zootopia! We're just hunky eye candy dancing around in stripper underwear!! :D

um yeah i whould be happy even if it just background character, because that proves the world is biggger. you dont have to adress it, it just have to be shown in like one scene say at a resturant you ciould have several animals in there at the tables and one could be a gator another a toad.

falls back to the old aspos fable structure. western culture asociate lions with kings and regalness and fairness. same with eagles. also why Griffons are the epitome of all animals as they rule skie s and land. Disney´s Robin hood is the prefect example for this. Prince John who is a false king is not even a true lion but a Puma, and Richard is the only real lion. Sir Hiss is a snake and also a untrustworthy Vizer of Richard that pawed the way for Johns reign. The sheriff is a wolf and wolfs are seen as ravenous and greedy. all their henchmen are all either big brutes like rhinos ( not to bright) or jackals and vultures, scavanges who just hang around the bigger predators to feed off scraps. one could make a whole doctors journal on that movie alone

could be something for a sequel . introducing reptilians as beings from another country or something

hmm... you're onto something there buddy. i have to agree, i did like the movie but after seeing things that it was suppose to be in another way, changed my point of view to see that it would have been better if it was on the darker rout instead of this one. and yeah i didn't see one monkey? maybe there was one or a gorilla? i don't really recall but i've seen the movie like... 3 or 5 times? but that was because my friend was hooked to shit on the movie... x_X it could have been better but kinda now noticed that there was no fish type characters, no lizard or the like type characters.... It's kinda blah now that you showed a point. Kinda still like the movie but i still say and agree with you. Fuck Disney... Disney is kinda losing it's way or has been for a while. There are better animated companies out there or... Was out there. not sure how many are around or still around.

Disney is not losing it's way.

D; congrats on replying to a old comment that's two year's old. D;

Whatever captain sarcastic.

i wouldn't be captain sarcastic if someone didn't reply over a 2 year old comment from a 2 year old pic. >:T

honestly? i am perfectly fine with this. really.

put 100 children age 5 - 10 in a room and show them images of a fox, bunny, crocodile and a snake and ask them to label 2 of them as "cute". again, I guarantee you in writing that most of them are going to label the fox and bunny as "cute". is that frustrating as hell bullshit? yeah it is... but what can you do? that's how kids are and kids are fucking stupid.

so yeah, i am perfectly fine and actually very glad that no bird/reptile/fish people were actually shown in the movie. that ultimately leaves their existence and society fully and completely up to user interpretation, which I honestly much prefer than having these characters do show up in the classic stereotypical villain roles due to their intimidating appearance.

fair enough, that whould be a cool setting though

you have to look at it this way: with Disney not showing any of the reptile/bird/fish/bug people, they essentially gave us a free pass to make up our own things, free of any restrictions whatsoever

I enjoyed the movie. but I was disappointed with the lack of reptiles. Though I heard from an interview that Reptiles do exist but they don't live in zootopia
and teased we may see them in the sequel.


Here is the Text

"The film makers told us that we aren’t going to see any reptiles or birds in this animal city, but teased that we may see them in a future film. I asked them about what these animals eat if they’re so evolved that they don’t eat each other. “Bugs,” they told me. They eat bugs, which are very nutritious. Spencer told me that when they were in Mexico, he had crickets and said they were delicious. So delicious in fact, that he was craving them on the spot!" (Jenna Busch)

http://legionofleia.com/2015/08/d23.....he-filmmakers/

I thought the creators confirmed there were reptiles and birds, just not in that particular city?

to me that dosent mean shit. " oh we hade concept arts and this and that" well yreah but iam gonan base my opinion on what you put on the screen, not what left out

Yes they did actually

http://legionofleia.com/2015/08/d23.....he-filmmakers/

"The film makers told us that we aren’t going to see any reptiles or birds in this animal city, but teased that we may see them in a future film."

Really though I feel as if it was a design choice to cut back on animation cost and time, winged creatures would have been very time consuming to animate and reptiles just really aren't... 'attractive' to most people.

I have a personal theory they kept reptiles out of the movie to use in a future movie to keep up the 'anti-racism' thing they have going, I almost guarantee there will be a Zootopia movie about how Reptiles and Mammals hate eachother but by the end of the movie they realize it was all wrong and everything will be hunky-dory forevermore because creativity is hard and it's easier to recycle plots with minor changes.

The movie it self does have it's issues, then again most Disney movies do one way or another. I myself i thought the feral plot thing was actually a scaley prep for an invasion or uprising to turn the mammals on each and while they are fighting eachother they could swoop in and take over. I wasn't expecting the lambs. as for racism and stereotypes yeah they did that alot, but some of them grew out of that and made some forward progress. Is it perfect no, but neither are we. Overall it's art,entertainment, and a business.

If your really dissatisfied with the movie and think it could of been done better. Prove it. Find other like minded people build a story board, figure out what becomes sentient and what becomes food. Figure out some sort of story or conflict to resolve find artists, animators, writers, directors, all the other parts i can't name atm due to poor vocabulary and CRS. either use earth as a template or make something up. Then show everyone how much better it can be.

I'm not trying to be condescending i can barely spell it, rude, or general pain in ass. For some reason i felt like i should say something. As it's all i can think of to currently do.

Could it be pragmatism? you know, there is this interview here,

Q: There are only mammals in Zootopia. Why is that?

Byron Howard: We thought really hard about it. We spent a year of research sketching things out in every sense of the word, and we ended up having a hundred different species in the final film.

Rich Moore: We had to choose. We decided to focus on a predator/prey dynamic and mammals offered more opportunities for that.

Byron Howard: What you may haven't noticed is that we chose not to show monkeys in the film. They resemble humans too much. It wouldn't have been funny. And of course, the films is only 90 minutes long. We couldn't include all of the animals.

Rich Moore: We are convinced that we shouldn't stifle the film with explanations. The story must be its own explanation. There's no need to annoy the audience with background details like why animals came to reign on Earth, etc.

Byron Howard: It's very difficult to make things simple. There's always the temptation to over-explain things. At Disney the goal is to cut, to simplify, to be direct. To trust the public and their intelligence.

You think that's bad? the creators left dogs out because humans weren't around to domesticate them... yet had domestic wolves....

They outright don't know a thing about how "country" folk live, as can see with how judy hopps is both raised and how she thinks, as a country person myself I can easily tell you had her family really used that night howler stuff AND warned their kids about it as was implied for the deus ex machine ending, she would have thought of it well before she thought of wolves.

So you hate this movie just because they didn't think to include reptiles?
That's dumb. I'm very sorry.

no i hate this movie because it omits a large part of the animals that exists and that it fumbles its premis in favour of something cute and cuddly for kids. you cant sell toys to kids if they arnt cute

So it sucks because you're favorite animal wasn't in it?
That's very petty and immature.
There's thousands of animals in the animal kingdom.
It would be impossible to have even half of them in the 2 hour window.
If they tried doing that, they would forget to have a story and it would come off as pandering without an attempt for a story or it would have a horribly cluttered and confused story due to trying to have too much detail in a 2 hour window.

"For something cute and cuddly for kids." ...In a kids movie. I hope you see the problem with that train of logic.

I would agree with the idea of "fumbling on the premise" just to sell toys and look cute, especially one that deals with something as important as racism and prejudice would be wholly wrong and disgusting, but the fact is they didn't. The moral was still there, and told in a clear, understandable way for kids, and in serious enough way for adults. There were also tons of mammals not shown, doesn't mean they matter any less either.

....It was a movie for kids. I sincerely doubt you can name a kids movie that doesn't want to sell toys. And honestly once again... how much work and money were they supposed to throw into this movie in order to include every species currently in existence? Each of those animals had to be designed by an artist, approved by the board managing the movie, then made into a fully animated model on a computer.

Did they leave some animals out? Sure they did. But I have a feeling it was more to release the movie sometime this century than it was because they OBVIOUSLY wanted to hate on every species they didn't make a model of. If you feel this movie is a bad movie in and of itself, that's fine. But at least express your hate for a reason that's not, 'I wanted the movie to be about <fill in the blank>! It wasn't so I hate it!' ...that sounds more like an overgrown kid throwing a tantrum than it does a rational adult objecting to a bad movie.

Secret of NIMH, Land Before time. and American Tale. because Don Bluth dont sugar coat things

There's a stark difference between Don Bluth and Disney though. One markets to sell merchandise, one was independently funded to tell lessons and stories.

Not only are you comparing apples and oranges, but you're getting mad because the apples are red instead of green. I mean, I wasn't the biggest fan of Zootopia either, but of all the things to hate about it, this is kinda mad.

You're doing better than me. I just didn't like it because it was a bad movie.

I think you're taking an animated movie for kids way to seriously. They had a point, and they made it, just because they didn't use every color under the rainbow in a world where any and every species of animal could be sentient doesn't mean they were trying to say reptiles and birds didn't belong or weren't good enough. The animators would have had to design whole new skeletal structures for the reptile and avian citizens, come up with tons of unique character models, and design completely different environmental structures to show their accommodation in the city. Possible? Absolutely. But it's faster and cheaper to come up with a few mammal skeletons, make four variations, and than copy and paste them around because they all work the same way. And that's not even taking into account the fact that this is a kids movie, who on the whole find mammals far more cute and interesting than reptiles, sad as it is.

An even bigger problem with this mind set is the fact that not only is it a animated movie for kids about a fictional world where animals talk, so getting legitimately mad at not seeing a lizard show up is beyond childish, but the argument that it cheapens the moral of the story is as ridiculous as saying that a movie about a white guy and a black guy overcoming racism and social prejudice is hypocritical because it didn't have a Hispanic guy as well. Actually no, it just means a Hispanic actor wasn't cast, the moral still stands. This doesn't even bring up the watering down of the story, or Nicks character, which were both done because, and I say it again, it's a kids movie. This movie wasn't made for you, or me, it was made to teach kids a fundamental lesson with jokes for the adults and a few serious situations to keep the message pertinent. It was made to make money, and entertain kids, regardless of what moral it's trying to teach or whether or not you think it succeeded, (Which it objectively did without needing to show reptiles or birds or whatever), no one should take it so seriously.

But that's just how I feel.

This is mostly not what I think was meant with this movie, and seems to be getting a bit of an excessive reaction from people. Just because Zootopia didn't have every type of animal in the universe in it in it's debut doesn't mean they were somehow slighting every type of animal they didn't include; it just means they had a budget to stick to and a timeframe for just how many types of animal models they could work on.

What *I'M* starting to get pissed about is the sheer number of people who go off on these wild 'Twisted world' fantasies about how the Zootopia world works, creating systems of forced obedience with shock collars and muzzles for the predators, hostility from former prey animals (the whole concept of which must have evolved out of these creatures in the same way humans stopped living in caves, literally hundreds of years ago) and the concept that predators (who are only predators in name, since they're actually not killing and eating anyone) are STILL eating prey animals, only in some secret underground concept that would be the equivalent of some underground cannibal cult eating 3rd world people among humans.

Maybe I'm the only one left who could take the movie as it was presented; as a world of anthro animals who lived together peacefully nd had formed a society. Everyone else seems to look at this idyllic world and want to see if ruined, soiled, filled with hate and prejudice and evil, then pissed on and forgotten. You know... more like the REAL world.

I'm with you man, not everything needs to be "defended" or "destroyed" just because creature A or thing B wasn't there.

If I could upvote this, I would.

Not a hill worth dying on. For any of you. Goddamn animated movie with characters named Lionheart and Otterton.

When showbiz gets past stupid pun names, then you can hope for ... whatever you're after. Or go watch Rango. It was full of lizards and rodents and buzzards.

Well it was in the middle of the desert. A place where these creatures are most common. You are not going to find Ms. Stevenson's cat out there.

Talk about your speciesism. X3

If I remember in an interview or in the actual art book, it mentions that reptiles and birds have their own cities.

That being said, the movie SING has animals of all shapes, colors, and species living together in one city. I think Disney didn't want to waste time on developing so many different character types.

The movie was about predator/prey conflict and discrimination, to over complicate it merely for (fictional) representation reasons would be lunacy. It would have been nice to have more in the background, but the extent of it actually causing hate in people is a bit silly. The characters were there to serve a purpose, and they fulfilled that.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see this turn into a franchise that includes a much more varied set of animals - but I don't find it too hard to believe that in a world with that much discrimination/needs in it, Zootopia would be a mammal only city, and only a few sets of mammals at that. In matter of fact, that would be stellar material for a sequel if they seek to keep similar themes.

I rather loved it, personally. I loved that they put time into the logistics of needs, thought about the struggles they would face, how others species would react to one another, how they handled (non-love interest) chemistry in the main cast, ect.


It's not that I'm surprised many people ended up being disappointed. Hype put it on an unreachable heights. One of the many reasons I refused to partake in any information/footage after the initial teaser, it paid off in spades.

Methinks your taking an animated movie waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too seriously, dude.

i dont think that jsut because its animated movie for kids it should not be thought on

Yeah, you have a point, it's suck not having others cool animals
But, to be sincere
Disney
Movie
Both is just silly and overushed like everything nowdays

This is surprisingly the most petty view on the movie I've seen yet, and I really enjoy reptiles!

oh i got way more shit to complain on

And that may be, but this is what you focused on first and presented.

it was what struck me at first glance yes. kind ahard to draw something on the predatory/ prey bullshit

If we get a sequel, Disney needs to throw in reptiles and amphibians.

didint see it that way

Have yet to see it. And have no rush to see it. And if I do see it, it will have to be for free. Definitely not paying a cent to rent it.

And I agree with what you've said.

Even though I love the movie, I agree with you about the reptiles or birds. I guess Disney would prefer furry after all. However, if there will be a sequel, then they need to include reptiles or birds in its plot. There may be different lands than Zootopia besides animals and there could be a history of how reptiles or birds weren't seen in the first film. It could be prejudice between animals and reptiles, maybe worse than predator/prey situations. Nick Wilde can be protagonist in the sequel because of his experiences with bigotry within Zootopia. Hopefully Disney pay attention to their fans for awareness of living beings besides animals.

https://img.ifcdn.com/images/62429e.....1a155cf7_1.jpg

why is the trash bin circled?

If I recall correctly, the creators said that land animals, mammal and non-mammal, were all sapient, and just lived in different cities due to each classification of animals having particular biological and environmental needs.

makes the fish market and bug burgers a tad bit dark

They said nothing about birds, sea creatures, and insects, they only spoke about land animals, implying the others were not sapient.

wich makes me ask other questions like. why was only mammals choosen to gain inteligence?

Why did real-life humans evolve from apes and not velociraptors or trout or pigeons?

Some things don't really have an answer.

we did not evolve from apes! we have a common ancestor with apes like gorillas and chimps. and taken by that Statement., there whould be nothing but saurians about since they where the msot succesfull group of animals to ever ahve walked upon this planet. even if the extinct event happened by the rules of this movie they whould still have evolved sentience and left relics if not out right survived due to their inteligence.

I was simplifying the concept for the sake of brevity.

...my someone is typing angry today.

How dare a billion-dollar corporation not cater their movie specifically to you. You'd better go tell someone who gives a shit! <:3c

How dare a multi billion dollar company make a movie about one of th ebiggest issue we face and ahve always faced and just deliver such a poorly made product. thats my fucking point. No they dont need to pander to me at all, but i refuse to be treated like an idiot by this kinds of movies

You're upset that the movie didn't contain something you wanted, which constitutes it being poorly-made, therefore you're upset that it didn't pander to you. :V

iu also strongly dislike it for its hamfisted plot, the ill concieved world, the bad characters among manny things

You're entitled to your opinion.

That doesn't mean I can't make fun of it though. <:3c

I wonder if real-life racism pisses you off as much as some fantasy racism does.

even fucking more so yes.

Well, that is a plus side. I got the strong feeling you were one of those types to bitch about this sort of things then say Blue Lives Matter.

Fuck no, if anny thing i´d be mor eon the side that whould say all human lives matter, no matter what the fuck your skin color is, what your culture is etc etc. i can offcourse strongly dislike individuals, but thats based on what they say and do and has nothing to do with what their skin color is.

all lives matter, blue lives matter, same stupid crowd spewing it.

Yeah. I think I'm gonna back away slowly from this whole account now. It's been real.

ummm so you get pissy cause ya don't see your species in the movie? and I'm pretty sure I have seen some reptiles in the movie I belive there was at least a gator and also as someone in the earlier comments said maybe in the squeals to come there maybe even more species let out you never know and as someone else pointed out it would be kinda hard to fit every single species and type of animal in a 2 hour window hell the next movie might even include a city full of reptiles but honestly I thought the movie was well written and I did love the story

my species isnt a lizard. its human. i just happen to really like reptiles. they dont have to fit every species into the movie. my fucking point is that they have ONLY mammals. they make a movie based on some very heavy subjects and they just fucks it up.

"they dont have to fit every species into the movie"

why get pissed off, when you counter argue yourself? lol...

they dont need to no but it be a better movie for it if they hade some representatives of those species even if it sjsut in the background. makes the world bigger

umm also just to point out ....they had reptiles i nthe movie actually if you had been paying attention...

show me fucking where. because i saw only mammals

She's cold blooded, why doesn't she GTFO as well? ;P

I feel like you missed the entire point of the film.

So, long story short.. "I'm Pissed off at a Movie praised by Critics, Audiences and Furry Fans alike for a well-animated, well-acted, well-told story with an important message of tolerance and acceptance, because they didn't cater to MY personal Scaly Fetish."

Nope, i am pissed on this movie for a ill concived world. the only worlds i´ve seen thats even worse is the worlds of cars and the good dinosaur, i dont belive a fucking thing in zootopia. yes its animated but take a movie like Atlantis the lost empire. it made poorly and i dont think its a good movie, but theres thought behind it. theres a belivability to it and the world of that movie is so much larger. This movie is extremly illconcived. we learn almost nothing about zootopia, theres upposed to be 12 districts, whata re those. we see three, possibly four. Why are there only alrge animals int h epolice force? will you ahve me belive the rhinos will tramble around the rodent area like a titan? why not hire animals suited for the diffrent areas, have mice cops to deal with small places. How does the city stay well fed? do you know the collossal amount of food a elephant needs every day to survive? To say something is jsut " a kids movie" is not a valid reason not to put thought into it.

"it made poorly and i dont think its a good movie, but theres thought behind it."

So... which is it?

the movie atlantis was poorly made, the plot was cut down and the characters flat. but the world they made around these characters hade thought put into it.

If the movie was poorly made, wouldn't that include the world? It's not like Jupiter Ascending where it's competently made but the world is a mess.

As for Zootopia, I can say it clearly took a lot of consideration to size of animals and travel lanes, despite the weird way the economy works. That's a discussion for another less heated and more reasonable discussion.

And I now officially declare your opinion clearly miss-informed, as there was a SHITLOAD of work, effort and thought put into the world of Zootopia, a film concept that underwent nearly a Decade of work, from starting out as a James Bond style parody to a transitional period of being a more dystopian story of actively oppressed predators in a prey-dominated world, to the movie that was released. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING in that world was thought out and designed, from the various districts and locations (Tundra Town is right next to Sahara Square means the massive refrigeration system that keeps Tundra Town cold is also keeping Sahara Square hot and dry), to the vehicules and the buildings that look designed for the various species that use them.

And yes, the world of Zootopia is so much larger then what we see on screen. Yes, there are plenty of districts we don't see, but seeing as how this is a 1 hour, 48 minute story of a rabbit from a small town going to the big city to follow her dream of being a cop and stumbling her way into a massive conspiracy, I can excuse them for not giving us the full World Tour. It just means we get to explore other Districts in the sequels. There are also not ONLY large animals in the police force, there are wolves. As for Rodentia, it's most likely they have their own specific police force, but we don't get to see them because they're Small Rodents, who would not be able to contribute much to Big Animal police-work, and stay in Rodentia. And we didn't get to see them deal with the Weasel intruder because it happened so fast and Judy rounded up before the Mouse cops arrived. That, or it's a nice, quiet part of town because all the crime there is Organized and nobody wants to make a fuss.

How does the city stay well fed? Considering the city is next to at least one Farming village, there are likely well-organized supply lines, and we do see the Elephants get plenty of food to eat. And concept art also show plenty of Fisheries in Tundra Town, so carnivores have food sources beyond just bugs.

So yes, there's plenty of effort made into world building, with logic set into how things are intended to work together. More so then even in the Kung Fu Panda films, which I love. Seriously, that world has no logic put into it beyond "Animals are People." What do the carnivores eat, when every animal, and I mean every animal is a sapient being? Even the bugs! At least Zootopia put it's foot down and went "Okay, THESE creatures aren't people, and that's what the Preds eat." That's a decision I can respect, even if it means I don't get Zootopian Bird Porn.

sorry to say, but your over the top exaggeration of Zootopia being a terrible movie for not including reptiles, or having a more mature plot is just childish.

rather than complain that your ass wasn't served 100% to your specific desires, why not go direct your own movie and quit bitching about someone else's great movie?

oh my list goes on from there. the piss poor characters, the atrocious voice acting from that jerk that played Nick. the plot, the ill concived world. I do not like this movie and its not because i wasent " catred to" 9f that was the case i´d go on a fucking crusade against most of modern entertainment,. My problem with this movie is and has always been that its a piss poor movie about some of the heaviest subjects you can make a child face.

Wow this debate seems to be raging... Has anybody considered the idea that maybe we just didn't see any of the reptiles because maybe they just keep to themselves and try to avoid all the stupid mammals that make up the vast majority of the population?

thats a possibility. But that sorta negates the message the movie tries to make though.

From what I've heard, they've planned for sequels and spin-offs staring lizards and birds anthros.

unless annyone that made that movie confirms its null and void. i dont go by rumors and hearsay

big talk by someone who runs off emotions and not facts

Welcome to the internet...

The people who made Zootopia pretty much said so in interviews.

or, and I'm just spitballing here lordstevie, maybe they are setting it up for sequels?

that is possible. but i dont care for that, since i am supossed to take the movie at face value. they could set up a sequel with dragons and it whouldnt change my view of the original

that's really a weird reason to not like the movie, not saying it's a stupid one or anything, nor am I knocking you for having the opinion as I am slightly agreeing as in MY opinion I want an alligator with a cajun accent (from new orleans, want new orleans stereotypes) I just think that's more of a reason to get invested in it if it is something you want to see, not pan it outright

valid, but i also object to the movies entire premis, setting world and poorly made characters. theres very little acctualkl thought thats gone into create this world other then " kids like cute animals" i am not saying reptiles or non mammals should be the focal point. just that it be nice to see them even ifts jsut in a background or a crowd. it whould make the world bigger. I mean imagen if whena Judy Arrives at the city and we see the monatage of all the diffrent animals if we just hade like one as you said Gator as a street vendor selling Gumbo or just news paper to a wilderbeast or something. or if among the bussniess animals there was like a flok of pidgeons in suits or a stork or just a VIce president giving instructions to his parrot secritary.

Hell ahve some other animals as cops. why arnt there rodent cops? i cant see a rhino stumble about in the rodent section. Even judy was like godzilla in there. Croc cops whould be good for dock works. Bats for night duty etc etc

Judy is a rodent, but I think you actually hate the G era... zootopia was set out to be something way bigger.... but meh, I hope it wiill learn from it's mistakes

I, like many here before have said, Loved zootopia, but you make a good point.
It's called ZOOtopia. A zoo is filled with ALL kinds of animals, not just mammals. Plus I don't see how birds and lizards aren't marketable, even as gag characters.

No car insurance for you Judy!

According to the creators of the movie they may make a spin-off movie about birds or reptiles next.

plus the sequel needs Alligator cops in ZPD shirts, komodo dragon cops as komodo dragons are predators.

the animal in the picture must be salamander maybe complaining "Why you lookin' down on me, man?"

its a small lizard

the lizard was like "Why you lookin' down on me, man?"

What I am about to put there may have already been said:

Correct point about no reptiles or birds being in the movie (I also heard about them in future movies) but in that world that could be due to a general discrimination against them or maybe they just decided to live apart from the mammals. The one thing that can be said is that they do exist because in that world Robin Hood is cannon. Lets look at that movie: a chicken, Robin Hood disguised as a stork and then there is Sir Hiss, therefore, they do exist in Zootopia's world. Also note that this was a movie about one city on that version of planet Earth. But using Robin Hood as a base there is one big problem as there was a Bloodhound in that movie. If humans never evolved (this could also include most if not all primates) domestic breeds of any species should not exist in Zootopia's world especially dogs as it was humans that created ALL versions of domestic dogs that exist today; no anthro cows or popular breeds of equines either (you can hit them for not having recently extinct or existing species or donkeys/burros).

Domestic cats: the various breeds that exist in our world should not exist in Zootopia's, BUT there are 2 species of small wildcats that can be mistaken for Tabbies; one is on display in the Philadelphia Zoo but you look at it carefully and you can tell there is something "wild" about it. They could have also included Lynxes, Bobcats, Pumas, Fisher cats, Caracals, Servals, etc. Disney can be justifiably hit on this point.

Australian animals: they exist and there is an Aussie section of the city it was just not developed for the movie ("Art of Zootopia"), although there was to be a Koala involved in the original plot.

Bats: I have not heard anything official but there is an underground section of the city for nocturnals so bats could be there. they did not late night sequences of the city so their absence could be explained except for the end tile concert scene.

What it comes down to is that even the best movie out there is not going to cover everyone's favorite topics or fill every plot hole. For example: as technically accurate as 2001: A Space Odyssey was they did not show any low gravity effects in the moon base or on the surface. Even Space: 1999 did that by having a form of limited artificial gravity limited to the base.

"You’ll also notice that there are no reptiles and birds in Zootopia. The filmmakers told us that they did this on purpose though they thought about adding them. Swamps and eyries may have been too much for the first film. When you see the complexity of Zootopia’s city planning, you’ll understand why concentrating on the mammals was important. Also, considering the way they tend to remain with their own kind, you’ll understand. They did say that a possible sequel might visit those lands."

Seriously do some research before going into a rant fest. Not to mention they already had over 80,000 different chars in the film... Not to also mention there is easily over 50k different types of species out there. So to add them all would just be to much for the movie. They had only 24 different types of animals in the first movie. So you can see how many they left out. They focused on the most common of animals for the first movie.

Now if this was like the third movie and they still havent added birds or reptiles...Then you can bitch about it. Till then, I think this is very childish.

the puma is Bagi's species, yes?

Turkish Angora cat, Duchess's cat species in the Aristocats, should be in the Zootopia sequel.

Was a deal breaker for me too. It's sad that reptiles in movies can either be the bad guys or so ridiculously goofy you can't take them seriously.

i dont normally comment on topics lake this but i do fine this kinda funny.

dude if you dont like the movie thats fine you dont have to. but to go out of your way to make art about it then trash talk the hell out of it?

thats kinda odd man its just like any other movie if you dont like it dont go and see it or buy the dvd.

at the one of the day by doing art for it your really just promoting it.

I'm more angry they left the monkey, lemur and ape out. There mammal too. And where my Alligator and Crocodile.

Sorry hun, but this picture was an awful, awful idea. What in the world were you thinking? You're gonna take one of the biggest, most well-loved events in furry culture that's happened in years and make angry political artwork about it that makes everyone's favorite character look like a racist jerk? Did you just wake up one day and think, "Gee, not enough people hate me. I have to fix that!" and then this happened? XD

Stick to the porn, hun. I'm begging you. XD

Because i dont care. I dont identify myself as a Furry and i knew full well what whould happen, but at the end of the day i didnt like the movie, i didnt like it before i saw it and i dont like it now and i will stand by my opinion, wich is that i found it to be a bad movie.

yeah that is weird that there was no reptiles in that movie, i thought there were plenty of cute/talking animal movies with reptile characters, or is that just a dream-works thing?

praise Raptor Jesus.

I thought keeping it to mammals only was a pretty good form of internal logic. If everything is sentient, what do carnivores eat? Plus, leaving out any market-talk, mammals are what are closest to us, and are relatively new on the evolutionary block; rat-things just evolved when lizards ruled the planet. The way the internal narrative of the movie was, only mammals made sense. It would be nice to see other species, sure, but I'm not all that invested.

Lol I think lizards, primeapes, and the others will be explored in a second movie. The WORLD of Zootopia would be very complex if all animals are indeed sentient. I like to imagine maybe there are different 'countries' that all the different animal families hail from and Zootopia is like a neutral city-state. their absence in this movie shouldn't make you hate the movie. Instead, it should make you want to know more about their world.

Wow its odd that how many people that I do know love/liked this movie and yet you are the first to come out with this kind of hate for it. I did noticed early on with the lack of bird, reptiles, fish and so on and in a world of only mammals of both prey and pred as where does the pred gets is meat from, was a bit of a gap for me.

well yeah i knew i´d be the odd one out, especily on a site for furries, But i will stand by my opinion that i didnt like the movie. Sure there might be sequels, and probebly will be seeing how muchh money it made and then it might have other types of animals, but thats not here or now, i dont think one can defend it by saying " wait until the next movie and you might get what we left out" I will judge a movie on what they put on the screen.

lol take a chill pill man plus evolution favored mammals aka us dude to people the movie makes some sense (predators need to eat something besides fish and insects bird and lizard meat makes sense) to quote the dude lol again thats like your opinion man

Dude, it's a kids movie, is not obligatory for furries, a kid wants to see a cute and fluffy animal and disney knows that, thats why there are no other anthropomorphic animals besides mammals, don't be mad at a kids movie, it's supposed to be silly and attractive for they... Not us... if we wanted to see it and make a fandom of the movie is another thing. But the film will still be for children.

i dont think that just because something is made for kids, makes it immune to scrutiny. Anny work of art or fiction can be thought on, dismanteled and talked about, what theams it has, purpose, plot etc etc. Thinking should never be a issue with movies.

I can understand you... I had the same feelings about it, before I saw it...

I did like it though after I watched it... still not completely hyped up about it like the rest of the furry-community, because as a scalie you pretty much feel like you are standing beside and are allowed to watch while everyone is celebrating it.



But! There are rumors that other animals like birds and reptiles will be in the sequel...

If that's trueI'd wait for that, maybe it explains why exactly they aren't in Zootopia. I could imagine a couple of factors that might make sense, why they are sticking together in whole scalie- or bird-communities, like other religion, other language or maybe just feeling to stick to the ones that resemble them mostly.


Of course it could also be that they just make the scalies the bad guys... happened often enough in Disney movies...

thing is one shoulndt have to wait for some extended cut, novalization or sequel to think " ah now it makes seanse" i will judge a movie on what they put on the screen

finally, somebody that had a hissy fit over the missing species. literally, I'll bet ;) your the first person I've run into in any of the fandoms I know that only goes by screen Canon ! hopefully, you also noticed the lack of both non placental mammals, non land mammals, most domestic types, all primates, and every species outside of zoo species

remember, this is not meant for us, this was meant to appeal to little kids with things they recognize.

yeah i noticed it. as i´ve said multiply times is that i dont buy the world the movie presents. i know its fiction but its very poorly concived. not on the same level of awfull as the world of cars or the good dinosaur but its up there.

remind me never to post my own world building fic with you in mind :P ,though I might have Jurassic Light vetted. unfortunately, I was one of the people caught in the final flareup of the "burned Furs" thing back in the day, when a lot of sites were full of "come back with a professional art degree, no0b!" types.

I understand your point of view and I respect your opinion about the movie :)
I agree that they could have added the reptiles, birds, dogs, cats and primates normally, it's kinda weird to don't see some more common animals there :/
But afterall, they wanted to focus in the 'racism' between preys and predators... I think that working in 'racism' between mammals and reptiles, for example, could work a bit better (like in your picture) lol

Wow you triggered a lot of people with this picture and having a simple opinion, people even called you names over this lol.

I love this picture though, it's great.

i knew pepole whould get up in arms. its a popular movie with anthro animals and this is a furry site , but i regret nothing and is tand by what i think on this

I found it creative and funny, good work dude. :)

I must be the minority here, but I also thought this film could've been handled a lot better. You know how most of the things the general audience and critics hate to see in animated films: modern 'hip' pop-culture references, cringey lingo humor and jokes catering to what is popular now. And add a throwaway pop-song that doesn't fit the film whatsoever and generic, obnoxious and unlikable characters... yeah those things. Zootopia is the main ticket.

I am baffled of how successful this film is, and am for the most part very displeased at Disney for falling into these traps (Though, they have done this in the past). I thought they would know better, but I guess not. If you were to remove the Disney name from the film, I bet most people would never take a second glance to the film.

The dark side of Zootopia is that the Mammals committed genocide against the birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish.

The Predator Vs Prey was just another reason to extend the pogroms, and it almost worked.

again chill your all acting like idiots its just a fucking movie lol especially chaos ticket your retarded

Honestly, I'm surprised no one's stated this sooner.

If youre not trolling, OP, undo the calamity that is your mammaries.

Even as mammals only it was full of double standards. (Foxes are good, really. Weasels however, they all suck.) In regards to lizards, and fish, (and birds, and... well everything else.) it's crap. This needed to be said.

https://i.makeagif.com/media/5-16-2015/2SP68V.gif

prejudices against carnivores finally fade away... these gross creepy fuckers still need to stay away tho.

As for not going the "Robin Hood" route, where every animal is a cartoon with human intelligence, I guess that was just an aesthetic choice. The Land Before Time didn't have any talking mammals in it, which made sense for that particular world build. Though, I'm not sure why the T-Rex doesn't speak.... same with the carnotaurus in Disney's Dinosaur. Can't be because it it eats meat, because plenty of dinos talk that do. I guess it's just "because we need a scary monster, logic be hanged".

I actually appreciate the logic in the world building of Zootopia, though it has flaws. Presumably, if fish/bugs/reptiles are still just animals during the time this film takes place, we could assume the more highly evolved mammals like cetaceans have probably already invented interstellar travel and left millions of years before all the other mammals caught up. hehe.

According to Rotten Tomatoes, the 93% percent of the audience liked Zotopia, but that leave 7%, about 1 out of 14 people, who disliked the film.
So while I may have loved it, I respect when someone dislikes something for a particular reason.

I can relate to that mate. *pets back* =P

Well, I can't really judge of anything to nature,
I understand where it's all going, I...can't really see much of a problem.
I mean because the film focuses on Judy and Nick most for the time, it's hard to tell of anyway.

I mean if you think of seeing the scene where Judy get's off the train,
surely they'd have afew reptiles, s'just they are pretty small creatures, and between Mammals and Reptiles, pretty much mammals are pretty hard to look over the shoulder to.
Hell, I made a reptile of a snake, and he's HUGE. XD

I think more likely then not this franchise will remain mammals only. (Implying that perhaps mammals are the only intelligent things on this planet. And that maybe something like the little reptile guy in this picture doesn't exist on this planet (And Judy would be more like "Holy crap an ALIEN!" (Not that I can see her enthusiastically supporting segregation...)

But I wouldn't worry if they DO decide to add reptiles (or birds.) They didn't actually want to do that segregation thing with the shock collars. So if they are going to do reptiles in this setting they'll just do a 'soft' retcon (Which barely would even BE a retcon, since the movie never explicitly says "Hey this city is mammals only! (Just doesn't SHOW anything else.) And they'd just show there where some non-mammals in the city all along. they're just minority immigrants. (With all that entails, sure. But they won't be kept out of the city.)

It'll be one of those. (Which you're free to hate by the way! Either way they opt to do it. They can use or not use whatever species they want or make a mammal only world, and you can hate it as much as you like.)


It didn't have to do with mammals being more cute and marketable though. You can make just about anything cute and marketable. And some reptiles already naturally are cute and marketable. (Tortoises, gecko's (Oscar's Oasis!) etc.)

It was more that the writers felt mammals had the clearest predator prey division and that was a key aspect of especially the earliest draft of their movie with the shock collars. They could have probably worked reptiles into the movie they ended up actually MAKING, but by the time they got to that point where the shock collars where abandoned they had already done a crapton of animation and modeling, so it was just plain to late at that point.

If you hate it so, why bother drumming this up? usually people try to avoid what they hate.

Not only that but they kinda went too far in this movie


Racism

Black Lives Matter related movement


Genocide (kinda but not really)


And in the deleted film, segregation

thats super constructive, thank you

You folks want a more diverse animal movie?

Try Illumination Entertainment's Sing...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3470600.....r/rm2759328000

http://www.singmovie.com/audition

^_^

yeah i am a bit more excited over that one

At least that movie has birds, primates, amphibians & reptiles...

well i definetly agree with you i mean i never seen one reptile i mean disney and pixar add much animals as they can

well yes, i did, I Still strongly dislike this movie and the fact it won an oscar dosent help, it jsut goes to show that they just give it away to what ever Disney/pixar movie that enters

I agree. I was quite disappointed watching the movie. Well, talk about latent... something like racism... Specism? Bloodtemperaturism?
But thank god, there will be a sequel, hopefully it will show avians and cold-bloods...
Or, Avians and Reptiles, Fishes and Amphibians have other cities or even nations...

This pic is just so sadly true. Movie and RL wise.

"All animals are equal. But some are more equal than others." Animal Farm - George Orwell

i liked the movie. but the original plot was way more interesting than the final result.

I think a sequel would fix that, add the animals that would’ve been much more taxing for the first product, so now that they know what to do, it will be much easier.

Oh grow up.

thats super constructive,thank you

Well at least I can type properly.

well english is my second language

Big problem with that.

The Art of Zootopia had concept art for reptiles and Apes to be there. It was outright explained that Apes were dropped because, "If Humans never happened, Apes shouldn't exist either because of how Closely related we are".

Reptiles were because of how it was getting too Complicated, and that they were hitting the limit for a lot of the Species roster, as animation of even the Smallest things, is incredibly expensive. So they had to drop the Reptiles from the On-screen showings.

Personally, I had one thing that jumped to my mind. The Do or Die, that is Mother Nature. Sure, officially, they had Bugs as a Source of Protein, but Birds weren't part of the list, so I say they didn't evolve, and are like your bog-standard wild birds we have in real life, aka, they're food.

Reptiles were either the same, and are thus, a Food Source for the Predators/Omnivores, or they're Sapient, but not in the (City) because they couldn't be bothered to take the trip over. Here's the thing, have you considered the OTHER SIDE as well?? That the Reptiles in-Universe, if they hadn't become Sapient, just want nothing to do with the Mammal Race?? Or that they're in a Tribal stage?

We have yet to see beyond the Borders of Zootopia, and we mean beyond the borders of what could possibly be Africa, as Zootopia had a deleted Scene where the alleged Union Spot was in a Waterhole in the Savanna, made more prominent how someone Pointed out that the City seemed to be in a large Fresh water lake in a Mountainous region in Africa.

i dont care about what they hade in the artbooks or any of that. all that matters is whats in the movie

The Artbook gives the reasons WHY there are no Reptiles. It's the Director's Cut that gives their reasonings for doing things, and thus, is Considered "Word of God".

And frankly, I rather not have my Enjoyment of a Movie Ruined just because my Favorite Genre/Animal isn't in it. And Trust me, I want Space Fantasy Sci-Fis and a lot more Anthro Genres that AREN'T Rubberhose Laziness or Generic Animals, but It doesn't Ruin Zootopia for me!

So frankly, if your Response is "I don't care what they had in the Artbooks, All that matters is What's in the Movie", it just shows that all you care about is Inclusivity for the Sake of Inclusivity... Such as "Token Minorities.

How's the US right now doing with Such a Thing being Screeched about? I mean, it's not like Portland isn't having their Federal Courthouse being assaulted and nearly burned down by Rioters...

OH Wait.

In the 2020 we now know that "real" inteligent animal world will be dark and twisted like hell.

Beastars is the production that is closest to reality that you probably think about. And despite the interesting characters, good history and a very well developed world ... its just fucked up. Asking too many questions ends with the discovery of horror. I don't know what others have written. I didn't read other entries. Zootopia is not the best movie but it is a production that leaves various "security gates" in case you ask too dangerous questions.

The reality we live in is the urban world. Our species has been trying to become independent of the food chain for a good 10,000 years. However, poorly us out. In a world like Zootopia or Beastars, the reality of the natural cycle of food circulation is mixed up with a complicated social and cultural hierarchy. They are eaters and they are eaten. This problem must be solved in the first moment of creating a world inhabited by intelligent animals.

There must be logical principles for the functioning of every created world. If they are missing or not clear, the gates of hell will open.

rasicst movie

Di-did you somehow will Zootopia 2 into existence?
Yeah, greeting from 2024, Zootopia 2 just got announced and it's gonna have reptiles in it.

And now the sequel is gonna have reptiles in it. After seeing the teasers I just had to come back to this pic. XD

The sequel will be fixing this problem.

I was legitimately hoping reptiles were not Sapient, but Zootopia 2 killed that hope, guess it'll just be another mundane movie franchise where the majority of the animals are Sapient, after all we can't think outside the box or be special, we all must conform to what everyone else thinks we must be :/


Maybe one day we'll get a movie or a TV show that has only one type of group of animals be it, mammal reptiles or bird and the rest will not be Sapient and will just be pets food and Wildlife, I'm honestly tired of seeing the exact same formula in every single movie TV show video game etcetera, Zootopia looked like it might have broke that trend but Zootopia 2 brought it right back :'(

You know, coming back to this after eight years… I wonder what your reaction to recent announcements is :)

Is this some kind of joke? No really I’m actually asking

it is not. i have a long list of grievances against Zootopia