Animation Source Forums

I'm actually totally ambivalent in the issue. I think they're cute together or just as friends, either way is fine with me. ^^
So I'll be happy to just wait and see what they might do with a sequel.

Personally I'm iffy about the prospect of a sequel, and if the matter of a relationship did come into play it would be very difficult to avoid making it cliched - an effort which, honestly, I don't know as I'd expect Disney to try to make these days. If Nick got mixed up with someone who wasn't as trustworthy as he thought, that might work. It's an old ploy, but it's been done well before. If it were pulled off right with Judy I'd be even more impressed - which may not be entirely fair of me, but oh well.

I think of Zootopia kind of the same way I think of movies like Courageous (best cop movie I know of). Was it a good movie? Absolutely (I think Courageous was better, but Zootopia was good). Do I want to see a sequel? Not really. Mostly I want to see the same principles that went into Zootopia used to make other good movies, much as the makers of Courageous built on the success of Facing the Giants to make it and then turned around to make Fireproof. There is progression, and there are themes carried over, but each one is its own entity all the same.

To bring things back to the topic, however, I notice that Ancient suggested that race was one of the issues in Zootopia. I'm not entirely sure I agree, partly because I'm not a fan of allegorization in general (I'm a big fan of some stories which are allegorical, but I don't like ones which aren't allegories being treated as or turned into allegory). Zootopia is a prime example. For one thing, if it's treated as an allegory then things tend to leak back from the interpretation into the movie itself, in a manner of speaking. Example: Zootopia had specialized areas like the rodent section from which larger animals were mostly barred either passively (e.g. bigger animals couldn't effectively use those hamster tubes) or actively (like the fence). If the species were equated with races, then one might well see that as unfair - but it was perfectly reasonable in the context of different species. It gave the rodents a place where they could count on not having to dodge elephant feet, and it was probably easier for the big animals who didn't have to worry about the extra numbers of small animals lingered in with them in every single part of the city. As different species, they needed both overlaps and separation to co-exist effectively.

Now, taking the story as I believe it should be interpreted, things take on a different light: the story is about prejudice between species. Can the principles there be used to teach kids about matters of race? Yes, but not by trying to make the movie itself about race, and thereby use race to judge the world of the movie.

Race was absolutely one of the issues dealt with in Zootopia. I thought it was very well done in terms of that.
So sorry if I misunderstood, but you're not trying to suggest it wasn't, are you?

Does anyone actually know if a sequel is planned to happen, or is it sort of up in the air at this point? Disney being Disney I could certainly see them trying for one.

Ah; now that you explained on the shoutbox, I see what I need to clarify - and let me start by clarifying that I continue on this mainly since it has to do with my thoughts on the pairing, and that I'm not arguing against the use of the pairing itself (well, not most uses anyway). My main debate (and I mean that in the most civil sense possible) is with the reasoning of equating the concept of species in Zootopia with that of races in the real world.

Simply put, the two matters do have similarities. For example, all the species in Zootopia - at least all the ones we see - are sentient, intelligent, and able to manipulate objects. For abstract purposes, such as voting, one could equate one species with another. They are equal... but they're not identical. Conversely, there are also some very radical differences between species and groups of species - ones which make certain overlaps among races in our world dangerous or even impossible in theirs. Most of those differences are very concrete, and so are a lot of things to consider when it comes to relationships. In those areas, the species boundaries in Zootopia are much more like the ones in this world than they are like ethnic differences. Thus, the concept of species in that world is similar to the concept of ethnicity in ours, but not the same. It's a fine line, but (I think) definitely one worth pointing out.

Back to the pairing issue, I think that Nick and Judy work well as friends, both in abstract and concrete terms. I don't know that they'd make sucha good couple, though, particularly in concrete terms (and I'm not sure about abstract ones either).

I don't see how the film has anything to do with "race". The film is about seeing others for who they are, not what they are. I think if racism was intended to be apart of the film, there would have been conflicts on both sides (mice not liking shrews, lions not like tigers, etc).

Well actually there are three clear instances of the directors' and writers' attempts to draw comparisons to racism in our world:

• Bellwether's desire to overcome all predators and usurp their apparent control of the city of Zootopia, and make things better for all prey by going to extremes to achieve it;
  
  
• Jerry Jumbeaux Jr.'s very obvious disdain for foxes, in the scene when Nick is trying to swindle a Jumbeaux popsicle from him with a very clever, melodramatic act (which, in spite of his racist feelings, Jerry seems wise to);
  
  
• the general view, among pretty much most of the Zootopia population, that certain animals are simply not suited for certain jobs (like a rabbit being a police officer)...a mindset that both predator and prey mammals seems to exhibit to varying degrees in that world.

Of course, the only way any of this would anger me is if the directors and writers were making some kind of very subtle and leftist/liberal "whites hate everything" message for the audience. Which in itself would be hateful and racist. And wrong. Racism is present in every corner of our world, and among all races...and across all strata of our various cultures. It is not endemic to one race or culture. No matter what anyone might say to the contrary, or how social justice warriors or social engineering advocates (even in politics and academia) might like everyone to view it.

Now, if that wasn't their intent, rather than just generally showing how racism in ANY form is an ugly thing, then that's okay.



Given the massive amounts of money it generated in theaters worldwide, and the concurrent product blitz? And given Disney's penchant for creating sequels to money-generating movies in their lineup (I mean, if they're planning a sequel to the God-awful Frozen, then it should be apparent that Zootopia, which was about a billion times better, should be getting one), then I'd say it's a pretty good possibility.

Note: http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Zootopia-Directors-Already-Thinking-About-Sequel-Possibilities-97547.html

Hmm. I just saw those as differences, not so much as racism. But I suppose I don't quite understand how far racism goes, and the film itself has a deep meaning. Perhaps more than what I understand.

What this really comes down to is the writing and directing team using allegory as a story device.

As defined by the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, allegory is:





Certainly the animals in Zootopia are not stand-ins, in the simplest terms, for any real-world race in our universe (no matter what some might claim to the contrary, if they ever did...which I am sure some might). But the predator-to-prey fears and views they have of each other, ingrained in them from their instinctual distrust of each other, and instinctual nature of who and what they are as species, plays into it. And that, actually, is the foundation of real-world racism. Not intelligent hatred...but that it is actually born of the instinctual nature of our species to form small bands and to distrust those outside of those bands...especially if they appear different from us in some way. Hatred, as a dark form of intelligence, simply fed off of that in our development as a species.

And really, "differences" are what feed racism, when we (any of us) have a difficult time embracing, understanding or tolerating (racial) differences. Regardless of where we are in society or as a race. Whomever that may be.

I suppose I need to better educate myself on racism, along with other issues in society.

Just be cautious where you go to enlighten yourself. It's a charged issue out there, and currently there is a lot of one-sided and erroneous information being spread around by leftist/socialist/liberal media and even, sadly (as I noted before), academia...especially the concept that only white Americans and Europeans, most specifically, are capable of being racist. Again, in and of itself, THAT is a racist view. And utterly inaccurate. Racism is present, as I noted before, in all strata of society and in all cultures and races. And it's ugly.

But if you go to the wrong places to get your information, you'll be fed a lot of spin-doctored and fabricated baloney.

We should be careful here...this tangent is getting off-topic, and could generate a lot of tense and even hostile conversation. Or a topic lock. And I wouldn't want to see that happen.

On the one hand, those all certainly do have clear counterparts in past (and in some cases present) racial struggles. Similar things have also popped up in other conflicts, such as religious ones (not trying to start anything here; just giving an example). So you do make a fair case in that direction.

On the other hand, I agree that this is turning into a tangent. Perhaps someone should make a forum thread specifically about the racism thing - or better yet an article, because it looks as though a thread on this subject would quickly run out of things to say - and get back to the pairing. The only way race is relevant here is the question of whether a Nick/Judy pairing could reasonably be equated with an interracial one, and I think we can all agree that better allegories for such - like Balto's parents - are not at all hard to come up with.

Being rather leftist myself, I see a lot of problems with what you just said. I see lies everyday being spread by more conservative and right wing media. Perpetuating bigoted thinking, tons of spin doctoring there too and the like. So you might want to mention those are to be avoided too. ;]
This isn't supposed to be a political discussion, but by saying that you did start down that road. I'm only posting to provide some balance to the information you provided. If you want to discuss it further, I'd be open to PMs about it.

Actually if Judy and Nick ever did become a pairing, I bet there are people who would be furious because of the possible interracial likeness of it.

Actually, the first mention of racism itself opened this up to a political discussion, Eska. Let's not start pointing fingers here. If you are going to engage in borderline attacks on my political views (because you mentioned me specifically in your response), and on anyone who has them, then you're going to be one who will have enflamed this discussion. Not me. I didn't attack every single person who has a leftist or liberal viewpoint, nor anyone in this discussion here...no matter how they feel. In fact, you should have seen my initial responses to the question of whether or not there is an allegory of racism in the movie as supporting your viewpoint. I only referred to the question of whether or not such a view was used to infer racism only being present in a CERTAIN SEGMENT of the population. Which is wrong, and enflammatory. And frankly, the left is full of rhetoric which is divisive and which has caused more conflict in the western world recently than it solved...bringing the situation to a head. That is a very real shame.

And, because *I* was the first one who suggested that we do not turn this into a political discussion, and I was also not the first one who started it down that road, *I* will now state, unequivocally, that what I said above is the last of what I have to say about it. If you throw in anymore (or anyone else does), you (or they) bear that responsibility.


People who have been bothered by it (I have seen no "anger" whatsoever) have been so because of logic: a rabbit and a fox cannot interbreed, nor would they even pair up. And lots of people don't abandon logic and sensibility in the real world simply because they're watching a fictional animated story. They expect the same logic to apply there. And that logic is already firmly established in the Zootopia world anyway. Clearly, in the movie, animals of different species don't pair up. They pair up in their own species. This has nothing whatsoever to do with our real world, where the question of interracial marriage still comes down to two people of one species pairing up. Humans are humans...regardless of skin color, eye structure or color, height, body dimensions, etc. The situation in our real world is not at all analogous to a fictional world where many different species of animals exist.

That's basically my thinking on the subject too. I'll be fair and acknowledge that I've seen some stories where couples which appeared to be different species worked; Pokemon, for example, where different species of Pokemon can interbreed (with certain limitations) and the offspring end up as the species of the mother with some traits (such as attacks) from the father. Then there's Skyrim, which has a similar rule with human and elfin races, but even in that a Khajiit (cat-person) or an Argonian (lizard-person) would be unable to breed with a human, an elf, or the other and produce any offspring, let alone fertile ones.

I think the closest one could get to something like Zootopia, at least of what I've seen or heard about in anything approaching detail, would be Thundercats (where it was clear they had races, not species), or Star Fox. Even in the latter one, I got the impression that the two had to be reasonably similar (e.g. a fox and a wolf), and I only know of one individual who was the result of such a union (a union of foxes, it's worth noting, albeit ones from different planets).

Thank you. I noticed you and I are pretty similar in our opinion on this subject. And that, thankfully, is a good thing. It shows that logic and plain old good horse sense is alive and well in this community.


Well yeah...but those are different fictional universes...and some of them are sillier and more implausible than others anyway. Especially Pokemon and those video game-based ones.