Zootopia (2016)

[BK007]

4 hours ago, Goffe said:

Investigative plot + Disney blandness +  unabashedly preachy + offensively nonsensical analogies + obvious villain is obvious = Poison to me.

 

Two sequences, the popsicle one and where the bully Fox apologize to Judy, had me internally screaming. Fucking awful.

 

God, the way Judy finds what is causing the animals to go wild is the most contrived plot device I have seen in a while.

 

And that speech at the end? I was like, kill me already. 40/100

 

Do you ever like anything though? 

Edited March 18, 2016 by BK007

[The Panda]

4 hours ago, Goffe said:

Investigative plot + Disney blandness +  unabashedly preachy + offensively nonsensical analogies + obvious villain is obvious = Poison to me.

 

Two sequences, the popsicle one and where the bully Fox apologize to Judy, had me internally screaming. Fucking awful.

 

God, the way Judy finds what is causing the animals to go wild is the most contrived plot device I have seen in a while.

 

And that speech at the end? I was like, kill me already. 40/100

 

Lol.

[AniNate]

4 hours ago, Goffe said:

Investigative plot + Disney blandness +  unabashedly preachy + offensively nonsensical analogies + obvious villain is obvious = Poison to me.

 

Two sequences, the popsicle one and where the bully Fox apologize to Judy, had me internally screaming. Fucking awful.

 

God, the way Judy finds what is causing the animals to go wild is the most contrived plot device I have seen in a while.

 

And that speech at the end? I was like, kill me already. 40/100

 

[BadAtGender]

Okay, some thoughts.

 

In a lot of ways, it feels like WiR and BH6 (and maybe even Bolt) were proto-Zootopia films. They had some similar storytelling techniques that feel like they were perfected here.

 

Additionally, if you can view Frozen as the culmination of 70 years of princess fairy tales, Zootopia is the culmination of the accumulated talking animal films. It's not a twist on expectations in the way that Frozen was, but it does seem like it's a film taking at least one aspect of the talking animal (the anthropomorphized one) to the logical extreme that earlier films, such as Robin Hood, didn't.

 

One thing that really stands out is this might be the first WDAS film in a long time which really nails the three act structure. Maybe part of that is because they utilize a mystery plot, which requires a lot tight control, but they just nail the arc beats perfectly through it. Even Frozen, as much as I love it, is a bit uneven in this structure. Zootopia makes the storytelling pretty damn effortless, which is amazing when you consider how much worldbuilding work is required.

 

And, oh man, that worldbuilding is amazing. While it's a pretty simple concept, mammals are all sentient and they build a city together, getting it to work is astounding. I can't help but feel that trying to do this film before Hyperion would have been impossible. They needed that strength to do those varied environments and to allow for all the character models to let the city actually feel populated. Doing crowds is hard enough. Doing it with wildly different animals has to be a considerable step beyond.

 

If there's anything to criticize about the film, it's the music. Giacchino isn't a composer I'd expect to be a let-down, but he kind of is here. The score is fine, but it's workmanlike and doesn't quite hold up to the greatness that's everywhere else. I think an early rumor had John Powell doing the score, but I expect his sabbatical nixed that (which also affected KFP3.) It's sad to consider what we might have had, since his last WDAS work for Bolt was phenomenal.

 

Secondly, I can't help but feel like Gazelle was a missed opportunity. Try Everything is pretty catchy as a song, and the lyrics do match the theme of the film, but neither of the times it's used in the film feel particularly appropriate. It would have been better if they'd come up with a few more songs to use. When Judy's riding into the city, it should be something about grand external discovery, not working hard for internal discovery. And at the end they needed something that was more of a showstopper.

 

Additionally, if they had come up with three songs, it would have sold the idea that Gazelle is the hottest musical act around much better. Something akin to A Goofy Movie, which used two different songs by Tevin Campbell to make Powerline seem like a legit popstar. Shakira's got the voice to really make it work. She just needed more to work with, IMO.

 

Still, that's a pretty minor quibble. Overall, it's a fantastic film and it might be the best constructed WDAS film, even if others might generate a stronger personal connection to some people.

[MrFanaticGuy34]

7 hours ago, Goffe said:

Investigative plot + Disney blandness +  unabashedly preachy + offensively nonsensical analogies + obvious villain is obvious = Poison to me.

 

Two sequences, the popsicle one and where the bully Fox apologize to Judy, had me internally screaming. Fucking awful.

 

God, the way Judy finds what is causing the animals to go wild is the most contrived plot device I have seen in a while.

 

And that speech at the end? I was like, kill me already. 40/100

 

 (Sighs)

 

Why am i not surprised with your opinions on current animated movies? I mean, seriously.....what did expect from them? More matureness and no childish stuff at all? Or only what YOU wanted to see? What the hell, Goffe?

 

No wonder why you want to hate on new animated films for no reason.

Edited March 18, 2016 by MrFanaticGuy34

[Spidey Freak]

4 hours ago, DamienRoc said:

One thing that really stands out is this might be the first WDAS film in a long time which really nails the three act structure. Maybe part of that is because they utilize a mystery plot, which requires a lot tight control, but they just nail the arc beats perfectly through it. Even Frozen, as much as I love it, is a bit uneven in this structure. 

 

...it might be the best constructed WDAS film, even if others might generate a stronger personal connection to some people.

 

Interesting you say that because the thing that kept me from connecting to this more than Frozen or WiR is the structure.

 

I do agree that the first two acts are excellent, and the middle act is definitely stronger than Frozen's middle act (though I felt Frozen's second act really benefited a supporting player in Kristoff). It's Zootopia's third act that I felt could have been more tighter. While "Woolter/Jesse" was a fun gag (not that inventive though), I just think the sequence would have had more of an effect if it were more seamlessly intertwined with the museum sequence. I wonder whether the villain's reveal happening slightly earlier would have allowed the character to have had more of an impact. I still prefer the climax on the fjord and the build up to it in Frozen, which I think are flawless and hold up incredibly well even after multiple viewings.

 

Also, the "Night Howlers" reveal though great, just comes from left field (literally ). Fortunately for Zootopia, its themes and leads are much more stronger than the mystery aspects, so this did not have affect the movie to a large degree.

Edited March 18, 2016 by Spidey Freak

[Goffe]

7 hours ago, BK007 said:

 

Do you ever like anything though? 

yes, I occasionally like good films. I definitely don't like bad films, which Zoo is. 

[Goffe]

4 hours ago, Goffe said:

Investigative plot + Disney blandness +  unabashedly preachy + offensively nonsensical analogies + obvious villain is obvious = Poison to me.

 

Two sequences, the popsicle one and where the bully Fox apologize to Judy, had me internally screaming. Fucking awful.

 

God, the way Judy finds what is causing the animals to go wild is the most contrived plot device I have seen in a while.

 

And that speech at the end? I was like, kill me already. 40/100

 

Lol.

Glad I could at least amuse you.

[MrFanaticGuy34]

1 hour ago, Goffe said:

yes, I occasionally like good films. I definitely don't like bad films, which Zoo is. 

 

Ok....seriously.....what do you expect from good animated films?

 

And be a little more concrete, because some of your opinions of new animated films, makes very little sense to me, and i have a hard time understanding your opinions.

Edited March 18, 2016 by MrFanaticGuy34

[Goffe]

1 hour ago, Goffe said:

yes, I occasionally like good films. I definitely don't like bad films, which Zoo is. 

 

Ok....seriously.....what do you expect from good animated films?

 

And be a little more concrete, because some of your opinions of new animated films, makes very little sense to me, and i have a hard time understanding your opinions.

I want something sincere, fresher, and not preachy, handling its subject with subtlety and grace. Being actually funny would be a plus.

Don't bother replying 'it's for kids'

[AniNate]

"We are good at multiplying" was funny. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong.

[The Panda]

3 hours ago, Goffe said:

yes, I occasionally like good films. I definitely don't like bad films, which Zoo is. 

 

It's okay, it's not like you're literally the only person with that opinion on this forum or anything (and only 2 troll critics at that).

 

I think you're being ridiculous in your critiques for this movie that seem pretty void of actual substance.  They're just, "Oh really!  That moment!?" 

 

The movie was actually funny and did handle it's message (overall) with great subtlety and grace.  Those are two of the biggest things going for the movie, intelligent humor and a central theme that strikes a perfect balance between being obvious enough so people get it but not getting preachy (I'll say Gazelle's speech pushed the line a bit).  Add to that a tightly compacted story that keeps you engaged enough so the next gag or thematic point can be made at full impact.

 

You to seem to just hate the genre (Animated Family Film).  I'm not a big horror film fan, but I won't criticize a horror movie for trying to be scary.  Just like I won't criticize a straight comedy for being unbelievable/unrealistic because straight comedies in a sense are supposed to (the only way to use that criticism is if the movie set itself up to have certain rules and then proceeds to break them without purpose)

 

But anyways, a simple Lol. was probably the best retort to that review.  It's okay, we all have wrong opinions sometimes, you just happen to have it on this.

Edited March 18, 2016 by The Panda

[MrFanaticGuy34]

2 hours ago, Goffe said:

 

 

Ok....seriously.....what do you expect from good animated films?

 

And be a little more concrete, because some of your opinions of new animated films, makes very little sense to me, and i have a hard time understanding your opinions.

I want something sincere, fresher, and not preachy, handling its subject with subtlety and grace. Being actually funny would be a plus.

Don't bother replying 'it's for kids'

 

Um, dude.....it's not just for kids. Adults seems to love it as well. Again....It's not just a kids thing. And it doesn't need to be a kiddie flick to be funny.

 

I noticed a pattern about you and your tastes, which does bother me. Any new animated film that comes out, it's automatically bad in your eyes.

[Goffe]

3 hours ago, The Panda said:

 

It's okay, it's not like you're literally the only person with that opinion on this forum or anything (and only 2 troll critics at that).

 

I think you're being ridiculous in your critiques for this movie that seem pretty void of actual substance.  They're just, "Oh really!  That moment!?" 

 

The movie was actually funny and did handle it's message (overall) with great subtlety and grace.  Those are two of the biggest things going for the movie, intelligent humor and a central theme that strikes a perfect balance between being obvious enough so people get it but not getting preachy (I'll say Gazelle's speech pushed the line a bit).  Add to that a tightly compacted story that keeps you engaged enough so the next gag or thematic point can be made at full impact.

 

You to seem to just hate the genre (Animated Family Film).  I'm not a big horror film fan, but I won't criticize a horror movie for trying to be scary.  Just like I won't criticize a straight comedy for being unbelievable/unrealistic because straight comedies in a sense are supposed to (the only way to use that criticism is if the movie set itself up to have certain rules and then proceeds to break them without purpose)

 

But anyways, a simple Lol. was probably the best retort to that review.  It's okay, we all have wrong opinions sometimes, you just happen to have it on this.

First, did you ever stop to think why my reviews are (for the most part) devoid of substance?

 

Second, no I don't hate an entire medium, that's a completely absurd accusation. Inside Out is the latest example of an animated film that I loved, I thought it was the second best movie of 2015. 

 

Films need to check the boxes of what makes them good and entertaining, the animated ones don't get a pass from me for whatever reason. 

 

I didn't find it funny or subtle. Are you seriously trying to disqualify my opinion? X saying Y can't use certain adjective because it's offensive or that 'what we learned today' speech at the end or a scene designed with a sole purpose of saying racism is bad (the ice cream store scene). That's the far opposite of subtle to me. I would give you more examples, but I have already totally forgotten the film. 

 

Honestly, I didn't expect that kind of post coming from an old user.

[Goffe]

52 minutes ago, MrFanaticGuy34 said:

 

Um, dude.....it's not just for kids. Adults seems to love it as well. Again....It's not just a kids thing. And it doesn't need to be a kiddie flick to be funny.

 

 

that's not what I said. 

 

People generally use 'it's for kids' excuse when they want someone to accept mediocrity. All I said was 'don't go on me with that excuse'.

[goldenstate5]

Dude doesn't like the movie. Oh well. I think even Goffe knows he's in the minority on this one since Zootopia seems to be even free from the usual hipster internet backlash that even Inside Out wasn't impervious to.

 

Its not like he has made his claim onto the world and everybody must follow it. You will find that almost every single film in history has its detractors, the point is whether or not that person is genuine or trying to bait people. He liked IO, so he doesn't seem to be a contrarian (and that movie attracted contrarians like crazy), so whatever.

 

Although racism is bad and I think it's kind of weird to hate a scene of a movie pushing that message but whatever.

[Avatree]

On 3/17/2016 at 11:44 PM, Goffe said:

Investigative plot + Disney blandness +  unabashedly preachy + offensively nonsensical analogies + obvious villain is obvious = Poison to me.

 

Two sequences, the popsicle one and where the bully Fox apologize to Judy, had me internally screaming. Fucking awful.

 

God, the way Judy finds what is causing the animals to go wild is the most contrived plot device I have seen in a while.

 

And that speech at the end? I was like, kill me already. 40/100

Good points. And I wasn't enjoying the movie much but I really lost patience with it when she discovered the flowers.

[Goffe]

6 hours ago, goldenstate5 said:

Although racism is bad and I think it's kind of weird to hate a scene of a movie pushing that message but whatever.

I don't have a problem with the message itself. The execution is where the problem lies.

[AniNate]

 

It would make logical sense to assume Emmett was talking about the people who ostensibly kidnapped him at first. If night howler is your clue and you see wolves on the camera, you probably are going to deduce they're connected. It was likely an intentional misdirection by Bellwether since she allowed Judy access to the cameras without protest

Edited March 20, 2016 by tribefan695

[Avatree]

1 hour ago, tribefan695 said:

 

It would make logical sense to assume Emmett was talking about the people who ostensibly kidnapped him at first. If night howler is your clue and you see wolves on the camera, you probably are going to deduce they're connected. It was likely an intentional misdirection by Bellwether, especially since she allowed Judy access to the cameras without protest

 

none of the movie made any kind of sense.