I love the scene where Judy looks back at Nick and his collar is on yellow. She knows they're feeling the same way about what just happened but only one of them can experience their emotions without repercussion. It reads to me that she truly realizes in that moment that it's not a safety precaution, predators are being punished for just being alive.
holy shit. Personally, as a queer brown woman, removing the collars at all now just feels like corporate disney interfering. It was probably too “radical” for their tastes or something. Idk. It’s just disappointing because every time I watch the movie i do enjoy it, i like it tbh, and yet i never actually want to rewatch it. It feels so shallow. It’s like it touches on the most generic kind of discrimination, and then proceeds to tie it up with a cute little bow at the end when the villain is defeated and the world is suddenly perfect. For a movie with a theme based on very real, nuanced issues it just feels like a cheap cop out.
You forgot to mention the part where the collars shock the predators whenever they feel any strong emotion, like, *all* emotions. The kid at the polar bear taming party is at first excited, then he gets too happy and gets shocked.
Yeah, and the amusement park Nick wanted to make would allow predators to actually be excited about things without getting shocked, like to be able to feel adrenaline / excitement / fear freely. It would be terrible to live in a world where you HAVE to always be apathetic and suppress your emotions just so you don't get punished.
that scene is so heartbreaking and I wish so badly they'd stuck with the version of the movie that would have kept it. what we got is by no means a bad movie, I still enjoy it enough to rewatch on occasion, but the original concept would have been so much more emotionally impactful
28:35 there is a slight pause before he says "accepts you" and that really speaks to me. he knows his kid is so happy about this. he knows how wrong it is to lie to him. he knows how much it will break him when he realizes it was all just a facade to keep everyone else happy. idk that one pause there just makes me want to cry
That’s the horrible thing though: Only in this line he DOESN‘T lie, it’s just that his son probably takes it the wrong way. The true meaning is that ONLY with this collar does this society accept him 😢
I think the idea of the taming collars would've added so much more to Mayor Lionheart's character as well (following the released plot of the movie). It would further solidify why he covered up all of the missing animals cases and why he had people working hard to keep it quiet but also cure them. Finally, a predator who "can be anything!" got into a position of power - he was "one of the good ones" - always a green collar. Him covering all of that up would be even more due to him not wanting to lose his position but also not wanting to place predators into a more negative light since it's ALREADY bad enough that they have shock collars. If it turns out there's something that makes predators go absolutely feral despite the presence of a shock collar, then what? How bad would things get? He would probably lose his position and predators would be WILDLY displaced and restrained in society. Mayor Lionheart would want to hide things, find out what's causing it, find a way to cure things to prevent further chaos. Not super well thought out but I just think a combo of ideas could've worked so well across so many elements.
It would have worked pretty well. A similar thing happened in Brasil. Our first and only female president was corrupt and honestly it was so disapointing to se a woman on such a position, put the rest of us in an even worse place because of greed. It would have been a great way to develop how predators feell like they are treated in society and how much impact a predator in a position so powerfull would have caused.
It could be set, like, around right before Judy was born. Would've retroactively explained why some of the characters seemed prejudiced for no reason other than being meanies - they remember the time when predator-prey relations were much worse, leaving the prey with newfound fear now that the predators are suddenly uncollared even though all their lives they were taught that that's dangerous, and the predators can have leftover anger about how they have been treated just a few years ago.
@@nataliaborys1554 Would also be a much better representation of how it came to the discrimination in the first place. Like with sexism and racism, the government first played an active role in perpetuating these ideas, like the shock-collars would. Now, we are living in the aftermath, like the original zootopia would.
@@akamered4483 Also also it would mirror real life so much more in that way. Like how you see a lot of older folks that are more prejudiced because they grew up during a time where they were pushed to fear the out group. It would show with only a few generations the majority of people have come to accept these differences while also still being taught/witnessing the prejudices still at play either subtly or openly via their parents or even grandparents.
@@t1dotaku Exactly. I like the idea behind zootopia for being a modern representation of discrimination "post-partum", but the detective plooooooot for gods sake
Personally, as a writer myself, I think the reason the collars were removed was because they couldn't find a way to give the story a happy ending without making it feel like a major contrivance.
I think if they did not have to have a traditional happy ending, they could have done it. A bittersweet, there-is-hope-for-the-future ending would have worked, but Disney would never go for anything less than perfectly happy in a kid's film.
I feel like part of the reason they removed them was if they kept the collars but resolved them by the end of the movie there would've been very little room for sequels. I was crazy for Zootopia when it was still being made so I had seen some concept art and ideas at the time even though I didn't know english very well and I fell in love with the promise of the movie; I don't hate what we got but after learning everything it could've been I would've prefered the version with the collars.
The scene where the polar cub receives the collar and celebrates before getting immediately shocked broke my heart. And when he went back to hug his dad, AH. That would’ve been one of my favourite Disney movies ever.
I'd still argue the best scene is the one in the train where the tiger sits down and the mother scoots her kid away from him- it's so subtle but perfect
what makes gideon's apology all the better, is that through the wording he uses you can tell he's been to therapy. This wasn't just him ending up an okay person in the end, this shows that at some point he looked himself in the mirror, said "I want to be better than you" and put in the freaking work. He conciously acknowledge just how wrong he had been for his actions and worked on bettering himself.
I remember the original ice cream shop scene with the elephants. The guy did not want to sell the jumbo pop to Nick because it was too big for his "son." He was not gonna finish it and most of it would end up on the floor as wasted food. I thought that was a logical take on the scene but the final cut made it look like they were just mean to non elephants. Same with Bogo assigning Judy with traffic duty. She's new on the force. That's not discrimination but they made it look like discrimination.
I feel if he said that, she potentially could’ve understood that, but if instead, she was given a job just in the offices would’ve been a better way to show she’s being somewhat discriminated against due to her size. Potentially, it could also show how the guy wants to, “Keep the little ones safe”
Yeah I think the discrimination in the police force is mostly meant to be represented by her treatment by others rather than just exclusively the case loads. It wasn’t explained to her that everyone goes through traffic duty, instead it did feel like her coworkers were singling her out. I think it was vibes based, as we the audience, do see the wider context of the treatment and expectation of rabbits. We get the feeling that something unfair is happening and zero explanation that traffic duty is for every new recruit, in the same way that Judy experiences it. So even if it wasn’t intentional, we can come to the same conclusion that the force was engaging in discrimination. Even reading the scene with the benefit of the doubt, this is still probably a failure in communication from management paired with a societal issue that exacerbated the feeling of discrimination. It has been a hot second since I watched Zootopia though, sooooo I could be envisioning the scene better than it was.
@@ixiahj I'm pretty sure that was the point. It was meant to misdirect audiences with confirmation bias. Since the story is told from Judy's perspective, it makes sense for her to fixate on prejudice directed her way while turning a blind eye to her own prejudice.
I’m just glad they changed the way he tricked Judy. In an alternative cut, he spun a completely ridiculous story about how Finnick was insane and had a litany of various medical problems in order to win Judy’s sympathy. His acting was also so hammy that only a total moron would believe him. The take they went with was ultimately much better.
If the original script was adapted as a stop motion Wes Anderson movie it would be 10/10 and ironically more in line with classic Disney than modern disney.
Agreed. If it was written during the Disney renaissance, no executive would've looked at the script and went "ew that's depressing" and demand it be rewritten to be as safe and inoffensively corporate as possible. It's still an enjoyable film regardless but seeing what we could have had felt like a robbery. Prejudice and fear being the villain instead of a stupid sheep, Nick being the main character with a better backstory and an actual motivation to do good instead of being a sleazy conman, the city being a dystopia instead of utopia where everyone largely gets along for the most part and racism is in just a few rotten eggs.
Based on some of the size difference things in this movie, you'd think they would NEED things like rabbit cops to police mouse town or such, rather than say, an elephant who is basically a kaiju to them.
Yeah that's one of my issues with zootopia, the size difference enforeces the idea that predators are a danger and prey have every reason to fear them. Which goes against the whole lesson and ruins the metaphor for racism.
@@camarvan Not making it match one to one was a pretty smart move, I think. A multi-faceted metaphor gives the writers more freedom in story-telling, and keeps people thinking about the issue in a more nuanced way.
There's an old webcomic called Zistopia that remade the entirety of Zootopia through the lens of the original pitch, setting it in the 1970s. It gave a deeper examination of systemic racism and class systems than I think even the original script did. It got very intense, one character had had a miscarriage due to having an electric collar on during childbirth.
I remember this to but unfortunately it was canceled. The creator of the fan story just stop for some reason i can't remember, Ironically 2/3 of the way from the story finishing similar to the original zootopia story before changing it.
Guys go watch beastars if u want a dark version of zootopia. Zootopia is like if humans were pretending to be animals. Beastars is like if animals were pretending to be human. Beastars actually explores the fact that predators need to eat meat and how their society essentially makes eating meat illegal, they have substitutes for meat but it’s an unspoken secret hidden from all herbivores that there is a hidden market selling herbivore meat to carnivores. The story also explores interspecies relationship and how they are viewed by the public. Predators and larger species of animals have to take medications or learn how to suppress their instincts to live in society in peace with herbivores. Bears have to take specific meds so that they don’t get too strong or too big so they don’t harm anyone but it has painful side effects. And there is so much more! It’s such a fascinating story.
@@robk2167 Lol an analogy is never 1 on 1. There's also discrimination in Beastars to both sides, I feel there's a bit of an analogy to gender discrimination there, in that carnivores are always seen as the dangerous men and herbivores are the helpless women. The carnivores understand the danger that herbis face and wish to protect them, while herbivores hate the fact that they can't just live in peace and feel safe. Meanwhile Zootopia is more about racial discrimination I feel.
@@pyro8632 I dont agree with you here at all as for me Zootopia is about gender than race where carnivores are seen as the dangerous men and herbivores are the helpless women. Its toxic feminism.
@@robk2167 Honestly if you omitted the part about toxic feminism I could see your point, but it kinda shows a certain mentality that's just a bit concerning. Regardless, the final message of any media is very personal to every person, so both of our viewpoints can coexist with neither being wrong. My point was more about Beastars' massages, to be honest.
I was thinking about it, I imagined rather grim scene where collar on someone activates and being in pain caused more anger thus collar continued to shock predator causing causing the loop of anger and suffering until that predators passes out or just dies
Another idea to show messed up the world is would be for Judy or a prey cop who’s still green along with some experienced cops going under cover to one of those parties to watch the dad and see if he’ll sit there and watch his son get shocked or break the collar leading to his arrest
@@fantasticbirdblue On one hand, I do think it's a bit heavy handed and dark, though maybe that's my bias and concern for what people and kids are intelligent enough to see and understand and discuss, but imo it is more realistic and more accurate to systemic racism, which is a real thing that negatively impacts people in the real world. It can be unhelpful to pretend that all prejudice in the world is an issue of prejudiced individuals and not complicated systems of hierarchies designed and refined for centuries to work against marginalized groups and identities. If anything, the collars are the more kid friendly, digestible low ball parallel to real life, since in real life people who are prejudiced against to be considered more dangerous often don't get a little punishment tap to keep them in line; they get tenderized by law enforcement or sh o t or k i ll e d.
I love the movie. My only problem with it is that the anti-predator sentiment was solved by pinning it on the villain even though the ice cream shop scene implied it was systemic. I also wasn't a fan of portraying Judy collaborating with the mafia to interrogate the weasel as a positive thing, since that is dangerously close to making her a rotten cop. Other than that, it was a decent buddy cop movie with likable characters and great humor.
On the first point, I don’t think the anti-predator sentiment was “solved” it more so calmed the tension between animals. Prejudices will still exist, this just stopped the city from falling into chaos. As for the second point, I don’t think the movie portrayed that as positive, just something that needs to be done for the case. Judy and Nick need information from a weasel who won’t give it away, so they use Mr big to get it. Not really a big deal, just part of solving a case.
@@justanotherguy2609 It is a pretty big deal actually. Threatening some guy selling bootleg movies out of his car with death is a pretty disproportionate punishment. Police aren't supposed to be playing judge, jury, and executioner just because it's convenient for them.
@@prixe12 I imagine they never actually intended to kill him, they just threatened to knowing it would get him to talk (Judy would never want to kill anyone and Mr. Big is smart enough to know dead men tell no tales). Still morally ambiguous for sure, but technically Judy wasn't a cop anymore by that point, which was why she went to Mr. Big to begin with. That and it was a funny cartoon scene that they didn't want to think about too deeply, lol
Somthing that still confuses me is how Judy never knew about the night howlers despite living on that farm her entire childhood. Even if she never went near them herself I feel like she would already know about how dangerous they can be
Yea, if the flowers were around since Judy's childhood then it'd be a very rational decision of her parents to warn her not to go near them. Repeatedly even. That's like the equivalent of having an electric fence and never telling your child that fence is electric.
My assumption which might be wrong is that her parents had stopped using the nighthowlers for a while because they knew how dangerous they were, and they only started using them again because their business started booming and they started growing more crops which necessitated it. But that’s just a theory.
@@Perdix64 You've landed on the explanation clear in the movie. Judy's parents use the scientific name to warn their kids, scaring them with the complicated sounding words. Judy only finds out it's related to her case because her childhood bully says his family and circle calls them nighthowlers. Still, you'd think she and Gideon would have talked enough for her to hear that once or twice. I suspect Judy was originally a city bunny in the first version of the movie, so this wouldn't have been a plothole, assuming the flowers still mattered in that version, which I think they did based on the finale concept art of Nick fighting off three out-of-control tigers.
I'm 19, and still remember watching these rough draft animatics of Zootopia on my iPad when I was 11 (I had the blu-ray that came with the code for behind the scenes footage). I genuinely felt kind of robbed, at that young age, because as young as I was I still understood & resonated with the emotional & bleak messages that were conveyed with the original world-building of the society and its "taming collars." I thought it added a level of depth to the film that wasn't there in the original, even though I wouldn't have necessarily been able to put that into words at that age. I still agree now, and it's nice to see those thoughts reflected in this video essay. While I still really like the original, it's a shame that it was rewritten to be more "kid friendly," especially since as a kid I emotionally connected more deeply with the deleted scenes, and I'm sure most other kids would have as well.
100%. Honestly I have no idea what the comments saying this idea had to go because of the target audience are on because gen z kids literally grew up on stuff like warrior cats, gravity falls, animorphs, avatar the last airbender and scooby doo mystery incorporated and while all these had some very dark themes in them it never prevented them from being extremely popular with the youngsters. Not to mention the actual classic Disney hits everyone loves like lion king, hunchback, tarzan and bambi or other almost universally loved creators like Don Bluth and Tim Burton. I was a similar age when I watched the movie in theaters and I have a distinct memory of seeing a video about the original storyline for it along with the deleted scene of Nick at the clinic I think from this version up on youtube shortly after and being almost afraid to click on it because I had this instinctual feeling it would make me less satisfied with what the movie ended up being and after stumbling upon it again years later and finally checking it out I can conclude that I was right. I can also totally relate to strongly reasonating with something as a child but not being able to put into words exactly why when I was younger. It sucks people think of kids as these mindless goblins with no critical thinking abilities who can't appreciate a good movie even if you shove it in their face because they really aren't like this.
You would have an absolute FIELD DAY with the anime Beastars. It's often compared with Zootopia because both revolve around tensions between predators and prey. Beastars, however, is intended for mature audiences and the predators don't simply “go savage”. Every single one of them has to hold back their blood thirst in some way shape or form. This is the first video I watch from you so, I'm not sure if you're open to watching/discussing anime. I just think Beastars would give you more to chew on, if you enjoy the dark and mature ideas from the Zootopia that could have been. I really enjoy both things and I'm very excited for Zootopia 2.
I don’t feel like it would. The movie we got actually has a message we can relate to. The collar thing is more of an unimaginable dystopia that we can immediately identify has not much in common with our own world, so the points about rac*ism would be mute. The movie we got is actually much more subtle about it’s messaging, which I think makes it more relevant for people today.
@@MoonShadeStuff Personally as someone who is a part of two distinct groups that both are pretty marginalized on their own and even more when they overlap I identify with this early story much more than I do with the final version but that's because I think the collar thing becomes much more meaningful and applicable to real life if you think of it as something more symbolic or metaphorical rather than literally taking it at face value, though I do get that this is a very specific interpretation that doesn't really hold as much ground when applied to the intended meaning which was very clearly racial issues (though I did see quite a few comments from people of color under this video who said they felt this version represented their struggles well too and I'm obviously not trying to disregard their experiences, in general I think it's safe to say that allegories don't necessarily have to be 1 to 1 reflections of reality to connect with people). Idk I guess what I'm trying to say is that I get what you're trying to say but I personally think that there are still demographics today that could have connected with and benefited from this version of the movie as well
Lets not forget Disney animated films like this one are meant for children. While darker movies are indeed interesting, I do not believe looking here is the best place Yes children are capable and stuff But also not really ? Thats not the point, what I mean is : Yes mature is really good, but here is not the right place ? Feel free to tell me if you believe I am wrong, there may be things I am not considering
I'm just disappointed in that "too miserable" talk that changed it. If all family-friendly studios had that kind of talk, I doubt things like Majora's Mask or any of Studio Ghibli's works would have ever seen the light of day
honesty, they can still make family-friendly things, one of the problems is how they don't use bittersweet endings as much anymore. Like Twilight Princess, it's a bittersweet ending. For me the definition of a "bittersweet ending" is something that ends happy but not in the way you hoped. In TW we had this with Midna as she broke the mirror. Of course, a bittersweet ending can be ruined but that's something for another time. Despite this, the ending is what makes the game as good as it was. The problem is companies shying away from bittersweet endings which then makes more clichés and makes the story predictable. TW shows a good use of a bittersweet an ending and an old movie called "The Last Unicorn" did too. Heck, I didn't really enjoy most of the movie but my gosh that ending still left me on the verge of tears and had me sad for another hour.
Omg you don't know how obsessed I was with the original Zootopia concept. I'm so happy you made a video about it. There are barely if any videos on how amazing the movie could have been
Same here. I remember seeing a deleted scene from this version floating around youtube shortly after seeing the movie in theaters as a kid and intristically not clicking on it because I had a feeling it might ruin my perception of the movie. I finally caved in a while ago and found out what the scrapped story was about through Davvid's three part series about it and... yeah, I was pretty much spot on. This felt like a much more meaningful and original idea to me personally. It's really a shame that it's so underappreciated, I would love to have an excuse to write more salty comments about how much I wish they went with this version instead and why, lol.
I can understand the scene of Judy not mentioning the wallet. When you're put on the spot like that you can often forget lots of things. I've lost count of how many times that's happened to me where important information to the argument or discussion leaves my mind because I'm thrown off and it's only until after it's not relevant anymore, hours, or days later, that I remember it again because in the moment I was panicking or emotionally compromised or was placed in a different mental pathway.
Just gotta say, Nick talking about Night Howlers was NOT how they followed the wolves - they came up with the idea of checking the traffic cams & followed the truck that had picked up the Jaguar to the holding location of the infected animals. They only made the 'Night Howlers = wolves' leap when they realised who it was picking the jaguar up. That was genuinely good detective work.
15:30 This is actually not true at all. There is a very concerning study of child psychology that showed kids as young as 4 start to treat other races differently based on their parent's own prejudices. Kids internalize that stuff, more than you realize.
I was absolutely shocked and amazed (not in a positive sense) when I saw video documentation of a similar(?) study. Very young girls, toddlers(?), of different races, were given dolls of 3 different skin colors. Each kid was a different race with different skin colors. The dolls either had the same outfit or no outfit, so no bias there. When asked “Which one is the prettiest?” “Which is the kindest?” “Which is your favorite?” All but one chose the lightest skinned dolls, even from kids with darker skin. One kid picked the medium/middle skin color “because she’s like me!” When asked “Which one is not pretty?” “Which one is mean?” “Which one do you not like?” All /Most of them chose the darkest doll, even the kids with darker skin. The one from earlier to picked ‘the doll that looked like her’ had a super hard time picking one for this round because she ‘thinks they all are nice’ and are ‘best friends’ and implied it wouldn’t be fair to pick one. I am white. I’ve mainly only been in places with majority light skin. But I don’t have any negative connotations towards darker skin color-ed people. But at the same time, not being around them took away the perspective of seeing people treat them differently. Which is why I was so taken aback when the adorable little girl with dark skin like dark chocolate pointed at the dark doll when asked who was bad, and pointed at the light skinned one when asked who was good. I think I realized a lot of my biases and closest thing to ‘racist’ thoughts are just my complete unawareness that some people are racist. For example, in the movie world, I’d be a prey out in Bunny Burrows. And if I went to the city, I would be confused and tell predators to their faces that they aren’t being discriminated against because I didn’t see any discrimination against predators in Bunny Burrow, where there wasn’t many predators to begin with. I clearly now have a much more… nuanced(?) perspective. I can see now that that’s how I used to be and I can correct myself when that happens. Like what he says around 29:07 to 29:45
Yeaaaah! I have Experienced this Personally It’s very painfully difficult to try to improve another person’s discriminatory behaviour, for years you can be friends with them, from childhood to adulthood, you speak up to them, and they still end up hurting you when you thought they left all of that behind.
I agree. I assume he just meant that the kids' views weren't concrete or deeply instated yet, so doing something as drastic as putting a collar on someone else seemed a bit unrealistic.
exactly.. i mean he does realize children of marginalized groups have literally been murdered by peers before, right? that's a pretty extreme case, but children can be extremely vicious to one another, usually it's learned. i saw a comment not long ago of someone who said they were nearly beaten to death by bigoted children as a kid, a comment under a video about kids who have been influenced by Sneako. of course, some children can very well be some of the most open people around because they haven't yet been steeped in the biases of the world around them. unfortunately, some have. pretty much everyone has some bias engrained into them in one way or another though since it's systematic, atleast here in the USA and many other places. many children who hold harmful views instilled by authority figures are able to have some sense talked into them though, and most of them aren't spiteful since they are young and, he is right, most of their views aren't that concrete yet. it seems a lot of children just want to do what is right sometimes, or what feels right for them based on some internal compass, so will do things like still try to be friends with people their parents have told them they can't be friends with. i do see where he is coming from, and i do think it's pretty rare to get cases where children are just mean and spiteful like that, but they unfortunately can be. P.S - other than that, a few of his other points were also kinda 'ehhh' to me. i definitely agree that the original version of zootopia would have worked way better though
I don’t really like how they’re called predators and prey in this universe. In Beastars, they use herbivore and carnivore, and they’re alot more violent and prejudiced in that society than the zootopia world. I just think that’s bizarre.
It's strange to be sure, but the reason why Disney did this, I think, is because they wanted to try to have the film be more dark and mature and be able to tackle more nuanced themes, so labeling the animals as "predators" and "prey" was an attempt to give it more of an edge. The issue arises with the fact that this is Disney we're talking about: to keep it brief, they are afraid to make things too dark because they know that people are not comfortable with confronting negative emotions, and as a result were not willing to fully commit to their original idea with the collars and the more blatant prejudice. Disney has always had something of a reputation for sanitizing their properties -- the themes of stuff like "happily ever after", "good will always prevail over evil in the end", or "you can do anything if you're willing to put your mind to it and work hard for your dreams" are all things that make people feel good, and Disney wants desperately to be associated with making people feel those happy, uplifting feelings. This, I believe, is what ultimately causes them to rewrite the story to become what it is, even if it came at the expense of the nuance that we could have gotten if they had not been so afraid that people would like their movie less because it made the audience confront something so clearly dark
I'd imagine if the film would establish the negative connotation of Predator & Prey then like post-time skip have carnivore & herbivore used by people against the system. That would've sent a message with only subtle changes in the dialogue.
I honestly don't see a problem with "you can do anything if you're willing to put your mind into it & work for your dreams." Even if that's not necessarily true, it's better to die at least trying to achieve something you want than being alive, complacent, & Uhappy. @@matthewkuscienko4616
The problem with Beastars is how u classify carnivores who aren't predators. Like hippos, boars who eat occasionally meat but aren't hunting killers per se.
@@chaaaargh kids can understand them, but can they handle them? Maybe you grew up in a stable environment, but a lot of kids can’t really handle the darker themes. It boils down to maturity and stability in their environment and some don’t have that
@@chaaaargh But parents can't Parents already had issues with the black leopard scene and the scene where the predators are kept in cages... Please understand that it's Disney, they wouldn't take a risk of having their movie be boycotted and lose money because of that... Because parents are convinced that animation is soely a medium for children and has to be 100% kid friendly
You make a lot of great points. I loved this movie but I always thought it was weird that Judy’s speech changes Zootopia immediately rather than people already having that bias beforehand.
The way i always saw it is that hearing the speech from Judy, a figure of authority, made their preexisting biases against predators feel ‘acceptable’ to openly express.
Honestly, I think I'm the only one who liked Bellweather as a villain, or at least the concept behind her. The idea of a politician hiding behind a facade while using fear and discrimination to sow mistrust between groups of people and subsequently gain power by doing so is so perfect for the type of movie that Zootopia is and what message it was trying to tell. Bellweather honestly just needed to have more scenes that fleshes her out more. Maybe a backstory that was similar to Judy's and Nick's where she was mistreated and underestimated throughout her life because she was a meek little sheep but she never rises up from those discriminations like Judy had and she let those feelings fester more deeply Nick had. Thus making her like a dark reflection of both Judy and Nick.
Honestly, I don’t really agree with her being a bad twist or not showing up enough in the movie. You see her several times being denied and mistreated because of being a meek little sheep. I think why people find her underwhelming is because of her design and personality. She’s so tiny when sheep are usually quite hefty. A change in her body language could make her go from sweet and kind to intimidating. I think her personality should have changed drastically at the reveal, showing her playing into the meek stuttering stereotype so people look the other way why she does her criminal work. Also, what would have helped the twist was if the people cooking the flowers weren’t also sheep, and the only other sheep we see clearly in the movie.
She's honestly a realistic villain as well. Many politicians love to fear monger and subtly or un-subtly make people distrust other groups of people to push their goals.
I loved her as the villain it made sense. Plus it wasn’t like the Lion mayor wasn’t also the villain…he was and actually got punished for it. I do hope we don’t have a twist villain for the second movie. But I feel like twist villains are common in mysteries which is technically what Zootopia is
Oh Anna if only there was someone who actually loved you, its either waternoose or turbo/king candy, stinky Pete and lotso are the best I might be forgetting someone else but I don’t think I am *also is auto a twist villain I haven’t seen WALL·E in a while*
Waternoose’s motivations made sense, and he did is evil regretfully. Horrible monster, but he makes sense. Bellwether is just an insane racist who gets off on her own evil.
If companies weren't afraid of making their movies too miserable we'd have movies with better themes and more profound messages, as a lot of good media has those miserable aspects. I'd also talk about aspects of The Lorax by Illumination, especially the cut song "Biggering", but that feels less as being afraid of misery, and more like the studio was afraid of showing a depiction of greed and corruption that could in some way affect their reputation
I've always thought to myself that this concept was kinda like Disney's version of biggering with the way the unique anti-authoritarian message got replaced with a pretty basic follow your dreams buddy cop shtick
@@rozinq1351 It's closer to the opposite of what happened with Illumination and The Lorax, as Disney actually *was* planning on releasing Zootopia with its "darker" storyline intact, but the writers and directors had other plans. It had less to do with the message and more to do with the plot feeling disjointed and tonally inconsistent. Also, the "follow your dreams" idea was shown to be a faulty worldview in the final version of the movie, so I don't know why you're criticizing that.
@@Dolphanatic They were? That's interesting, because I heard a different explanation about them originally showing this version to Pixar executives who deemed it too bleak and grimdark and another one that claimed they showed a draft of this to a test audience of kids and they found it hard to relate to Nick as a protagonist under a different video about this version of the script, though I don't remember either of these being backed up by any sources so they could have easily been rumors. As for the follow your dreams storyline I just think that it's a very basic and common concept that's extremely popular in animated movies in particular and while I get that popular tropes are popular for a reason in my opinion it wasn't executed in a way that is interesting and original enough to warrant having it replace such a deep and unique narrative (that's not to say the execution was bad, it certainly wasn't, it just felt a little generic to me even as a kid because of how many times I've seen it done before). I've seen some of your other comments here so I roughly know what your opinions on both versions are and even though I disagree with most of them I'm not gonna attempt to change your mind because I do understand where a lot of your arguments come from but due to a mix of general and personal reasons I have a different perspective. I still think zootopia as it is is a cute and fun movie with a good message, I just like the original idea more but I understand why some will disagree.
@@rozinq1351 Those are just rumors. In reality, what little footage exists of the early version of Zootopia mostly consists of storyboards and a few crude renderings, so I doubt there would've even been enough of a movie to show test audiences. You're probably thinking of the test screenings that the people working on movies routinely do to make sure there are no editing errors. If you're interested, there's a documentary called "Imagining Zootopia" that gives a pretty detailed look into the production of Zootopia, and it reveals a lot about how the rewrite actually went down. There are entire scenes and chunks of the old script shown, but the most insightful part of the documentary is how the writers and directors, specifically Byron Howard, Jared Bush, and Phil Johnston, all agreed that the tame collar storyline wasn't working and that rewriting the movie to be more straightforward with a greater focus on stereotypes was a huge improvement. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it's clear that the rewrite was their idea, so it really rubs me the wrong way whenever I see people spreading false rumors about there being some sort of corporate pressure to make the movie "less dark" and calling the writers and directors "cowards" for rewriting their own story.
super obsessed with how this guy narrates like he’s running on a treadmill the entire time, like so worked up he’s out of breath lol. i feel the same way about this subject, i made an entire powerpoint ranting til i was basically yelling to my roommate about how good this movie could have been LMAO. this movie is my Wish
3:22 They're both written to be intelligent and neither one is the butt of every joke. This is such a great point. I hate it when movies make one character, (which is the dude 99% of the time) to be an idiot punching bag for comedic relief.
I will always maintain that the best children's media that tackles discrimination, and just how ridiculous it all is, was the Dr. Seuss book "The Sneetches and Other Stories". The story goes that birdlike beings called Sneetches were divided into two groups - Star Bellied and Plain Bellied, which was a misnomer, as the Plain Bellied had a star that was just too small to be seen, nevertheless, the Star Bellied considered themselves the superior of the two and enjoyed their privileged status, while looking down on the Plain Bellied Sneetches. Until one day, an entrepreneur/con-artist named Sylvester McMonkey McBean comes to the island of the Sneetches and approaches the Plain Bellied, with his invention that will give them a visible star, all for the price of three dollars. This angers the Star Bellied, as they now lost their special affiliation, until McBean approaches the Star Bellies with an invention to remove their star, for the exorbitant price of ten dollars. The story climaxes with the Sneetches, spending more money and going through the machines, with ever increasing insanity and lunacy, as both groups of Sneetches try to one-up the other, until they run out of money, and are left confused as who was who, McBean leaves the island a rich man, gloating that "You can't teach a Sneetch", but the Sneetches did learn for this folly, and realised that just how foolish it all was, that a Sneetch was a Sneetch whether they had a star or not. Zootopia works in a similar way, with or without a shock collar, this was the point Theodore Seuss Gisel was trying to make with his story, discrimination is the collar we wear in life and will shock you regardless of your status. The 1973 Dr. Seuss special featuring the Sneetches illustrates this quite vividly, the Star Bellies were taught to be haughty, conceited and condescending to the Plain Bellies, thus went to great lengths to keeping this privileged status _ad_ _hoc_ and _de_ _jure_ by any means necessary. The story was not one-sided either, as the Plain Bellies embellished in this foolishness too, they were left penniless just like the Star Bellies too by McBean, the whole ordeal revealed to all Sneetches, that they were capable of doing the same embarrassing thing. I think Zootopia should have shown the institutional discrimination, rather than individual, that it was all dictated downward not upward, and that the law and practises were designed to keeping this convoluted status quo, like the Sneetches, Zootopia could have shown just how farcical it all is, Zootopia could have been a parody of real-life Hollywood, that despite viewing itself as the progressive capital of the US, still have institutional inequality that could rival any authoritarian regime. Moreover, whether its stars or collars, discrimination works in both plain sight and behind the scenes, we don't have stars nor collars to know the painful sting of discrimination and inequality.
As someone who regarded Zootopia as one of my favorite movies and has been an influential movie for me to pursue film, that Bellwether twist has only pissed me off as time went on. It felt like they just had to assign the villain role to someone last minute. Here's to hoping the 2nd film does better with the themes especially since we've experienced more nuances with its themes since 2016.
Dude same, like I watched this movie 24/7 it was on repeat in my room. But after a certain point I would just skip the reveal of Bellwether because younger me HATED it. As the years have gone I just hate it even more, it made no sense whatsoever and as you said felt extremely last minute.
Don’t count on it, Pixar announced that no more movies will be produced by directors that convey their own story and instead will be focusing on sequels
The entire plot fulls apart when you stop to think about the night howlers, the flowers and how these things are probably well documented, with their 'feralising' capabilities being well known. The cops should have been investigating suppliers of these plants from the get go and the movie would have ended in half the amount of time with the lion mayor not having to result to lying, all he needed to say is that the predators going feral are most likely due to a drug sythisised from a flower and that they're working towards apprehending these criminals.
I agree, I also find it weird how no one questions why the predators are going savage in the first place and why is it only happening in the city, what about the outskirts and other towns?
@@filipadsiekierka5350 I think they only said for it to be in the city because the movie takes place in the city and also because the police are stationed to protect the city I’m sure places like bunny burrow have police but other then that anything that happens outside of the city police’s stationed area is out of their control
@@Martyismylifesupport Well yes, but those ”savage” incidents sound pretty serious. Surely other towns and cities would get interested if they heard about it, right? Why did no one from outside question why this is happening only in Zootopia?
@@filipadsiekierka5350 because it is said by the skunk doctor and lion heart that up until nick and Judy found the hospital lionheart kept this information from the public to save his reputation and to protect the city from going into chaos and most likely up until bellweather was mayor she kept this information from outsiders which is probably why any outsiders didn’t know but that’s up to people to theorize:)
It literally doesn't matter if people know about Night Howlers. Poverty in real life informs the vast amount of crime, but you still have people denying it. Instead, they'll assert that *certain* demographics are just "predisposed" to crime and poverty. That they're impoverished because of an intrinsic flaw in their *blood*. Racists in Zootopia won't care about the feralizing effects of Night Howlers. They may even say that Predators are uniquely vulnerable to Night Howlers as a result of their race, facts be damned. Bigotry is not rational.
I feel like the sheep being the villain almost works bc of her demeanor. Like irl, it’s always people who seem so nice and kind that are secretly embezzling money or something. I just wish we could’ve seen more of her struggle being secretary to someone who treated her like that, it would’ve been awesome to see how she manipulated people and got her little ram henchman to follow her.
Hey man, the music selection for the second to last timestamp is just absolutely perfect. It fits beautifully the depressing haertbreaking and disturbing deleted scene.
Dude, amazing video, but i will have to disagree with you on somethings, and the biggest one is "the bullies discriminating Wild just because they're mean". I feel like people that say stuff like "children cannot be spiteful" haven't experienced it themselves, and i have throughout my whole childhood. The scene with the bullies might've been the hardest hittting piece of Disney media i've watched, it reopened a box of memories and made my eyes swell with tears. I'm a Venezuelan inmigrant (latino basically), and i could not get away without getting bullied in school because i was was "the spanish", they made fun of me and beat me hard just because the thought my accent and the fact i was an outsider was funny, they called me every name and made me consider that thing a teenager should never (Capital S) and this happened twice during different schools, they never came off as being scared of me, i was a short kid, they genueily hated me because i wasn't white, but as i grew i realized it was them being the jerks, i made friends that respected who i was and cared about me, and that scene broke me because of it. I feel like the movie handled that aspect better than most, sometimes children have bad influences and that might change aspects of themselves for the worse, even hurting others.
I agree, I can't understand what that feels like but as neurodivergent.. I feel like other kids could sense that I was not like them. I've been treated like shit most of my life. I can assure they were not feeling threatened by me. I was and am kind and harmless. So yes I agree
@@currybread5298 I got treated like shit because of race mostly or the fact that I have OCD but mostly due to being a teacher's kid in middle school. Teachers did nothing to stop that
I'm sorry pal for what happened to you, but I'm glad you found friends in the way. And yeah, children can be good and all but they are still naive and most of the time can be jerks...
You know i was wondering how they switched Nick to Judy as the main protagonist in development. Because in the first concept art I saw he’s like getting a lot of focus.
According to an old video I remember watching (it was in like 2019 or 2020 I think) that it's because of the test audience suggesting that Judy would've been the better main protagonist, only for Nick to be the fan favorite lol
What’s interesting about that name change was because whenever the movie was being released around March of 2016, the UK was still a European Union member at the time before Brexit happened 3 months later. This information is relevant because there was a zoo in Denmark, another EU member, that had already trademarked the name “Zootopia” so to avoid trademark infringement, they named it Zootropolis instead.
Even in the US its official name shown on Disney+ was changed to Zootropolis at some point. However, none of the actual movie was edited, so the part where it shows the title towards the beginning still says "Zootopia"
I don't think Disney was too scared to make a movie that was "too dark". I think they were too scared to peel back the curtain of how the world really works. Like you said at 29:25, "The less people know and understand something, the easier they are to control". This is absolutely true. The less you know, the more you are convinced the stance you hold is the correct one. If our listen to history or the news and hear "X people are better than Y people", the more you think that is true, and both X and Y people are played for a fool. Y are viewed as inferior to X, and X believe that they are subjugatd for no reason and both are lead to believe "it is what is is, and there is nothing you can do about it." For Zootopia, anyone viewed as predator by prey is not to be trusted and anything they say is dangerous, so they must be subjugated for the sake of peace, safety and security, and prey cannot see what is done to the predators to "keep them safe", and there "is nothing you can do about it", "it is what it is". Showing anything outside of the rose tinted glasses is dangerous, and I believe Disney was scared of breaking the immersion of Zootopia a mostly "fictional" place.
I don't mind the coincidence of getting into the mafia's good graces by saving the daughter. It was a time when Judy got to do what she wanted to become a cop to do (help people) even though she wasn't supposed to be doing it, and it got her help back.
It’s a shame how the villain really was a big major factor in these 2010s Disney movies, even putting aside King Candy as Turbo being the best possible twist villain, most of the following after just really hindered the movies and some cases nearly destroy it, which is a shame cause it held back so much potential if they had been realized better
I think another big part that was ignored was how long ago was Zooptia not at peace? Or rather how long ago were Predators still eating prey? It's fine to say "get over it" but if the foxes were eating the bunnies a generation or so ago it's a big ask. Especially if they still have all the natural weapons and teeth needed to still kill. Given the stronger reactions from the older characters like Judy's parents, it almost makes you believe bloodshed was fairly recent.
Yeah, discrimination usually has a long history behind it, the shock-collars would be representative of how the government also used to perpetuate ideas of sexism or racism through laws. Without that context in the film, what should be the focus is how the aftermath of such times affect society (the exact thing we are facing in out modern times), but I guess a badly tied together detective plot was more important than that. 🤷♀
in the second sentence of the movie judy says “thousands of years ago” for predators eating prey. so they pretty much told us how long ago right at the start
@@Jaceisdabest That is interesting and concerning at the same time. It's been a long time since I watched the movie and I will admit I missed that. That said it's either a long time ago, if it's multiple thousands of years, or fairly "Recently" if it's only 1 or 2 thousand. It would be like saying we were cannibals in the 100's or so.
@@Jaceisdabest for all we know, zootopia could simply misconstrue history as is often seen in real life. Saying that thousands of years ago two carnivores preyed on small animals but that's passed and now they live in harmony is like saying we used to discrimate black people but they've got laws now and we all live in harmony.
Zootopia is one of those rare movies, where the directors got too ambitious with their first draft compared to the company they were making it for. I would have loved to see the original vision for zootopia as much as the next guy, but unless Disney decides to do a “Snyders cut” of the movie I doubt we’ll ever see it come to fruition
thats not rare, I know people who work in hollywood and a friend of mine was formerly shopping scripts around and interested in screenwriting. Most movies and tv change scripts to be "more palatable", more easily sellable.
remember how Disney has shut down an entire studio to prevent Nimona from being released. i said it before and i'll say it again: i want a beat-by-beat realization of the original storyboard for this movie!
Unless there was something I missed I don't know if it's accurate to say that they shut down Blue Sky just so Nimona wasn't released. We don't know how much they actually knew about the movie.
When they made Lilo and stitch, the entire studio was keeping it under wraps until it was basically finished so that they couldn’t scrap the project. It’s such a wonderful movie!!!
Fuck, I love the idea of the first pass of Zootopia. It almost feels like Basil The Great Mouse Detective but with systematic racism and. I don’t know. There’s something nostalgic about animated movies handling dark subjects. Actually, yk what, gonna watch Basil again. Good bloody video
I think it's great that they had enough courage to cover a topic like this in the first place, but it did always feel like something was missing from this portrayal and I could never quite put my finger on it. However, I did notice at the end how all the city's problems were solved without them needing to do anything, which always bugged me.
This is one of the best videos on Zootopia ever made. The way you had an entire section where you genuinely praised aspects of the movie you liked, differentiating them from the aspects that you don't like very much was amazing. Honestly I don't often find critics who do it like that. As much as I love the movie we got, the cut version was so much better. The way it showed the prey-the "oppressed" group, making life so much more difficult for the predators, the "oppressors" just to keep themselves safe, is a message we almost never see in film: the people that *historically* had a disadvantage eventually turning the tables on the people with relations to the oppressors who want nothing to do with it, and who don't deserve to have the same done to them. It's such a punching message and the fact that they cut it really irritates me, since there's so much needless prejudice against good people just because of their race, religion, sexuality, political stance, etc. that is celebrated by people who smugly believe they're the most accepting of all.
Exactly! It would've been ahead of its time considering we now live in an ironic age where those who are r@sits are the ones calling people "r@sits"... Rather than take the opportunity to be truly successful and move on with their lives, those people would rather dunk on the people that look or identify with their oppressors and ask for nonsensical "reparations". Thus, giving the people who are still oppressing them justified reasons to do so and perpetuating the Cycle of Violence.
@@Mae4Ever I hate to break it to you, but this is a thread of two racist people who think that people of color hold the majority of power in America and Europe. The language of the first guy saying "the historical oppressors becoming oppressed" is a nice way of saying "white people are being oppressed by people of color," and the second guy is saying it's more racist to call racist people racist in the first sentence, and goes on to say that racism isn't and has never been real, and if it was it's their own fault that people are racist to them anyway. Just good ole UA-cam commenter white supremacy :3
@@Mae4Ever - I believe they mean that the people who are screaming that some groups (such as normal straight Christian white people) are inherently racist and sexist... are in fact the ones BEING those things.
@ellugerdelacruz2555 I get what you're trying to say but the take "the oppressed dunk on people who look like thier oppressors and ask for reparations which gives the ones in power justified reason to keep oppressing them!" which is...not how that works at all I'm sorry to say 😭 Marginalized groups were being savagely oppressed even if they acted the best that they could and kept out of the way, they were still torn down if they ever got too "uppity". If you look up the Tulsa Massacre you'll see what I mean. Even the reparations thing is dumb to bring up cause even if it was 200 years ago, black former slaves were promised 40 acres and a mule when the Civil War was over and never received it. Which led to thier descendants being left with little to no land or prospects. You can have the opinion that the marginalized should let these things go and move on with thier lives but it doesn't change the fact that this history is still affecting these groups to this very day, all across the world. It's not as simple as "be free and be the best you can be!" even though I wish it was.
I feel like quite a bit of the critique here is that things are being simplified, to which I say- This IS a kids movie still. A lot of things that people want different about it might make it a better adult movie, but would probably make it a worse kids movie. I think it did a very impressive job keeping complex themes without making it too dark or too confusing for little kids to get something out of. Like with the collar plot- it would make a more interesting movie for adults, but it is outright dystopian and genuinely horrifying. It’s just too much for a lot of kids. This movie is SUPPOSED to be for modern children. It does not fit their brand, and it is not family friendly. Also- I’m a little concerned for you if you think the collar plot is closer to real life, literally society legally mandated electrocuting of 5 year olds for having emotions, that’s what you think is more realistic? Having 10% of the population literally constantly including in the privacy of their own homes be subject to this twisted version of essentially conversion electroshock therapy for emotions.
I know I might get backlash for this take, but I feel that some of these complaints are really just a result of over-analyzing the story elements when compared to the cut story-line. Here's what I mean... I definitely agree that the movie did a good job of showing discrimination, especially when it comes from our upbringing, and I definitely agree that the sleuthing plot was full of holes big enough to drive a star through. However, I feel that the discrimination depicted was really more systematic than individual, and the twist villain was still impactful. Throughout the movie we get to see various instances of animals stereotyping other animals. Rabbits are seen as carrot growing wimps, foxes being sly dominators, sheep being easily preyed upon victims, etcetera. These stereotypes, along with acts of discrimination (making Judy a meter maid instead of a Probationary Officer, Bellwether getting treated like an easy-to-push-around secretary by Lionheart, foxes and weasels getting treated with mistrust just because their species are portrayed as being underhanded) tell a story of underlying discrimination which explain why a fox might get bullied by a bunch of "prey" children, or why Bellwether would even exist as a villain in the first place. The only reason why "prey" would try to "rise up" is if they felt discriminated against by "predators" despite the sparkle and shine of opportunity in the big city of Zootopia. This is also why I don't see any problem with Bellwether being the twist villain, because she was the driving force for someone who was so underprivileged, like Judy, to be allowed the chance to take a crack at a high profile case, just because Judy's the "meek prey" cop. When she became the mayor, it wasn't that much of a logical leap to think that she would be the villain, given all the bad things occurring when she took office and her previous treatment. Just because she had a lack of screen time (which, I will admit, did slightly dampen the power of the twist), does not mean that the twist was a horrible or rushed plot device. Overall, I feel that comparing the Zootopia we got versus what was cut is an unfair comparison. They are two separate stories that could both stand on their own, and would likely benefit if the cut content was made as a prequel (as suggested by a comment I saw on here). But, hey, I'm just one opinion amongst thousands so you don't have to take it that seriously.
i see all your points and pretty much agree to all of them. However what ruins the movie for me is how it's supposed to be funny/quirky that judy is a corrupt as fuck cop
At least she was trying to do good. The chief character is far worse and doesn't even get a little consequence for being the spitting image of a corrupt and negligent cop.
It wasn't fully appreciated initially but it's still amazing. I got a voice acting background and Jason Bateman's performance's been an inspiration for me since this film. The vocal training was tough, without noticeable results for months but actors like him or the late Kevin Conroy are a great impulse to not give up: I was almost Leon in those new RE games :)
These aren’t actual voice actors, they’re just celebrities, and Disney likes to hire well known names, rather than people who solely, or mostly do voice acting. Kinda sad, really. They’re just a name
The original version definitely would’ve been better because of how much more real it is, but the one we got was still very relatable and enjoyable. I think both are great but still wish we got the original film because I would’ve loved to see it.
Disney shouldn't be afraid to make their films a little dark. As long as you have a balance that doesn't make it feel like kids can't watch it too, then it can still work. Disney has made movies with dark content in the past before like The Black Cauldron, the original animated Pinocchio movie Night On Bald Mountain from Fantasia and more.
One reason why I think the collars wouldn't work is because it would create a very clear good guy vs bad guy scenario, which would completely go against what you claimed to be a strong point of the actual movie. The same way Nick could be discriminated for being a "sly dangerous fox", judy can also be discriminated for being a "dumb small bunny". However, this dynamic wouldn't be possible if one group was marginalized to the point of submission. It would remove a lot of the nuance of the final product. I'd say neither is actually better. They are just completely different visions
one of my new favorite youtube videos, well writing, amazing analysis, really appreciable video editing to understand what the first movie was supposed to look like, and of course deep, reflective and important messages. Thanks for making this video mate! I'll probably show it to many other people!
I agree. If I was in charge of Disney, I would have a Zootopia spinoff movie or miniseries where Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde from the final version of Zootopia that we got accidentally end up in the original Zootopia and they have to find a way back home, while trying to make it through this dystopian version of Zootopia and helping their counterparts there.
LOVING the Fire Emblem music. I listen to youtube videos instead of watch them and it was KILLING me where I heard that music before. Went back and saw you credit them (THANK YOU I would have been guessing forever) and had a big smile. Good video!
Its easier (and safer) to market a message about token discrimination than it is to make one about systemic oppression. Especially when the former is currently being phased out and the ladder is still being strongly enforced today.
That's the credit scene, every movie credit (or credits in general) already has a song anyways. Zootopia just happens to make it into a concert. Labeling it as a "dance party ending" is disingenuous.
@@lasercraft32 Not really. If anything, the problem was that it would've been too miserable to be realistic. Most people would probably scoff at the idea of mind control devices being a part of everyday life, whereas stereotyping is a lot more believable.
I know this is a bit of a controversial opinion, but Bellwether was like, the last somewhat decent twist villain, since her plan...kinda makes sense, in a way. I personally think the movie up to that point was really good, if not, amazing, but the twist just kinda brings to movie to a crawl. Though thankfully, at that point, you're just a few minutes away from the end of the movie, so at least there's that. Other than that however, I do really like Zootopia.
That's a fair opinion. Bellwether's plan makes sense, I just don't like her because of how boring and predictable she is, being the "overworked secretary of someone powerful and [seemingly] bad" archetype.
I think she shows up in the movie plenty, and they show how often she’s pushed aside or ignored. Honestly I think she could have worked a lot better with a design and personality change. Make her the actual size and shape of a regular sheep, then play into the fat, slightly annoying from stuttering, meek hunched character. People expect the fat character to be the joke character, unfortunately. Then when the reveal happens, she changes her posture, and her voice. Suddenly she’s strong, intimidating. Suddenly she speaks clearly in less of a high pitched ditzy tone. She’d be leaning into the sheep stereotypes on purpose, just like nick, because nobody expected anything more from her. She lets this fester in resentment, and decides to weasel her way in and make this plot to gain power. I think it would have made her a much better villain!! It’d be freaky to see her change so suddenly and drastically when there’s really no change at all, how unsettling it’d be to find out she was being fake the whole time. Also, if they didn’t want the twist to be so obvious, her lackeys shouldn’t have been sheep as well. Or at least not all of them.
I think another issue with the racism allegory is that, unlike real racism, there WAS a reason at one point for prey to fear predators, even if that reason is long past In real life, there is no reason one race would view itself as better then snother, hate is not logical.
The dirty secret is there was a reason at some point in history, often something to do with a war between two cultures. The fact those wars are long past, just like predators vs. prey was long past, makes it a good metaphor. (Although I do still wonder how and what the obligate carnivores of Zootopia eat. Did their diet get evolved away or did they invent lab-grown meat?)
This video was amazing. The editing, the storytelling, everything was so captivating. Also, i hope one day you can be the director you dream to be, (32:20) you already got the looks for it!
I do kind of understand why you'd consider Zootopia to have a lot of coincidences and that this is a major flaw, but I think the major flaw of Zootopia is that it's very plot driven. It's something I noticed looking back at it where I noticed a lot of the praise for the movie back then came from its moral and the pop culture references (especially the Godfather one). But if you take out the references and the moral, you're just stuck with a cookie cutter, by the number buddy cop film. It pretty much plays all the tropes in the book, and dead straight, too. By-the-law cop that wants to prove they’re worth something? Check! Partner usually breaks or bends the rules and that’s how they get things done? Check! They have a time limit to solve the case? Check! They arrest someone, have a fallout, and then proceed to capture the real villain, complete with a dramatic showdown, evil gloating, and a caught-on-tape Engineered Public Confession? Check! Check! Check! It's thanks to the moral and chemistry between Judy and Nick that this movie does have a personality, but it does feel like Zootopia is going through a plot checklist, just making sure all the scenes are progressing at the right times, using the coincidences you mentioned. I do agree that the reveal of what the Night Howlers were is bad. It really feels like an amateur writer wrote this without knowing what "show, don't tell" was. Considering the shock collar plot was abandoned in late 2014, Disney only had a little more than a year to redo nearly the entire movie, and when it comes to movie making, that amount of time is relatively short. I will bet that this is why the final version of Zootopia is the way that it is, with the coincidences and plot checklist feel. I wouldn't be surprised if having to rework the whole movie in only a little amount of time meant having to resort to coincidences instead of letting the plot grow organically. I do believe that Zootopia is the most average of the Disney movies, and had it had more time to develop, I think it would have been much more well regarded today. At least we'll have a sequel. We'll see what that will bring.
Ngl I didn’t watch Zootopia in theaters. I actually watched it first in a classroom and I loved it at that moment and ngl I was kicking myself for not watching it in theaters when it came out. I will say I feel like if the Villain was better i woulda probably consider it one of the best animated movies. As it is I still love so much.
That Collar "Acceptance" scene idea is just... oooof. I wish we could've seen it on the big screen. How ironic the same force that makes it so powerful resists its very existence.
10:11, congratulations, you just perfectly described systemic racism/sexism! This is one of the many reasons why I love your videos. Also, I’m working on my own Ralph Breaks the Internet video if you’re interested.
We had a black person as president. I have supervisors who are black. That's why this movie doesn't hold up with the old version. Systematic racism is made up because it gives the idea to suppress minorities, not help. You give ppl victim mentality. it's so easy to blame whitey when many whites are also bullied, yet no one cares because they're not the minority.
I feel like part of the reason is that it's a hard element to include in the story. For starters, how do you write a satisfying ending to this? If you keep the collars, then all they went through to solve the case would be for nothing. Maybe Judy's opinion may change, but that's a lot of plot for little change. If you get rid of the collars, then you've got a plot hole. Most of their society grew up believing the shock collars as a necessity to keep everyone safe. While you can, over time, get people on your side, you still need to put in the work to change society. On top of that, it's harder to make the ignorance believable. You literally have a group of people being put through physical pain just for having normal emotions. For Judy to be ignorant and ok with it, shed have to be an awful person beyond redemption or be incredibly dense beyond the point of redemption. While I liked the concept youd nttd to change the entire movie script to make it work. It would not be anywhere near the same film.
The primary reason Zootopia changed its shock collar draft was because *the setting* was so bleak it became impossible to root for. The directors wanted audiences to care for the city and want it saved, and creating a dystopia defeated the point. The directors also state that this plot didn’t help the protagonists shine like they do in the final film. They claim Nick became too sad and Judy came off as an ignorant jerk. Would they be anywhere near as popular if that’s what they settled with? I feel like people only praise it without actually seeing it because they’re infatuated with the idea of a dark movie about a furry racist dystopia. Except that you can’t cathartically redeem a society that openly tortures cute foxes and bear cubs. Fanfic authors tried to tell this alternate story and wrote themselves into a corner because the world is just too bleak and the characters are too negative.
I’m so happy that this is being talked about, I think one of disneys biggest issues right now is they’re not taking any risks, but it’s crazy because some of their most popular movies are all ones with darker themes, not only do kids movies with darker themes make a lot of money on release but they tend to make a lot of money in the future aswell, films that you grow up and watch as an adult but still enjoy, so it just confuses me why a money greedy company wouldn’t want to make more money. I believe some day Disney is going to either do something big or it is going to die out, the only way they have been able to stay relevant is by creating controversy for themselves, but that doesn’t last long, I’d like to hopefully see a new animation industry start up in my lifetime, because the people who work at these big companies aren’t normal people with interesting ideas their all people who were given these opportunities and make a fortune from mediocre ideas. Nothing new is ever happening.
The original story is amazing. As a person of colour, that version hits so so close to home. So many people in my community of brown and black people (specifically poor and low-income) WANTED to live their lives like everyone else, had dreams and inventions and ideas and businesses, but the world wouldn’t allow them. So just like Nick, they became what the world expected of them or just gave up. And the collar is especially genius; in a humor, relatability and world building standpoint. The ‘collar’ in real life is the suppression of ourselves to conform to eurocentric ideals. The pressures to be the ‘good black person’ who is quiet and wellspoken and not like ‘the others’. The weight of knowing that every move you make could potentially define the attitudes of your race to others. So many black and brown people actively codeswitch and reject their culture to appease the system that rejects them. And the simple doodles of how prey and preds see each other made me strangely emotional. Prey see predators as dangerous, unpredictable creatures. Predators see prey as ‘sitting on them’. And it breaks my heart of how relatable it is. I’m not necessarily ‘afraid’ of white people, but it has been instilled in me that I am below them. That I have to shut up and agree for my safety and to get through life. If I saw this movie instead, it would be my favourite Disney movie of all time. As is, I enjoyed it. But I agree wholeheartedly that to make the problem be personal instead of systemic failed to address the root of the problem. It’s not about the ‘good cop’ and the ‘corrupt official’, it is the poisoned foundation of their society that is causing such horrific damage.
I'm a person of color too, and while I liked the movie we got when I was younger, I remembered seeing the deleted scenes on youtube and feeling upset that we couldn't the originally idea with the shock collars and Nick not just being a con-man out of just one bad experience with prey as a kid and instead as a guy who's down on his luck trying to make the best out of a bad situation, and trying to make life better for him and predators like him. I think it's a big shame Disney couldn't try something like that with something so raw, especially with that scene with the taming party. Learning in order to become an adult you have to become more aware of how the world works, how cops view you, how certain people will treat you is genuinely heartbreaking as a child, and something that was inflicted onto me when I was younger.
As a person of (paler) color... ...yup, that about sums it up. :/ I'll do my part to combat the institutional barriers when and as I see 'em, but probably half the time I just don't notice in the first place. I stay quiet, humble, and try and stay open and teachable tho. :) Always lookin' to help a brother out, when and as I can tho. Top minorities in my area are Hispanics, Pacific Islander (Filipino) and Native American, and I'm in what's historically been a very... _exclusionist_ subregion. At my high school, only about 2-4% were actual 'black people,' but I mean... Mark and I got along fine. I _think_ I remember having checked out his Soundcloud page. (it was just a'ight.) ...it's tough to figure out how to help when there ain't so much to help y'all _with_ in my local area, but... I mean, I *do* try...
The sad part is that something not so different from Nick's backstory scenes basically describe my school life. While the children don't really have or understand those preconceived biases, i've experienced children still acting on those biases. Often for little to no reason. "Because" i was not a carbon copy of everybody else, simply different in no specific way. Not into sports, or curious and into learning new things, etc. Sadly, because children are often unaware or lacking understanding of preconceived biases, it can make following out on those biases even easier.
The flower was in both versions. The flower in the collar version would of had Nick get shot by the dart making Zootopia think he went crazy with out his collar but it was all the flower that made him do that instead. Nick would then trick Judy and escape prison, Judy feeling guilty for Nick escaping would catch up with Nick and later find out what really happened.
My biggest issue with this movie is well...the theme itself. While I am glad that it was more general and not covering anything specific in the real world, I just don't think Disney should have tackled this. And there's also the twist villain, who stinks. If this were just a buddy cop movie, it probably wouldn't have been as memorable, but more consistently entertaining.
3:05 "Not to mention being on opposite sides of the predator and prey spectrum." Oh wow, I'm not sure I ever realized this, but cops "prey" on criminals, so their relationship is defined along this axis in more ways than one.
Can you not equate criminals to prey animals? If someonerob a bank at gunpoint or breaks into someone's house to do things youtube won't like me spelling oit, what happens to those criminals afterwards is entirely on them. Of course there are garbage cops too, but the predator/prey analogy falls flat on it's face if you coin the criminals as prey.
@@sebastianb.3978 Wel... cops hunt criminals, don't they? That's literally what people tell them to go do every time they get a ticket. Preying is a less suitable word than hunting here, granted, but I was working with what the video gave me. And also, I don't mind that my comparison falls flat at some point. It falls flat in lots of places. For instance: there are no socio-economic circumstances that make one more likely to become a rabbit. I don't mind that the comparison eventually falls flat because so do all other comparisons of predators and prey to races or classes or whatever in Zootopia. The movie uses elements from different relationships, but never commits to fully modeling any one of them. Which is the movie's strength, because it's a funny feelgood tale about prejudice, not an epic historic drama. I mean, The fox and the hound is a fine film, but it has some deeply disturbing edges if you think about it too hard, so I enjoy Zootopia's less literal approach more. So I'm looking for elements of relationships here, not comparisons that hold up all the way through. But I do feel this is part of why Judy forcing-convincing Nick to work with her works for the audience. Imagine the cop had been the fox, telling the little bunny criminal to work for them. That would have just read as bullying, no matter what the bunny did to deserve it. (Especially if you swap the genders too, but ooh boy would I be opening another can of worms there.) That fox would be mean, an antihero at best. Or if the criminal bunny had proposed the team-up that would just have been last resort begging, giving the fox cop no real reason to go along with it. (Unless you change the dynamic between cops and criminals in this setting a lot to more of a dystopian narco state where the cops are basically powerless to hunt.) The pact works so well because Judy has power but still takes a risk, because she is the hunted in one way, but the hunter in another. And I never thought of that before watching this video, so I thought that was neat.
One thing that always hurt the movie for me was how the Night Howlers were used and how shortly before Judy had to give the conference she heard a doctor say those things. Did no one in the entire world know of this somehow? The entire world would have to be so racist that everyone who knows refuses to call. That a common plant can do this on all animals at base without complex chemical interactions. That it doesn't wear off on its own over time. She somehow found it out in secret and managed to keep a secret without anyone spilling it. Where someone was caught stealing this and no one looked up what it could be used for to cause harm. This is literally a single step from being a zombie apocalypse, and... it is an allegory for racism cause by funny plant that can do this on its own by hitting someone with it not even ingesting it. No prey animals accidentally hit or effected at all. I legitimately believe the implementation of Night Howlers was done so quickly and so poorly it harmed the core narrative and it genuinely raises questions. Did Nick not fear for his life when he heard the doctor and Lion talking, did he completely dismiss what was actively happening? That when we find him later he is perfectly fine and not crippled from the stress of this situation and fear of becoming a monster as he will get infected by whatever is happening? He's behaving like he already solved it and knew, that right after the conference he was going to tell Judy about Night Howlers but didn't, and he considered visiting her to tell her but realized her farm would have it so she'd be back when she learns the truth, and decided to record it. I think that is why I say the original drafts for the movie were better, it wasn't as contrived and actually addressed the issue without using cheap glass that if you look at even slightly creates major concerns.
Really love some of the moments of the original version shown here, like when they treat removing Nick’s collar as being equivalent to disarming a bomb, even having a cage ready to drop on him the moment he goes ballistic, thinking he’s just *that* dangerous even though we the audience know that just a person, one who is just so sick and tired of being seen this way, and just wants people to know that that’s all he is, just a person like them, and one who is treated unfairly by society simply for being born the way he is
The original movie would’ve worked great to teach kids that *progress takes time* . If the movie ended with the predators gaining more rights, like being able to remove their collars on their own private property or Wild Times being a state sponsored thing while the state still regulated collars on predators in public, it would’ve showed kids that not everything has a happy ending super quickly. But this is Disney and Disney likes sanitized movies
Aside from the plot and the characters of Nick and Judy, what I appreciated most about Zootopia is precisely the fact that they resumed the use of animals as an "allegory" of humans, given that they hadn't been there for a while animal protagonists in a Disney film, especially if we consider intelligent animals (like humans) in the wake of Phaedrus or Aesop.
15:04 I think you are not noticing how this movie is set in a setting like the 2000s and Judy is Nick are both the first Rabbit and first Fox police officers. Bogo, Judy and many others in the city don't just have a problem specifically with Judy they all think rabbits are weak and helpless and have pushed them out of the profession. Same with Bogo shutting down Nick in the rainforest district with "do you think I will believe A FOX". He doesn't have a problem with Nick specifically, and not of the officers that work for Bogo are even surprised by his blatant speciesm against Nick and foxes. It's why no fox ever wanted to become a police officer before Nick.
what you’re saying is really interesting but, 14:22 at this point in the video i physically can’t keep listening because of the music, combined with the repeating film clips it makes me feel like im in a fever dream
@@sedij2358 wreck it Ralph came out before this and I think encanto is pretty average and has that line of Disney films where there is no actual bad antagonist and is just domestic or family or something
@@MeepMacArthurlll yes, but wreck it Ralph can still be considered a modern Disney movie. It came out only 4 years before zootopia. As far as Encanto goes with its main conflict, I think it did it the best out of the Disney movies that have used that trope.
I personally love this film and do think it’s one of Disney best! I respect your opinions and analysis, as I can understand its flaws, I can just personally overlook them. Great video.
Give me something like Beastars with this, oh my word. An animator named Davvid broke this down really well around 1 year ago too and put the storyboards together and everything. I love both Nicks all things considered though, but the dark stuff is enjoyable.
![Why The Screenslaver is Pixar's Stupidest Villain [Incredibles 2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/g-ceg-ppNo4/mqdefault.jpg)
Can I get a pat on the back for uploading a new video within a time span of less than two weeks for the first time in over a year and a half?
No :|
@@the_swagman-l6l oof
Okay. :)
sonic
Yes!🫂
I love the scene where Judy looks back at Nick and his collar is on yellow. She knows they're feeling the same way about what just happened but only one of them can experience their emotions without repercussion. It reads to me that she truly realizes in that moment that it's not a safety precaution, predators are being punished for just being alive.
trans ppl be like /s
sad we live in a world where people just suck
Stegosaurus wanta to know your location.
It's an amazing storytelling moment that I wish truly existed
holy shit.
Personally, as a queer brown woman, removing the collars at all now just feels like corporate disney interfering. It was probably too “radical” for their tastes or something. Idk. It’s just disappointing because every time I watch the movie i do enjoy it, i like it tbh, and yet i never actually want to rewatch it. It feels so shallow. It’s like it touches on the most generic kind of discrimination, and then proceeds to tie it up with a cute little bow at the end when the villain is defeated and the world is suddenly perfect. For a movie with a theme based on very real, nuanced issues it just feels like a cheap cop out.
@@renoirrr it could even be seen as police propaganda too since it's essentially a detective mystery.
You forgot to mention the part where the collars shock the predators whenever they feel any strong emotion, like, *all* emotions. The kid at the polar bear taming party is at first excited, then he gets too happy and gets shocked.
Yeah, and the amusement park Nick wanted to make would allow predators to actually be excited about things without getting shocked, like to be able to feel adrenaline / excitement / fear freely. It would be terrible to live in a world where you HAVE to always be apathetic and suppress your emotions just so you don't get punished.
It does fit the expectations put on many minorities. A lot of us are expected to alway keep a level head even in the case where it is justified.
that scene is so heartbreaking and I wish so badly they'd stuck with the version of the movie that would have kept it. what we got is by no means a bad movie, I still enjoy it enough to rewatch on occasion, but the original concept would have been so much more emotionally impactful
@@Axiian19 Hmmmm. I'm feeling more intersectional allegories being illuminated in this conversation.
Goodness--like something out of Harrison Bergeron.
Oh my god, the "taming party" scene wouldve broken me. I wouldve been ugly crying in that movie theater.
I know, bawling my eyes out right now :C
I was already balling with how it is
28:35 there is a slight pause before he says "accepts you" and that really speaks to me. he knows his kid is so happy about this. he knows how wrong it is to lie to him. he knows how much it will break him when he realizes it was all just a facade to keep everyone else happy. idk that one pause there just makes me want to cry
It's so well written
That’s the horrible thing though: Only in this line he DOESN‘T lie, it’s just that his son probably takes it the wrong way. The true meaning is that ONLY with this collar does this society accept him 😢
I think the idea of the taming collars would've added so much more to Mayor Lionheart's character as well (following the released plot of the movie). It would further solidify why he covered up all of the missing animals cases and why he had people working hard to keep it quiet but also cure them. Finally, a predator who "can be anything!" got into a position of power - he was "one of the good ones" - always a green collar. Him covering all of that up would be even more due to him not wanting to lose his position but also not wanting to place predators into a more negative light since it's ALREADY bad enough that they have shock collars. If it turns out there's something that makes predators go absolutely feral despite the presence of a shock collar, then what? How bad would things get? He would probably lose his position and predators would be WILDLY displaced and restrained in society. Mayor Lionheart would want to hide things, find out what's causing it, find a way to cure things to prevent further chaos.
Not super well thought out but I just think a combo of ideas could've worked so well across so many elements.
It would have worked pretty well. A similar thing happened in Brasil. Our first and only female president was corrupt and honestly it was so disapointing to se a woman on such a position, put the rest of us in an even worse place because of greed. It would have been a great way to develop how predators feell like they are treated in society and how much impact a predator in a position so powerfull would have caused.
Ironically the original script could work as a prequel, a sort dark kept secret for the perfect zootopia from the current film.
It could be set, like, around right before Judy was born. Would've retroactively explained why some of the characters seemed prejudiced for no reason other than being meanies - they remember the time when predator-prey relations were much worse, leaving the prey with newfound fear now that the predators are suddenly uncollared even though all their lives they were taught that that's dangerous, and the predators can have leftover anger about how they have been treated just a few years ago.
@@nataliaborys1554 Would also be a much better representation of how it came to the discrimination in the first place. Like with sexism and racism, the government first played an active role in perpetuating these ideas, like the shock-collars would. Now, we are living in the aftermath, like the original zootopia would.
@@akamered4483 Also also it would mirror real life so much more in that way. Like how you see a lot of older folks that are more prejudiced because they grew up during a time where they were pushed to fear the out group. It would show with only a few generations the majority of people have come to accept these differences while also still being taught/witnessing the prejudices still at play either subtly or openly via their parents or even grandparents.
@@t1dotaku Exactly. I like the idea behind zootopia for being a modern representation of discrimination "post-partum", but the detective plooooooot for gods sake
Or possibly the laws of another town/state/country within the universe honestly. Some cities are more progressive than others
Personally, as a writer myself, I think the reason the collars were removed was because they couldn't find a way to give the story a happy ending without making it feel like a major contrivance.
I think if they did not have to have a traditional happy ending, they could have done it. A bittersweet, there-is-hope-for-the-future ending would have worked, but Disney would never go for anything less than perfectly happy in a kid's film.
I feel like part of the reason they removed them was if they kept the collars but resolved them by the end of the movie there would've been very little room for sequels.
I was crazy for Zootopia when it was still being made so I had seen some concept art and ideas at the time even though I didn't know english very well and I fell in love with the promise of the movie; I don't hate what we got but after learning everything it could've been I would've prefered the version with the collars.
@@zachnewby4739 they did it for incredibles 1
Imo, im glad they remove that, i think the collars would be too much on the nose, or i guess, the neck.
i feel like they really removed it for it being "too discriminatory" and "too depressing" for kids
The scene where the polar cub receives the collar and celebrates before getting immediately shocked broke my heart. And when he went back to hug his dad, AH. That would’ve been one of my favourite Disney movies ever.
And the dad is like: I know little one, I know.
@@gabojill19 Oh and how before that, when the cub starts celebrating, his dad is like: wait, don't-.
It's cause he knew what'd happen :(
I'd still argue the best scene is the one in the train where the tiger sits down and the mother scoots her kid away from him- it's so subtle but perfect
what makes gideon's apology all the better, is that through the wording he uses you can tell he's been to therapy. This wasn't just him ending up an okay person in the end, this shows that at some point he looked himself in the mirror, said "I want to be better than you" and put in the freaking work. He conciously acknowledge just how wrong he had been for his actions and worked on bettering himself.
I remember the original ice cream shop scene with the elephants. The guy did not want to sell the jumbo pop to Nick because it was too big for his "son." He was not gonna finish it and most of it would end up on the floor as wasted food. I thought that was a logical take on the scene but the final cut made it look like they were just mean to non elephants.
Same with Bogo assigning Judy with traffic duty. She's new on the force. That's not discrimination but they made it look like discrimination.
I feel if he said that, she potentially could’ve understood that, but if instead, she was given a job just in the offices would’ve been a better way to show she’s being somewhat discriminated against due to her size. Potentially, it could also show how the guy wants to, “Keep the little ones safe”
Yeah I think the discrimination in the police force is mostly meant to be represented by her treatment by others rather than just exclusively the case loads.
It wasn’t explained to her that everyone goes through traffic duty, instead it did feel like her coworkers were singling her out. I think it was vibes based, as we the audience, do see the wider context of the treatment and expectation of rabbits. We get the feeling that something unfair is happening and zero explanation that traffic duty is for every new recruit, in the same way that Judy experiences it. So even if it wasn’t intentional, we can come to the same conclusion that the force was engaging in discrimination. Even reading the scene with the benefit of the doubt, this is still probably a failure in communication from management paired with a societal issue that exacerbated the feeling of discrimination.
It has been a hot second since I watched Zootopia though, sooooo I could be envisioning the scene better than it was.
@@ixiahj I'm pretty sure that was the point. It was meant to misdirect audiences with confirmation bias. Since the story is told from Judy's perspective, it makes sense for her to fixate on prejudice directed her way while turning a blind eye to her own prejudice.
I’m just glad they changed the way he tricked Judy. In an alternative cut, he spun a completely ridiculous story about how Finnick was insane and had a litany of various medical problems in order to win Judy’s sympathy. His acting was also so hammy that only a total moron would believe him. The take they went with was ultimately much better.
Holy shit, Fuzzy Things pfp
This is the " if it was indie it'll be a classic" movie pick for me
If the original script was adapted as a stop motion Wes Anderson movie it would be 10/10 and ironically more in line with classic Disney than modern disney.
@@holben27 Dude, this would kick hard as a Wes Anderson film. I wish he actually did direct the movie instead
Agreed. If it was written during the Disney renaissance, no executive would've looked at the script and went "ew that's depressing" and demand it be rewritten to be as safe and inoffensively corporate as possible. It's still an enjoyable film regardless but seeing what we could have had felt like a robbery. Prejudice and fear being the villain instead of a stupid sheep, Nick being the main character with a better backstory and an actual motivation to do good instead of being a sleazy conman, the city being a dystopia instead of utopia where everyone largely gets along for the most part and racism is in just a few rotten eggs.
@@rivy-lurk-869 Yeah and Imagine if humans actually existed in the script and the main villains are the farmers.
@@JackebBee-iz7qi Dude, Mr Fox was fantastic.
...
Pun not intended.
Based on some of the size difference things in this movie, you'd think they would NEED things like rabbit cops to police mouse town or such, rather than say, an elephant who is basically a kaiju to them.
Omg! That's why there's a vole mafia rodent town is underpoliced! 🤯
Yeah that's one of my issues with zootopia, the size difference enforeces the idea that predators are a danger and prey have every reason to fear them. Which goes against the whole lesson and ruins the metaphor for racism.
@@ClownHoundII Because it's not just racism, it's discrimination in general. It's not a 1 to 1 metaphor and i really don't think it's supposed to be
@@camarvan Not making it match one to one was a pretty smart move, I think. A multi-faceted metaphor gives the writers more freedom in story-telling, and keeps people thinking about the issue in a more nuanced way.
@@haukenot3345 agreed
There's an old webcomic called Zistopia that remade the entirety of Zootopia through the lens of the original pitch, setting it in the 1970s. It gave a deeper examination of systemic racism and class systems than I think even the original script did. It got very intense, one character had had a miscarriage due to having an electric collar on during childbirth.
Link?
I'd love to give it a read, do you happen to have link to it?
I remember this to but unfortunately it was canceled. The creator of the fan story just stop for some reason i can't remember, Ironically 2/3 of the way from the story finishing similar to the original zootopia story before changing it.
I’d love to read this, do you have a link or name?
Guys go watch beastars if u want a dark version of zootopia.
Zootopia is like if humans were pretending to be animals. Beastars is like if animals were pretending to be human.
Beastars actually explores the fact that predators need to eat meat and how their society essentially makes eating meat illegal, they have substitutes for meat but it’s an unspoken secret hidden from all herbivores that there is a hidden market selling herbivore meat to carnivores.
The story also explores interspecies relationship and how they are viewed by the public.
Predators and larger species of animals have to take medications or learn how to suppress their instincts to live in society in peace with herbivores. Bears have to take specific meds so that they don’t get too strong or too big so they don’t harm anyone but it has painful side effects. And there is so much more!
It’s such a fascinating story.
@@kawansiesquad6659 but are there humans eating other humans? What kind of analogy is there between humans and animals (carnivores and herbivores)?
@@robk2167 Lol an analogy is never 1 on 1. There's also discrimination in Beastars to both sides, I feel there's a bit of an analogy to gender discrimination there, in that carnivores are always seen as the dangerous men and herbivores are the helpless women. The carnivores understand the danger that herbis face and wish to protect them, while herbivores hate the fact that they can't just live in peace and feel safe. Meanwhile Zootopia is more about racial discrimination I feel.
@@pyro8632 I dont agree with you here at all as for me Zootopia is about gender than race where carnivores are seen as the dangerous men and herbivores are the helpless women. Its toxic feminism.
@@robk2167 Honestly if you omitted the part about toxic feminism I could see your point, but it kinda shows a certain mentality that's just a bit concerning.
Regardless, the final message of any media is very personal to every person, so both of our viewpoints can coexist with neither being wrong. My point was more about Beastars' massages, to be honest.
@@pyro8632 I haven't watch Beastars so cannot give my opinion on this. Ill try to watch asap so I can give you my point of view.
wow, that polar bear scene was chilling and heartbreaking. disappointed that it got cut, bc that seemed so well written
I was thinking about it, I imagined rather grim scene where collar on someone activates and being in pain caused more anger thus collar continued to shock predator causing causing the loop of anger and suffering until that predators passes out or just dies
Another idea to show messed up the world is would be for Judy or a prey cop who’s still green along with some experienced cops going under cover to one of those parties to watch the dad and see if he’ll sit there and watch his son get shocked or break the collar leading to his arrest
I honestly feel like people only like the tame collar plot because of the shock value (pun unintended) rather than the actual story behind it
@@fantasticbirdblue On one hand, I do think it's a bit heavy handed and dark, though maybe that's my bias and concern for what people and kids are intelligent enough to see and understand and discuss, but imo it is more realistic and more accurate to systemic racism, which is a real thing that negatively impacts people in the real world. It can be unhelpful to pretend that all prejudice in the world is an issue of prejudiced individuals and not complicated systems of hierarchies designed and refined for centuries to work against marginalized groups and identities.
If anything, the collars are the more kid friendly, digestible low ball parallel to real life, since in real life people who are prejudiced against to be considered more dangerous often don't get a little punishment tap to keep them in line; they get tenderized by law enforcement or sh o t or k i ll e d.
@@fantasticbirdblue I'm confused what you mean by "the actual story behind it"?
I love the movie. My only problem with it is that the anti-predator sentiment was solved by pinning it on the villain even though the ice cream shop scene implied it was systemic.
I also wasn't a fan of portraying Judy collaborating with the mafia to interrogate the weasel as a positive thing, since that is dangerously close to making her a rotten cop.
Other than that, it was a decent buddy cop movie with likable characters and great humor.
To be fair, Mr. Big seemed less like an organized gangster and more of just a guy who wanted to be left alone but people kept attacking him
@@SirToaster9330 He's still a criminal.
On the first point, I don’t think the anti-predator sentiment was “solved” it more so calmed the tension between animals. Prejudices will still exist, this just stopped the city from falling into chaos.
As for the second point, I don’t think the movie portrayed that as positive, just something that needs to be done for the case. Judy and Nick need information from a weasel who won’t give it away, so they use Mr big to get it. Not really a big deal, just part of solving a case.
@@justanotherguy2609 It is a pretty big deal actually. Threatening some guy selling bootleg movies out of his car with death is a pretty disproportionate punishment. Police aren't supposed to be playing judge, jury, and executioner just because it's convenient for them.
@@prixe12 I imagine they never actually intended to kill him, they just threatened to knowing it would get him to talk (Judy would never want to kill anyone and Mr. Big is smart enough to know dead men tell no tales). Still morally ambiguous for sure, but technically Judy wasn't a cop anymore by that point, which was why she went to Mr. Big to begin with. That and it was a funny cartoon scene that they didn't want to think about too deeply, lol
Somthing that still confuses me is how Judy never knew about the night howlers despite living on that farm her entire childhood. Even if she never went near them herself I feel like she would already know about how dangerous they can be
Yea, if the flowers were around since Judy's childhood then it'd be a very rational decision of her parents to warn her not to go near them. Repeatedly even. That's like the equivalent of having an electric fence and never telling your child that fence is electric.
My assumption which might be wrong is that her parents had stopped using the nighthowlers for a while because they knew how dangerous they were, and they only started using them again because their business started booming and they started growing more crops which necessitated it. But that’s just a theory.
It could also be because they went by a different name.
@@Perdix64 You've landed on the explanation clear in the movie. Judy's parents use the scientific name to warn their kids, scaring them with the complicated sounding words. Judy only finds out it's related to her case because her childhood bully says his family and circle calls them nighthowlers. Still, you'd think she and Gideon would have talked enough for her to hear that once or twice. I suspect Judy was originally a city bunny in the first version of the movie, so this wouldn't have been a plothole, assuming the flowers still mattered in that version, which I think they did based on the finale concept art of Nick fighting off three out-of-control tigers.
She does actually, but her family never referred to them as night howlers
I'm 19, and still remember watching these rough draft animatics of Zootopia on my iPad when I was 11 (I had the blu-ray that came with the code for behind the scenes footage). I genuinely felt kind of robbed, at that young age, because as young as I was I still understood & resonated with the emotional & bleak messages that were conveyed with the original world-building of the society and its "taming collars." I thought it added a level of depth to the film that wasn't there in the original, even though I wouldn't have necessarily been able to put that into words at that age. I still agree now, and it's nice to see those thoughts reflected in this video essay. While I still really like the original, it's a shame that it was rewritten to be more "kid friendly," especially since as a kid I emotionally connected more deeply with the deleted scenes, and I'm sure most other kids would have as well.
100%. Honestly I have no idea what the comments saying this idea had to go because of the target audience are on because gen z kids literally grew up on stuff like warrior cats, gravity falls, animorphs, avatar the last airbender and scooby doo mystery incorporated and while all these had some very dark themes in them it never prevented them from being extremely popular with the youngsters. Not to mention the actual classic Disney hits everyone loves like lion king, hunchback, tarzan and bambi or other almost universally loved creators like Don Bluth and Tim Burton. I was a similar age when I watched the movie in theaters and I have a distinct memory of seeing a video about the original storyline for it along with the deleted scene of Nick at the clinic I think from this version up on youtube shortly after and being almost afraid to click on it because I had this instinctual feeling it would make me less satisfied with what the movie ended up being and after stumbling upon it again years later and finally checking it out I can conclude that I was right. I can also totally relate to strongly reasonating with something as a child but not being able to put into words exactly why when I was younger. It sucks people think of kids as these mindless goblins with no critical thinking abilities who can't appreciate a good movie even if you shove it in their face because they really aren't like this.
You would have an absolute FIELD DAY with the anime Beastars. It's often compared with Zootopia because both revolve around tensions between predators and prey. Beastars, however, is intended for mature audiences and the predators don't simply “go savage”. Every single one of them has to hold back their blood thirst in some way shape or form. This is the first video I watch from you so, I'm not sure if you're open to watching/discussing anime. I just think Beastars would give you more to chew on, if you enjoy the dark and mature ideas from the Zootopia that could have been. I really enjoy both things and I'm very excited for Zootopia 2.
man the original story would've been so good we don't have enough mature animations
Watch Beastars
It is more or less the same story
@@Dr.MliekoEhh not really, I love beastars but the story and overall themes are very different to this
I don’t feel like it would. The movie we got actually has a message we can relate to. The collar thing is more of an unimaginable dystopia that we can immediately identify has not much in common with our own world, so the points about rac*ism would be mute. The movie we got is actually much more subtle about it’s messaging, which I think makes it more relevant for people today.
@@MoonShadeStuff Personally as someone who is a part of two distinct groups that both are pretty marginalized on their own and even more when they overlap I identify with this early story much more than I do with the final version but that's because I think the collar thing becomes much more meaningful and applicable to real life if you think of it as something more symbolic or metaphorical rather than literally taking it at face value, though I do get that this is a very specific interpretation that doesn't really hold as much ground when applied to the intended meaning which was very clearly racial issues (though I did see quite a few comments from people of color under this video who said they felt this version represented their struggles well too and I'm obviously not trying to disregard their experiences, in general I think it's safe to say that allegories don't necessarily have to be 1 to 1 reflections of reality to connect with people). Idk I guess what I'm trying to say is that I get what you're trying to say but I personally think that there are still demographics today that could have connected with and benefited from this version of the movie as well
Lets not forget Disney animated films like this one are meant for children.
While darker movies are indeed interesting, I do not believe looking here is the best place
Yes children are capable and stuff
But also not really ? Thats not the point, what I mean is :
Yes mature is really good, but here is not the right place ?
Feel free to tell me if you believe I am wrong, there may be things I am not considering
I remember when my sister saw this. She came back and said, "The movie was good until the end where the sheep turns out to be evil!"
i agree
1000th like
These twist villains never work. You'd think Disney would finally learn by now but nope, they did the same thing with Magnifico from Wish.
@@Nopeasaurus He wasn't a twist villain, was he?
@@Nopeasaurus They work when they're done the right way
I'm just disappointed in that "too miserable" talk that changed it. If all family-friendly studios had that kind of talk, I doubt things like Majora's Mask or any of Studio Ghibli's works would have ever seen the light of day
'You've met with a terrible fate... _haven't you?'_
Here's the difference - those are both Japanese
honesty, they can still make family-friendly things, one of the problems is how they don't use bittersweet endings as much anymore. Like Twilight Princess, it's a bittersweet ending. For me the definition of a "bittersweet ending" is something that ends happy but not in the way you hoped. In TW we had this with Midna as she broke the mirror. Of course, a bittersweet ending can be ruined but that's something for another time. Despite this, the ending is what makes the game as good as it was. The problem is companies shying away from bittersweet endings which then makes more clichés and makes the story predictable. TW shows a good use of a bittersweet an ending and an old movie called "The Last Unicorn" did too. Heck, I didn't really enjoy most of the movie but my gosh that ending still left me on the verge of tears and had me sad for another hour.
Hell, with the "too miserable" stuff would've meant a number of classic films and shows wouldn't have been made. Remember Coraline?
@@sev1120 Pretty sure Coraline is not by Disney
Omg you don't know how obsessed I was with the original Zootopia concept. I'm so happy you made a video about it. There are barely if any videos on how amazing the movie could have been
Same here. I remember seeing a deleted scene from this version floating around youtube shortly after seeing the movie in theaters as a kid and intristically not clicking on it because I had a feeling it might ruin my perception of the movie. I finally caved in a while ago and found out what the scrapped story was about through Davvid's three part series about it and... yeah, I was pretty much spot on. This felt like a much more meaningful and original idea to me personally. It's really a shame that it's so underappreciated, I would love to have an excuse to write more salty comments about how much I wish they went with this version instead and why, lol.
I can understand the scene of Judy not mentioning the wallet. When you're put on the spot like that you can often forget lots of things. I've lost count of how many times that's happened to me where important information to the argument or discussion leaves my mind because I'm thrown off and it's only until after it's not relevant anymore, hours, or days later, that I remember it again because in the moment I was panicking or emotionally compromised or was placed in a different mental pathway.
Just gotta say, Nick talking about Night Howlers was NOT how they followed the wolves - they came up with the idea of checking the traffic cams & followed the truck that had picked up the Jaguar to the holding location of the infected animals. They only made the 'Night Howlers = wolves' leap when they realised who it was picking the jaguar up. That was genuinely good detective work.
15:30 This is actually not true at all. There is a very concerning study of child psychology that showed kids as young as 4 start to treat other races differently based on their parent's own prejudices. Kids internalize that stuff, more than you realize.
I was absolutely shocked and amazed (not in a positive sense) when I saw video documentation of a similar(?) study.
Very young girls, toddlers(?), of different races, were given dolls of 3 different skin colors. Each kid was a different race with different skin colors. The dolls either had the same outfit or no outfit, so no bias there.
When asked “Which one is the prettiest?” “Which is the kindest?” “Which is your favorite?” All but one chose the lightest skinned dolls, even from kids with darker skin. One kid picked the medium/middle skin color “because she’s like me!”
When asked “Which one is not pretty?” “Which one is mean?” “Which one do you not like?” All /Most of them chose the darkest doll, even the kids with darker skin. The one from earlier to picked ‘the doll that looked like her’ had a super hard time picking one for this round because she ‘thinks they all are nice’ and are ‘best friends’ and implied it wouldn’t be fair to pick one.
I am white. I’ve mainly only been in places with majority light skin. But I don’t have any negative connotations towards darker skin color-ed people. But at the same time, not being around them took away the perspective of seeing people treat them differently. Which is why I was so taken aback when the adorable little girl with dark skin like dark chocolate pointed at the dark doll when asked who was bad, and pointed at the light skinned one when asked who was good.
I think I realized a lot of my biases and closest thing to ‘racist’ thoughts are just my complete unawareness that some people are racist. For example, in the movie world, I’d be a prey out in Bunny Burrows. And if I went to the city, I would be confused and tell predators to their faces that they aren’t being discriminated against because I didn’t see any discrimination against predators in Bunny Burrow, where there wasn’t many predators to begin with.
I clearly now have a much more… nuanced(?) perspective. I can see now that that’s how I used to be and I can correct myself when that happens. Like what he says around 29:07 to 29:45
Yeaaaah! I have
Experienced this
Personally
It’s very painfully difficult to try to improve another person’s discriminatory behaviour, for years you can be friends with them, from childhood to adulthood, you speak up to them, and they still end up hurting you when you thought they left all of that behind.
I agree. I assume he just meant that the kids' views weren't concrete or deeply instated yet, so doing something as drastic as putting a collar on someone else seemed a bit unrealistic.
exactly.. i mean he does realize children of marginalized groups have literally been murdered by peers before, right? that's a pretty extreme case, but children can be extremely vicious to one another, usually it's learned. i saw a comment not long ago of someone who said they were nearly beaten to death by bigoted children as a kid, a comment under a video about kids who have been influenced by Sneako. of course, some children can very well be some of the most open people around because they haven't yet been steeped in the biases of the world around them. unfortunately, some have. pretty much everyone has some bias engrained into them in one way or another though since it's systematic, atleast here in the USA and many other places.
many children who hold harmful views instilled by authority figures are able to have some sense talked into them though, and most of them aren't spiteful since they are young and, he is right, most of their views aren't that concrete yet. it seems a lot of children just want to do what is right sometimes, or what feels right for them based on some internal compass, so will do things like still try to be friends with people their parents have told them they can't be friends with. i do see where he is coming from, and i do think it's pretty rare to get cases where children are just mean and spiteful like that, but they unfortunately can be.
P.S - other than that, a few of his other points were also kinda 'ehhh' to me. i definitely agree that the original version of zootopia would have worked way better though
unrelated but as a kid I thought if I touched a black person my skin would change 💀
I don’t really like how they’re called predators and prey in this universe. In Beastars, they use herbivore and carnivore, and they’re alot more violent and prejudiced in that society than the zootopia world.
I just think that’s bizarre.
It's strange to be sure, but the reason why Disney did this, I think, is because they wanted to try to have the film be more dark and mature and be able to tackle more nuanced themes, so labeling the animals as "predators" and "prey" was an attempt to give it more of an edge. The issue arises with the fact that this is Disney we're talking about: to keep it brief, they are afraid to make things too dark because they know that people are not comfortable with confronting negative emotions, and as a result were not willing to fully commit to their original idea with the collars and the more blatant prejudice. Disney has always had something of a reputation for sanitizing their properties -- the themes of stuff like "happily ever after", "good will always prevail over evil in the end", or "you can do anything if you're willing to put your mind to it and work hard for your dreams" are all things that make people feel good, and Disney wants desperately to be associated with making people feel those happy, uplifting feelings. This, I believe, is what ultimately causes them to rewrite the story to become what it is, even if it came at the expense of the nuance that we could have gotten if they had not been so afraid that people would like their movie less because it made the audience confront something so clearly dark
I'd imagine if the film would establish the negative connotation of Predator & Prey then like post-time skip have carnivore & herbivore used by people against the system. That would've sent a message with only subtle changes in the dialogue.
I wonder how a film from the Predator franchise works in this universe.
I honestly don't see a problem with "you can do anything if you're willing to put your mind into it & work for your dreams." Even if that's not necessarily true, it's better to die at least trying to achieve something you want than being alive, complacent, & Uhappy.
@@matthewkuscienko4616
The problem with Beastars is how u classify carnivores who aren't predators. Like hippos, boars who eat occasionally meat but aren't hunting killers per se.
I feel like if the target audience wasn’t 7-10 year olds, they probably would’ve done it like this
First that but secondly Disney just dislikes to take risks and wants to have an as broad audience as possible to maximize profits.
even if it was, they still could've went with the og plot. kids can handle darker themes more than ppl seem to realize
@@chaaaargh kids can understand them, but can they handle them? Maybe you grew up in a stable environment, but a lot of kids can’t really handle the darker themes. It boils down to maturity and stability in their environment and some don’t have that
@@chaaaargh But parents can't
Parents already had issues with the black leopard scene and the scene where the predators are kept in cages... Please understand that it's Disney, they wouldn't take a risk of having their movie be boycotted and lose money because of that... Because parents are convinced that animation is soely a medium for children and has to be 100% kid friendly
You make a lot of great points. I loved this movie but I always thought it was weird that Judy’s speech changes Zootopia immediately rather than people already having that bias beforehand.
The way i always saw it is that hearing the speech from Judy, a figure of authority, made their preexisting biases against predators feel ‘acceptable’ to openly express.
Honestly, I think I'm the only one who liked Bellweather as a villain, or at least the concept behind her. The idea of a politician hiding behind a facade while using fear and discrimination to sow mistrust between groups of people and subsequently gain power by doing so is so perfect for the type of movie that Zootopia is and what message it was trying to tell.
Bellweather honestly just needed to have more scenes that fleshes her out more. Maybe a backstory that was similar to Judy's and Nick's where she was mistreated and underestimated throughout her life because she was a meek little sheep but she never rises up from those discriminations like Judy had and she let those feelings fester more deeply Nick had. Thus making her like a dark reflection of both Judy and Nick.
Honestly, I don’t really agree with her being a bad twist or not showing up enough in the movie. You see her several times being denied and mistreated because of being a meek little sheep. I think why people find her underwhelming is because of her design and personality. She’s so tiny when sheep are usually quite hefty. A change in her body language could make her go from sweet and kind to intimidating. I think her personality should have changed drastically at the reveal, showing her playing into the meek stuttering stereotype so people look the other way why she does her criminal work. Also, what would have helped the twist was if the people cooking the flowers weren’t also sheep, and the only other sheep we see clearly in the movie.
That's a good interprétation.
She's honestly a realistic villain as well. Many politicians love to fear monger and subtly or un-subtly make people distrust other groups of people to push their goals.
I loved her as the villain it made sense. Plus it wasn’t like the Lion mayor wasn’t also the villain…he was and actually got punished for it. I do hope we don’t have a twist villain for the second movie. But I feel like twist villains are common in mysteries which is technically what Zootopia is
I agree-- when it first came out I was super confused because I basically forgot she existed by the time the twist villain was released
I'd personally consider Bellwether to be a discount Waternoose
Waternoose is the best twist villain of all time. Bellwether isn't the worst, but is one of the worst.
@@bowserbreaker2515King Candy/Turbo is the best twist villain
@@allenj7613THAT WAS HIS MISTAKE
Idk turbo and water noose are by far the best
Oh Anna if only there was someone who actually loved you, its either waternoose or turbo/king candy, stinky Pete and lotso are the best I might be forgetting someone else but I don’t think I am *also is auto a twist villain I haven’t seen WALL·E in a while*
Waternoose’s motivations made sense, and he did is evil regretfully.
Horrible monster, but he makes sense.
Bellwether is just an insane racist who gets off on her own evil.
If companies weren't afraid of making their movies too miserable we'd have movies with better themes and more profound messages, as a lot of good media has those miserable aspects.
I'd also talk about aspects of The Lorax by Illumination, especially the cut song "Biggering", but that feels less as being afraid of misery, and more like the studio was afraid of showing a depiction of greed and corruption that could in some way affect their reputation
I've always thought to myself that this concept was kinda like Disney's version of biggering with the way the unique anti-authoritarian message got replaced with a pretty basic follow your dreams buddy cop shtick
@@rozinq1351 It's closer to the opposite of what happened with Illumination and The Lorax, as Disney actually *was* planning on releasing Zootopia with its "darker" storyline intact, but the writers and directors had other plans. It had less to do with the message and more to do with the plot feeling disjointed and tonally inconsistent. Also, the "follow your dreams" idea was shown to be a faulty worldview in the final version of the movie, so I don't know why you're criticizing that.
@@Dolphanatic They were? That's interesting, because I heard a different explanation about them originally showing this version to Pixar executives who deemed it too bleak and grimdark and another one that claimed they showed a draft of this to a test audience of kids and they found it hard to relate to Nick as a protagonist under a different video about this version of the script, though I don't remember either of these being backed up by any sources so they could have easily been rumors. As for the follow your dreams storyline I just think that it's a very basic and common concept that's extremely popular in animated movies in particular and while I get that popular tropes are popular for a reason in my opinion it wasn't executed in a way that is interesting and original enough to warrant having it replace such a deep and unique narrative (that's not to say the execution was bad, it certainly wasn't, it just felt a little generic to me even as a kid because of how many times I've seen it done before). I've seen some of your other comments here so I roughly know what your opinions on both versions are and even though I disagree with most of them I'm not gonna attempt to change your mind because I do understand where a lot of your arguments come from but due to a mix of general and personal reasons I have a different perspective. I still think zootopia as it is is a cute and fun movie with a good message, I just like the original idea more but I understand why some will disagree.
@@rozinq1351 Those are just rumors. In reality, what little footage exists of the early version of Zootopia mostly consists of storyboards and a few crude renderings, so I doubt there would've even been enough of a movie to show test audiences. You're probably thinking of the test screenings that the people working on movies routinely do to make sure there are no editing errors. If you're interested, there's a documentary called "Imagining Zootopia" that gives a pretty detailed look into the production of Zootopia, and it reveals a lot about how the rewrite actually went down. There are entire scenes and chunks of the old script shown, but the most insightful part of the documentary is how the writers and directors, specifically Byron Howard, Jared Bush, and Phil Johnston, all agreed that the tame collar storyline wasn't working and that rewriting the movie to be more straightforward with a greater focus on stereotypes was a huge improvement. Whether you agree with the decision or not, it's clear that the rewrite was their idea, so it really rubs me the wrong way whenever I see people spreading false rumors about there being some sort of corporate pressure to make the movie "less dark" and calling the writers and directors "cowards" for rewriting their own story.
super obsessed with how this guy narrates like he’s running on a treadmill the entire time, like so worked up he’s out of breath lol. i feel the same way about this subject, i made an entire powerpoint ranting til i was basically yelling to my roommate about how good this movie could have been LMAO. this movie is my Wish
3:22 They're both written to be intelligent and neither one is the butt of every joke. This is such a great point. I hate it when movies make one character, (which is the dude 99% of the time) to be an idiot punching bag for comedic relief.
I will always maintain that the best children's media that tackles discrimination, and just how ridiculous it all is, was the Dr. Seuss book "The Sneetches and Other Stories". The story goes that birdlike beings called Sneetches were divided into two groups - Star Bellied and Plain Bellied, which was a misnomer, as the Plain Bellied had a star that was just too small to be seen, nevertheless, the Star Bellied considered themselves the superior of the two and enjoyed their privileged status, while looking down on the Plain Bellied Sneetches. Until one day, an entrepreneur/con-artist named Sylvester McMonkey McBean comes to the island of the Sneetches and approaches the Plain Bellied, with his invention that will give them a visible star, all for the price of three dollars. This angers the Star Bellied, as they now lost their special affiliation, until McBean approaches the Star Bellies with an invention to remove their star, for the exorbitant price of ten dollars. The story climaxes with the Sneetches, spending more money and going through the machines, with ever increasing insanity and lunacy, as both groups of Sneetches try to one-up the other, until they run out of money, and are left confused as who was who, McBean leaves the island a rich man, gloating that "You can't teach a Sneetch", but the Sneetches did learn for this folly, and realised that just how foolish it all was, that a Sneetch was a Sneetch whether they had a star or not. Zootopia works in a similar way, with or without a shock collar, this was the point Theodore Seuss Gisel was trying to make with his story, discrimination is the collar we wear in life and will shock you regardless of your status. The 1973 Dr. Seuss special featuring the Sneetches illustrates this quite vividly, the Star Bellies were taught to be haughty, conceited and condescending to the Plain Bellies, thus went to great lengths to keeping this privileged status _ad_ _hoc_ and _de_ _jure_ by any means necessary. The story was not one-sided either, as the Plain Bellies embellished in this foolishness too, they were left penniless just like the Star Bellies too by McBean, the whole ordeal revealed to all Sneetches, that they were capable of doing the same embarrassing thing. I think Zootopia should have shown the institutional discrimination, rather than individual, that it was all dictated downward not upward, and that the law and practises were designed to keeping this convoluted status quo, like the Sneetches, Zootopia could have shown just how farcical it all is, Zootopia could have been a parody of real-life Hollywood, that despite viewing itself as the progressive capital of the US, still have institutional inequality that could rival any authoritarian regime. Moreover, whether its stars or collars, discrimination works in both plain sight and behind the scenes, we don't have stars nor collars to know the painful sting of discrimination and inequality.
What you're saying is that the best story is the one where capitalism solves racism?
@@wakkaseta8351 What we're saying is that you can't teach a human, and you're the prime example why.
@@wakkaseta8351you missed the point by a mile.
@@wakkaseta8351 It's a story about how some can go to great lengths to protect their privilages.
I loved that book!
As someone who regarded Zootopia as one of my favorite movies and has been an influential movie for me to pursue film, that Bellwether twist has only pissed me off as time went on. It felt like they just had to assign the villain role to someone last minute. Here's to hoping the 2nd film does better with the themes especially since we've experienced more nuances with its themes since 2016.
Might not happen as it's too risky but who knows
Dude same, like I watched this movie 24/7 it was on repeat in my room. But after a certain point I would just skip the reveal of Bellwether because younger me HATED it. As the years have gone I just hate it even more, it made no sense whatsoever and as you said felt extremely last minute.
How could it be improved? Could there be clues she's behind all that?
Don’t count on it, Pixar announced that no more movies will be produced by directors that convey their own story and instead will be focusing on sequels
She could have appeared in more scenes or contributed. And at least make her suspicious.
The entire plot fulls apart when you stop to think about the night howlers, the flowers and how these things are probably well documented, with their 'feralising' capabilities being well known. The cops should have been investigating suppliers of these plants from the get go and the movie would have ended in half the amount of time with the lion mayor not having to result to lying, all he needed to say is that the predators going feral are most likely due to a drug sythisised from a flower and that they're working towards apprehending these criminals.
I agree, I also find it weird how no one questions why the predators are going savage in the first place and why is it only happening in the city, what about the outskirts and other towns?
@@filipadsiekierka5350 I think they only said for it to be in the city because the movie takes place in the city and also because the police are stationed to protect the city I’m sure places like bunny burrow have police but other then that anything that happens outside of the city police’s stationed area is out of their control
@@Martyismylifesupport Well yes, but those ”savage” incidents sound pretty serious. Surely other towns and cities would get interested if they heard about it, right?
Why did no one from outside question why this is happening only in Zootopia?
@@filipadsiekierka5350 because it is said by the skunk doctor and lion heart that up until nick and Judy found the hospital lionheart kept this information from the public to save his reputation and to protect the city from going into chaos and most likely up until bellweather was mayor she kept this information from outsiders which is probably why any outsiders didn’t know but that’s up to people to theorize:)
It literally doesn't matter if people know about Night Howlers.
Poverty in real life informs the vast amount of crime, but you still have people denying it. Instead, they'll assert that *certain* demographics are just "predisposed" to crime and poverty. That they're impoverished because of an intrinsic flaw in their *blood*.
Racists in Zootopia won't care about the feralizing effects of Night Howlers. They may even say that Predators are uniquely vulnerable to Night Howlers as a result of their race, facts be damned.
Bigotry is not rational.
I feel like the sheep being the villain almost works bc of her demeanor. Like irl, it’s always people who seem so nice and kind that are secretly embezzling money or something. I just wish we could’ve seen more of her struggle being secretary to someone who treated her like that, it would’ve been awesome to see how she manipulated people and got her little ram henchman to follow her.
Hey man, the music selection for the second to last timestamp is just absolutely perfect. It fits beautifully the depressing haertbreaking and disturbing deleted scene.
Dude, amazing video, but i will have to disagree with you on somethings, and the biggest one is "the bullies discriminating Wild just because they're mean".
I feel like people that say stuff like "children cannot be spiteful" haven't experienced it themselves, and i have throughout my whole childhood. The scene with the bullies might've been the hardest hittting piece of Disney media i've watched, it reopened a box of memories and made my eyes swell with tears.
I'm a Venezuelan inmigrant (latino basically), and i could not get away without getting bullied in school because i was was "the spanish", they made fun of me and beat me hard just because the thought my accent and the fact i was an outsider was funny, they called me every name and made me consider that thing a teenager should never (Capital S) and this happened twice during different schools, they never came off as being scared of me, i was a short kid, they genueily hated me because i wasn't white, but as i grew i realized it was them being the jerks, i made friends that respected who i was and cared about me, and that scene broke me because of it.
I feel like the movie handled that aspect better than most, sometimes children have bad influences and that might change aspects of themselves for the worse, even hurting others.
Yeah children suck. I've had something similar happen to me what nick went through. The stuff haunts you for life and i just can't forget about it
I agree, I can't understand what that feels like but as neurodivergent.. I feel like other kids could sense that I was not like them. I've been treated like shit most of my life. I can assure they were not feeling threatened by me. I was and am kind and harmless. So yes I agree
@@currybread5298 I got treated like shit because of race mostly or the fact that I have OCD but mostly due to being a teacher's kid in middle school. Teachers did nothing to stop that
I'm sorry pal for what happened to you, but I'm glad you found friends in the way. And yeah, children can be good and all but they are still naive and most of the time can be jerks...
@@Angninjin22
Ra
You know i was wondering how they switched Nick to Judy as the main protagonist in development. Because in the first concept art I saw he’s like getting a lot of focus.
According to an old video I remember watching (it was in like 2019 or 2020 I think) that it's because of the test audience suggesting that Judy would've been the better main protagonist, only for Nick to be the fan favorite lol
@@Chivecookies_domainof course Nick is a fan favorite since we can relate to this Fox.
@@MrTragedious986 There are also other reasons,,,
BRUH i wish nick was the main protag, i love him so much, he's also very relatable than the average mc Judy
@@JackebBee-iz7qi he _is_ hot as fuck, yeah..
Fun fact: Here in the UK its actually called Zootropolis.
Fun fact: That's a worse name! 👍
What’s interesting about that name change was because whenever the movie was being released around March of 2016, the UK was still a European Union member at the time before Brexit happened 3 months later. This information is relevant because there was a zoo in Denmark, another EU member, that had already trademarked the name “Zootopia” so to avoid trademark infringement, they named it Zootropolis instead.
I thought this was a prank we were playing but no it's actually called that here oh my god
Even in the US its official name shown on Disney+ was changed to Zootropolis at some point. However, none of the actual movie was edited, so the part where it shows the title towards the beginning still says "Zootopia"
In germany it's "Zoomania"
No connection in name to an area what so ever
I don't think Disney was too scared to make a movie that was "too dark". I think they were too scared to peel back the curtain of how the world really works. Like you said at 29:25, "The less people know and understand something, the easier they are to control". This is absolutely true. The less you know, the more you are convinced the stance you hold is the correct one. If our listen to history or the news and hear "X people are better than Y people", the more you think that is true, and both X and Y people are played for a fool. Y are viewed as inferior to X, and X believe that they are subjugatd for no reason and both are lead to believe "it is what is is, and there is nothing you can do about it." For Zootopia, anyone viewed as predator by prey is not to be trusted and anything they say is dangerous, so they must be subjugated for the sake of peace, safety and security, and prey cannot see what is done to the predators to "keep them safe", and there "is nothing you can do about it", "it is what it is". Showing anything outside of the rose tinted glasses is dangerous, and I believe Disney was scared of breaking the immersion of Zootopia a mostly "fictional" place.
I don't mind the coincidence of getting into the mafia's good graces by saving the daughter. It was a time when Judy got to do what she wanted to become a cop to do (help people) even though she wasn't supposed to be doing it, and it got her help back.
It’s a shame how the villain really was a big major factor in these 2010s Disney movies, even putting aside King Candy as Turbo being the best possible twist villain, most of the following after just really hindered the movies and some cases nearly destroy it, which is a shame cause it held back so much potential if they had been realized better
It really did feel like M. Night Shyamalan was whispering into the ears of the Disney execs at the time XD
@@Nic_2751 Frozen making a metric fuck ton of cash while having one of the laziest twist villains probably didn't help things.
I think another big part that was ignored was how long ago was Zooptia not at peace? Or rather how long ago were Predators still eating prey? It's fine to say "get over it" but if the foxes were eating the bunnies a generation or so ago it's a big ask. Especially if they still have all the natural weapons and teeth needed to still kill. Given the stronger reactions from the older characters like Judy's parents, it almost makes you believe bloodshed was fairly recent.
Yeah, discrimination usually has a long history behind it, the shock-collars would be representative of how the government also used to perpetuate ideas of sexism or racism through laws. Without that context in the film, what should be the focus is how the aftermath of such times affect society (the exact thing we are facing in out modern times), but I guess a badly tied together detective plot was more important than that. 🤷♀
I imagined it was like caveman times
in the second sentence of the movie judy says “thousands of years ago” for predators eating prey. so they pretty much told us how long ago right at the start
@@Jaceisdabest That is interesting and concerning at the same time. It's been a long time since I watched the movie and I will admit I missed that. That said it's either a long time ago, if it's multiple thousands of years, or fairly "Recently" if it's only 1 or 2 thousand. It would be like saying we were cannibals in the 100's or so.
@@Jaceisdabest for all we know, zootopia could simply misconstrue history as is often seen in real life. Saying that thousands of years ago two carnivores preyed on small animals but that's passed and now they live in harmony is like saying we used to discrimate black people but they've got laws now and we all live in harmony.
Zootopia is one of those rare movies, where the directors got too ambitious with their first draft compared to the company they were making it for. I would have loved to see the original vision for zootopia as much as the next guy, but unless Disney decides to do a “Snyders cut” of the movie I doubt we’ll ever see it come to fruition
thats not rare, I know people who work in hollywood and a friend of mine was formerly shopping scripts around and interested in screenwriting. Most movies and tv change scripts to be "more palatable", more easily sellable.
remember how Disney has shut down an entire studio to prevent Nimona from being released.
i said it before and i'll say it again: i want a beat-by-beat realization of the original storyboard for this movie!
How about we don’t and you be happy with the movie we got! Like BILLIONS OF fans around the world, like me!
Unless there was something I missed I don't know if it's accurate to say that they shut down Blue Sky just so Nimona wasn't released. We don't know how much they actually knew about the movie.
me when i spread misinformation on the internet
@@danielx7609some people still like the movie we got, we just wanna know what could’ve been. Whatever happened to curiosity?
When they made Lilo and stitch, the entire studio was keeping it under wraps until it was basically finished so that they couldn’t scrap the project. It’s such a wonderful movie!!!
Fuck, I love the idea of the first pass of Zootopia. It almost feels like Basil The Great Mouse Detective but with systematic racism and. I don’t know. There’s something nostalgic about animated movies handling dark subjects. Actually, yk what, gonna watch Basil again. Good bloody video
I believe Basil is a better detective than judy.
@@jaypee116 He most definitely is ngl
You'll like Zistopia.
I think it's great that they had enough courage to cover a topic like this in the first place, but it did always feel like something was missing from this portrayal and I could never quite put my finger on it. However, I did notice at the end how all the city's problems were solved without them needing to do anything, which always bugged me.
This is one of the best videos on Zootopia ever made. The way you had an entire section where you genuinely praised aspects of the movie you liked, differentiating them from the aspects that you don't like very much was amazing. Honestly I don't often find critics who do it like that. As much as I love the movie we got, the cut version was so much better. The way it showed the prey-the "oppressed" group, making life so much more difficult for the predators, the "oppressors" just to keep themselves safe, is a message we almost never see in film: the people that *historically* had a disadvantage eventually turning the tables on the people with relations to the oppressors who want nothing to do with it, and who don't deserve to have the same done to them. It's such a punching message and the fact that they cut it really irritates me, since there's so much needless prejudice against good people just because of their race, religion, sexuality, political stance, etc. that is celebrated by people who smugly believe they're the most accepting of all.
Exactly!
It would've been ahead of its time considering we now live in an ironic age where those who are r@sits are the ones calling people "r@sits"...
Rather than take the opportunity to be truly successful and move on with their lives, those people would rather dunk on the people that look or identify with their oppressors and ask for nonsensical "reparations". Thus, giving the people who are still oppressing them justified reasons to do so and perpetuating the Cycle of Violence.
@@ellugerdelacruz2555Sorry, can you elaborate what you said in the first sentence?
@@Mae4Ever I hate to break it to you, but this is a thread of two racist people who think that people of color hold the majority of power in America and Europe. The language of the first guy saying "the historical oppressors becoming oppressed" is a nice way of saying "white people are being oppressed by people of color," and the second guy is saying it's more racist to call racist people racist in the first sentence, and goes on to say that racism isn't and has never been real, and if it was it's their own fault that people are racist to them anyway. Just good ole UA-cam commenter white supremacy :3
@@Mae4Ever - I believe they mean that the people who are screaming that some groups (such as normal straight Christian white people) are inherently racist and sexist... are in fact the ones BEING those things.
@ellugerdelacruz2555 I get what you're trying to say but the take "the oppressed dunk on people who look like thier oppressors and ask for reparations which gives the ones in power justified reason to keep oppressing them!" which is...not how that works at all I'm sorry to say 😭
Marginalized groups were being savagely oppressed even if they acted the best that they could and kept out of the way, they were still torn down if they ever got too "uppity". If you look up the Tulsa Massacre you'll see what I mean.
Even the reparations thing is dumb to bring up cause even if it was 200 years ago, black former slaves were promised 40 acres and a mule when the Civil War was over and never received it. Which led to thier descendants being left with little to no land or prospects.
You can have the opinion that the marginalized should let these things go and move on with thier lives but it doesn't change the fact that this history is still affecting these groups to this very day, all across the world. It's not as simple as "be free and be the best you can be!" even though I wish it was.
I feel like quite a bit of the critique here is that things are being simplified, to which I say- This IS a kids movie still. A lot of things that people want different about it might make it a better adult movie, but would probably make it a worse kids movie. I think it did a very impressive job keeping complex themes without making it too dark or too confusing for little kids to get something out of.
Like with the collar plot- it would make a more interesting movie for adults, but it is outright dystopian and genuinely horrifying. It’s just too much for a lot of kids. This movie is SUPPOSED to be for modern children. It does not fit their brand, and it is not family friendly.
Also- I’m a little concerned for you if you think the collar plot is closer to real life, literally society legally mandated electrocuting of 5 year olds for having emotions, that’s what you think is more realistic? Having 10% of the population literally constantly including in the privacy of their own homes be subject to this twisted version of essentially conversion electroshock therapy for emotions.
Meanwhile, Disney now owns all of 20th Century Fox's assets and IPs, including The Simpsons and the Deadpool films.
@@KnightEclipser They may own those, but they don't market those towards kids...
I know I might get backlash for this take, but I feel that some of these complaints are really just a result of over-analyzing the story elements when compared to the cut story-line. Here's what I mean... I definitely agree that the movie did a good job of showing discrimination, especially when it comes from our upbringing, and I definitely agree that the sleuthing plot was full of holes big enough to drive a star through. However, I feel that the discrimination depicted was really more systematic than individual, and the twist villain was still impactful. Throughout the movie we get to see various instances of animals stereotyping other animals. Rabbits are seen as carrot growing wimps, foxes being sly dominators, sheep being easily preyed upon victims, etcetera. These stereotypes, along with acts of discrimination (making Judy a meter maid instead of a Probationary Officer, Bellwether getting treated like an easy-to-push-around secretary by Lionheart, foxes and weasels getting treated with mistrust just because their species are portrayed as being underhanded) tell a story of underlying discrimination which explain why a fox might get bullied by a bunch of "prey" children, or why Bellwether would even exist as a villain in the first place. The only reason why "prey" would try to "rise up" is if they felt discriminated against by "predators" despite the sparkle and shine of opportunity in the big city of Zootopia. This is also why I don't see any problem with Bellwether being the twist villain, because she was the driving force for someone who was so underprivileged, like Judy, to be allowed the chance to take a crack at a high profile case, just because Judy's the "meek prey" cop. When she became the mayor, it wasn't that much of a logical leap to think that she would be the villain, given all the bad things occurring when she took office and her previous treatment. Just because she had a lack of screen time (which, I will admit, did slightly dampen the power of the twist), does not mean that the twist was a horrible or rushed plot device.
Overall, I feel that comparing the Zootopia we got versus what was cut is an unfair comparison. They are two separate stories that could both stand on their own, and would likely benefit if the cut content was made as a prequel (as suggested by a comment I saw on here). But, hey, I'm just one opinion amongst thousands so you don't have to take it that seriously.
i see all your points and pretty much agree to all of them. However what ruins the movie for me is how it's supposed to be funny/quirky that judy is a corrupt as fuck cop
As soon as she joins the police force she profiles, blackmails, and makes conections with the mafia.
@@Dan0saur how is she corrupted? Your just using excuses to hate a morden Disney movie 🎬
@@nicholassims9837She got help from the Mafia
At least she was trying to do good. The chief character is far worse and doesn't even get a little consequence for being the spitting image of a corrupt and negligent cop.
@@nicholassims9837 did you even watch the movie
It wasn't fully appreciated initially but it's still amazing. I got a voice acting background and Jason Bateman's performance's been an inspiration for me since this film. The vocal training was tough, without noticeable results for months but actors like him or the late Kevin Conroy are a great impulse to not give up: I was almost Leon in those new RE games :)
Neat
These aren’t actual voice actors, they’re just celebrities, and Disney likes to hire well known names, rather than people who solely, or mostly do voice acting. Kinda sad, really. They’re just a name
@@Arbysroastbeefjuice Jason Bateman is an actor, though.
The original version definitely would’ve been better because of how much more real it is, but the one we got was still very relatable and enjoyable. I think both are great but still wish we got the original film because I would’ve loved to see it.
Disney shouldn't be afraid to make their films a little dark. As long as you have a balance that doesn't make it feel like kids can't watch it too, then it can still work. Disney has made movies with dark content in the past before like The Black Cauldron, the original animated Pinocchio movie Night On Bald Mountain from Fantasia and more.
@@NightFangClash peak
One reason why I think the collars wouldn't work is because it would create a very clear good guy vs bad guy scenario, which would completely go against what you claimed to be a strong point of the actual movie. The same way Nick could be discriminated for being a "sly dangerous fox", judy can also be discriminated for being a "dumb small bunny". However, this dynamic wouldn't be possible if one group was marginalized to the point of submission. It would remove a lot of the nuance of the final product.
I'd say neither is actually better. They are just completely different visions
one of my new favorite youtube videos, well writing, amazing analysis, really appreciable video editing to understand what the first movie was supposed to look like, and of course deep, reflective and important messages. Thanks for making this video mate! I'll probably show it to many other people!
I remember some of the deleted scenes making me cry, which is EXACTLY what a Disney film should do, even if it isn’t for the right reasons.
It's a bit disturbing. The damage is so bad it's hard to redeem it
Oh wow I just realized how long ago this came out and I'm so glad that someone agrees that the old idea was better than what we got.
I agree. If I was in charge of Disney, I would have a Zootopia spinoff movie or miniseries where Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde from the final version of Zootopia that we got accidentally end up in the original Zootopia and they have to find a way back home, while trying to make it through this dystopian version of Zootopia and helping their counterparts there.
Despite these flaws, I still think this is an incredibly underrated Disney flick. Can’t wait for your next video, as always, Rockotar!
LOVING the Fire Emblem music. I listen to youtube videos instead of watch them and it was KILLING me where I heard that music before. Went back and saw you credit them (THANK YOU I would have been guessing forever) and had a big smile. Good video!
Its easier (and safer) to market a message about token discrimination than it is to make one about systemic oppression. Especially when the former is currently being phased out and the ladder is still being strongly enforced today.
The worst part of Zootopia is shilling an obnoxious pop song and having a dance party ending
Shakira, shakira...
The worst part is said obnoxious pop song has been stuck in my head since 2016, i was obsessed with that song as much as the characters in the movie
Literally the worst part of the movie
That's the credit scene, every movie credit (or credits in general) already has a song anyways. Zootopia just happens to make it into a concert. Labeling it as a "dance party ending" is disingenuous.
Look up the HISHE parody of that song. It’s hilarious
"Too miserable" just means "Too realistic..."
meh
Yeah… except we’re not putting electric shock collars on ethnic minorities, are we?
@@lasercraft32Then fuck realism. I want to be entertained, and the original collar story is not entertaining.
@@lasercraft32 Not really. If anything, the problem was that it would've been too miserable to be realistic. Most people would probably scoff at the idea of mind control devices being a part of everyday life, whereas stereotyping is a lot more believable.
I know this is a bit of a controversial opinion, but Bellwether was like, the last somewhat decent twist villain, since her plan...kinda makes sense, in a way. I personally think the movie up to that point was really good, if not, amazing, but the twist just kinda brings to movie to a crawl. Though thankfully, at that point, you're just a few minutes away from the end of the movie, so at least there's that. Other than that however, I do really like Zootopia.
That's a fair opinion.
Bellwether's plan makes sense, I just don't like her because of how boring and predictable she is, being the "overworked secretary of someone powerful and [seemingly] bad" archetype.
I think she shows up in the movie plenty, and they show how often she’s pushed aside or ignored. Honestly I think she could have worked a lot better with a design and personality change. Make her the actual size and shape of a regular sheep, then play into the fat, slightly annoying from stuttering, meek hunched character. People expect the fat character to be the joke character, unfortunately. Then when the reveal happens, she changes her posture, and her voice. Suddenly she’s strong, intimidating. Suddenly she speaks clearly in less of a high pitched ditzy tone. She’d be leaning into the sheep stereotypes on purpose, just like nick, because nobody expected anything more from her. She lets this fester in resentment, and decides to weasel her way in and make this plot to gain power. I think it would have made her a much better villain!! It’d be freaky to see her change so suddenly and drastically when there’s really no change at all, how unsettling it’d be to find out she was being fake the whole time.
Also, if they didn’t want the twist to be so obvious, her lackeys shouldn’t have been sheep as well. Or at least not all of them.
I think another issue with the racism allegory is that, unlike real racism, there WAS a reason at one point for prey to fear predators, even if that reason is long past
In real life, there is no reason one race would view itself as better then snother, hate is not logical.
The dirty secret is there was a reason at some point in history, often something to do with a war between two cultures. The fact those wars are long past, just like predators vs. prey was long past, makes it a good metaphor. (Although I do still wonder how and what the obligate carnivores of Zootopia eat. Did their diet get evolved away or did they invent lab-grown meat?)
This video was amazing. The editing, the storytelling, everything was so captivating. Also, i hope one day you can be the director you dream to be, (32:20) you already got the looks for it!
I would recommend Beastars, it’s an anime that have a similar concept, but darker. It hits the more complex ideas Zootopia wasn’t able to explore.
yess i was just about to say this, beastars is amazing
Hecc yeah, watch zootopia, then beastars back to back 😊
I do kind of understand why you'd consider Zootopia to have a lot of coincidences and that this is a major flaw, but I think the major flaw of Zootopia is that it's very plot driven.
It's something I noticed looking back at it where I noticed a lot of the praise for the movie back then came from its moral and the pop culture references (especially the Godfather one). But if you take out the references and the moral, you're just stuck with a cookie cutter, by the number buddy cop film. It pretty much plays all the tropes in the book, and dead straight, too. By-the-law cop that wants to prove they’re worth something? Check! Partner usually breaks or bends the rules and that’s how they get things done? Check! They have a time limit to solve the case? Check! They arrest someone, have a fallout, and then proceed to capture the real villain, complete with a dramatic showdown, evil gloating, and a caught-on-tape Engineered Public Confession? Check! Check! Check!
It's thanks to the moral and chemistry between Judy and Nick that this movie does have a personality, but it does feel like Zootopia is going through a plot checklist, just making sure all the scenes are progressing at the right times, using the coincidences you mentioned. I do agree that the reveal of what the Night Howlers were is bad. It really feels like an amateur writer wrote this without knowing what "show, don't tell" was.
Considering the shock collar plot was abandoned in late 2014, Disney only had a little more than a year to redo nearly the entire movie, and when it comes to movie making, that amount of time is relatively short. I will bet that this is why the final version of Zootopia is the way that it is, with the coincidences and plot checklist feel. I wouldn't be surprised if having to rework the whole movie in only a little amount of time meant having to resort to coincidences instead of letting the plot grow organically.
I do believe that Zootopia is the most average of the Disney movies, and had it had more time to develop, I think it would have been much more well regarded today. At least we'll have a sequel. We'll see what that will bring.
THANK YOU! That was my problem with the movie; it had way too much of a "plot checklist" feel to it.
@@SivleFred So then watch something else and STOP BITCHING ABOUT IT.
Ngl I didn’t watch Zootopia in theaters. I actually watched it first in a classroom and I loved it at that moment and ngl I was kicking myself for not watching it in theaters when it came out.
I will say I feel like if the Villain was better i woulda probably consider it one of the best animated movies. As it is I still love so much.
i saw it three times in theaters &, while i thought it was my favorite thing at the time, i don't really remember that experience anymore
Anyone remember that whole ass Zootopia fan MOVIE animatic that one guy made at like..17? The dedication was crazy.
Name??
@@Vivi-MageIt’s called return to zotopia
That Collar "Acceptance" scene idea is just... oooof.
I wish we could've seen it on the big screen. How ironic the same force that makes it so powerful resists its very existence.
This and Ralph breaks the internet has me fully convinced that Disney micromanaging is what drove rich moore away. There's just no changing my mind
Wait so he's not doing the sequel? Because that's bad.
@@jaypee116Jared Bush, who wrote and Co-directed Zootopia and Encanto is the only one returning to write and direct Zootopia 2
@@anthonyrodriguez4905 oh thank you.
Isn't Byron Howard working on the sequel? @@anthonyrodriguez4905
Remember when Isabelle from Animal Crossing was a twist villain in a Disney movie? That was wild. XD
I know right crazy
Surprised Nintendo didn't sue though
Which movie was it? I’m gonna watch it lol
@@MrStark-up6fi communist zooptopia
@@MrStark-up6fi Zootopia (or Zootropolis, depending on your region). Its this movie lol.
10:11, congratulations, you just perfectly described systemic racism/sexism! This is one of the many reasons why I love your videos. Also, I’m working on my own Ralph Breaks the Internet video if you’re interested.
You got any spare oppression? I'm feeling a little bored and need a conflict
@@SuperSallySteak this analogy counts for disabled people, too
@SuperSallySteak It's 2024, you can be oppressed about anything you want so long as you blame it on the mean ol' wypipo
We had a black person as president. I have supervisors who are black. That's why this movie doesn't hold up with the old version. Systematic racism is made up because it gives the idea to suppress minorities, not help. You give ppl victim mentality. it's so easy to blame whitey when many whites are also bullied, yet no one cares because they're not the minority.
I feel like part of the reason is that it's a hard element to include in the story.
For starters, how do you write a satisfying ending to this? If you keep the collars, then all they went through to solve the case would be for nothing. Maybe Judy's opinion may change, but that's a lot of plot for little change.
If you get rid of the collars, then you've got a plot hole. Most of their society grew up believing the shock collars as a necessity to keep everyone safe. While you can, over time, get people on your side, you still need to put in the work to change society.
On top of that, it's harder to make the ignorance believable. You literally have a group of people being put through physical pain just for having normal emotions.
For Judy to be ignorant and ok with it, shed have to be an awful person beyond redemption or be incredibly dense beyond the point of redemption.
While I liked the concept youd nttd to change the entire movie script to make it work. It would not be anywhere near the same film.
Exactly. Are you a writer?
The primary reason Zootopia changed its shock collar draft was because *the setting* was so bleak it became impossible to root for. The directors wanted audiences to care for the city and want it saved, and creating a dystopia defeated the point. The directors also state that this plot didn’t help the protagonists shine like they do in the final film. They claim Nick became too sad and Judy came off as an ignorant jerk. Would they be anywhere near as popular if that’s what they settled with?
I feel like people only praise it without actually seeing it because they’re infatuated with the idea of a dark movie about a furry racist dystopia. Except that you can’t cathartically redeem a society that openly tortures cute foxes and bear cubs. Fanfic authors tried to tell this alternate story and wrote themselves into a corner because the world is just too bleak and the characters are too negative.
I’m so happy that this is being talked about, I think one of disneys biggest issues right now is they’re not taking any risks, but it’s crazy because some of their most popular movies are all ones with darker themes, not only do kids movies with darker themes make a lot of money on release but they tend to make a lot of money in the future aswell, films that you grow up and watch as an adult but still enjoy, so it just confuses me why a money greedy company wouldn’t want to make more money. I believe some day Disney is going to either do something big or it is going to die out, the only way they have been able to stay relevant is by creating controversy for themselves, but that doesn’t last long, I’d like to hopefully see a new animation industry start up in my lifetime, because the people who work at these big companies aren’t normal people with interesting ideas their all people who were given these opportunities and make a fortune from mediocre ideas. Nothing new is ever happening.
The original story is amazing. As a person of colour, that version hits so so close to home.
So many people in my community of brown and black people (specifically poor and low-income) WANTED to live their lives like everyone else, had dreams and inventions and ideas and businesses, but the world wouldn’t allow them. So just like Nick, they became what the world expected of them or just gave up.
And the collar is especially genius; in a humor, relatability and world building standpoint. The ‘collar’ in real life is the suppression of ourselves to conform to eurocentric ideals. The pressures to be the ‘good black person’ who is quiet and wellspoken and not like ‘the others’. The weight of knowing that every move you make could potentially define the attitudes of your race to others. So many black and brown people actively codeswitch and reject their culture to appease the system that rejects them.
And the simple doodles of how prey and preds see each other made me strangely emotional.
Prey see predators as dangerous, unpredictable creatures. Predators see prey as ‘sitting on them’. And it breaks my heart of how relatable it is. I’m not necessarily ‘afraid’ of white people, but it has been instilled in me that I am below them. That I have to shut up and agree for my safety and to get through life.
If I saw this movie instead, it would be my favourite Disney movie of all time. As is, I enjoyed it. But I agree wholeheartedly that to make the problem be personal instead of systemic failed to address the root of the problem. It’s not about the ‘good cop’ and the ‘corrupt official’, it is the poisoned foundation of their society that is causing such horrific damage.
I'm a person of color too, and while I liked the movie we got when I was younger, I remembered seeing the deleted scenes on youtube and feeling upset that we couldn't the originally idea with the shock collars and Nick not just being a con-man out of just one bad experience with prey as a kid and instead as a guy who's down on his luck trying to make the best out of a bad situation, and trying to make life better for him and predators like him.
I think it's a big shame Disney couldn't try something like that with something so raw, especially with that scene with the taming party. Learning in order to become an adult you have to become more aware of how the world works, how cops view you, how certain people will treat you is genuinely heartbreaking as a child, and something that was inflicted onto me when I was younger.
As a person of (paler) color...
...yup, that about sums it up. :/
I'll do my part to combat the institutional barriers when and as I see 'em, but probably half the time I just don't notice in the first place. I stay quiet, humble, and try and stay open and teachable tho. :)
Always lookin' to help a brother out, when and as I can tho. Top minorities in my area are Hispanics, Pacific Islander (Filipino) and Native American, and I'm in what's historically been a very... _exclusionist_ subregion. At my high school, only about 2-4% were actual 'black people,' but I mean... Mark and I got along fine. I _think_ I remember having checked out his Soundcloud page. (it was just a'ight.)
...it's tough to figure out how to help when there ain't so much to help y'all _with_ in my local area, but... I mean, I *do* try...
The term “color people” is back on the menu! White racist would be smiling on you guys!
Nah, I see it more as an analogy for social credit.
What part of black culture is being suppressed exactly?
I love your videos, your monsters inc. review is still one of my favorite ideos on yt, same with the Azula analysis
The sad part is that something not so different from Nick's backstory scenes basically describe my school life. While the children don't really have or understand those preconceived biases, i've experienced children still acting on those biases. Often for little to no reason. "Because" i was not a carbon copy of everybody else, simply different in no specific way. Not into sports, or curious and into learning new things, etc.
Sadly, because children are often unaware or lacking understanding of preconceived biases, it can make following out on those biases even easier.
The flower was in both versions. The flower in the collar version would of had Nick get shot by the dart making Zootopia think he went crazy with out his collar but it was all the flower that made him do that instead. Nick would then trick Judy and escape prison, Judy feeling guilty for Nick escaping would catch up with Nick and later find out what really happened.
My biggest issue with this movie is well...the theme itself. While I am glad that it was more general and not covering anything specific in the real world, I just don't think Disney should have tackled this. And there's also the twist villain, who stinks. If this were just a buddy cop movie, it probably wouldn't have been as memorable, but more consistently entertaining.
3:05 "Not to mention being on opposite sides of the predator and prey spectrum." Oh wow, I'm not sure I ever realized this, but cops "prey" on criminals, so their relationship is defined along this axis in more ways than one.
Can you not equate criminals to prey animals? If someonerob a bank at gunpoint or breaks into someone's house to do things youtube won't like me spelling oit, what happens to those criminals afterwards is entirely on them. Of course there are garbage cops too, but the predator/prey analogy falls flat on it's face if you coin the criminals as prey.
@@sebastianb.3978 Wel... cops hunt criminals, don't they? That's literally what people tell them to go do every time they get a ticket. Preying is a less suitable word than hunting here, granted, but I was working with what the video gave me.
And also, I don't mind that my comparison falls flat at some point. It falls flat in lots of places. For instance: there are no socio-economic circumstances that make one more likely to become a rabbit. I don't mind that the comparison eventually falls flat because so do all other comparisons of predators and prey to races or classes or whatever in Zootopia. The movie uses elements from different relationships, but never commits to fully modeling any one of them. Which is the movie's strength, because it's a funny feelgood tale about prejudice, not an epic historic drama. I mean, The fox and the hound is a fine film, but it has some deeply disturbing edges if you think about it too hard, so I enjoy Zootopia's less literal approach more. So I'm looking for elements of relationships here, not comparisons that hold up all the way through.
But I do feel this is part of why Judy forcing-convincing Nick to work with her works for the audience. Imagine the cop had been the fox, telling the little bunny criminal to work for them. That would have just read as bullying, no matter what the bunny did to deserve it. (Especially if you swap the genders too, but ooh boy would I be opening another can of worms there.) That fox would be mean, an antihero at best. Or if the criminal bunny had proposed the team-up that would just have been last resort begging, giving the fox cop no real reason to go along with it. (Unless you change the dynamic between cops and criminals in this setting a lot to more of a dystopian narco state where the cops are basically powerless to hunt.) The pact works so well because Judy has power but still takes a risk, because she is the hunted in one way, but the hunter in another.
And I never thought of that before watching this video, so I thought that was neat.
@@Echiewel You really are passionate dude, respect^^
One thing that always hurt the movie for me was how the Night Howlers were used and how shortly before Judy had to give the conference she heard a doctor say those things. Did no one in the entire world know of this somehow?
The entire world would have to be so racist that everyone who knows refuses to call. That a common plant can do this on all animals at base without complex chemical interactions. That it doesn't wear off on its own over time. She somehow found it out in secret and managed to keep a secret without anyone spilling it. Where someone was caught stealing this and no one looked up what it could be used for to cause harm.
This is literally a single step from being a zombie apocalypse, and... it is an allegory for racism cause by funny plant that can do this on its own by hitting someone with it not even ingesting it. No prey animals accidentally hit or effected at all.
I legitimately believe the implementation of Night Howlers was done so quickly and so poorly it harmed the core narrative and it genuinely raises questions. Did Nick not fear for his life when he heard the doctor and Lion talking, did he completely dismiss what was actively happening? That when we find him later he is perfectly fine and not crippled from the stress of this situation and fear of becoming a monster as he will get infected by whatever is happening?
He's behaving like he already solved it and knew, that right after the conference he was going to tell Judy about Night Howlers but didn't, and he considered visiting her to tell her but realized her farm would have it so she'd be back when she learns the truth, and decided to record it.
I think that is why I say the original drafts for the movie were better, it wasn't as contrived and actually addressed the issue without using cheap glass that if you look at even slightly creates major concerns.
I agree
@@TeresaCabreraAliaga Your thinking way too deeply into it
Really love some of the moments of the original version shown here, like when they treat removing Nick’s collar as being equivalent to disarming a bomb, even having a cage ready to drop on him the moment he goes ballistic, thinking he’s just *that* dangerous even though we the audience know that just a person, one who is just so sick and tired of being seen this way, and just wants people to know that that’s all he is, just a person like them, and one who is treated unfairly by society simply for being born the way he is
The original movie would’ve worked great to teach kids that *progress takes time* . If the movie ended with the predators gaining more rights, like being able to remove their collars on their own private property or Wild Times being a state sponsored thing while the state still regulated collars on predators in public, it would’ve showed kids that not everything has a happy ending super quickly. But this is Disney and Disney likes sanitized movies
Aside from the plot and the characters of Nick and Judy, what I appreciated most about Zootopia is precisely the fact that they resumed the use of animals as an "allegory" of humans, given that they hadn't been there for a while animal protagonists in a Disney film, especially if we consider intelligent animals (like humans) in the wake of Phaedrus or Aesop.
In my opinion this should have been a Pixar movie as the theme and message is exactly what Pixar does.
Pixar quality is tanking
15:04 I think you are not noticing how this movie is set in a setting like the 2000s and Judy is Nick are both the first Rabbit and first Fox police officers. Bogo, Judy and many others in the city don't just have a problem specifically with Judy they all think rabbits are weak and helpless and have pushed them out of the profession. Same with Bogo shutting down Nick in the rainforest district with "do you think I will believe A FOX". He doesn't have a problem with Nick specifically, and not of the officers that work for Bogo are even surprised by his blatant speciesm against Nick and foxes. It's why no fox ever wanted to become a police officer before Nick.
what you’re saying is really interesting but, 14:22 at this point in the video i physically can’t keep listening because of the music, combined with the repeating film clips it makes me feel like im in a fever dream
Honestly, after the stuff that happens next, I think we can say it was the best modern Disney film
Yeah this was the last good Disney movie if I can remember
Nah, wreck it ralph and encanto were much better in my opinion.
@@sedij2358 wreck it Ralph came out before this and I think encanto is pretty average and has that line of Disney films where there is no actual bad antagonist and is just domestic or family or something
Encanto was well received
@@MeepMacArthurlll yes, but wreck it Ralph can still be considered a modern Disney movie. It came out only 4 years before zootopia. As far as Encanto goes with its main conflict, I think it did it the best out of the Disney movies that have used that trope.
I personally love this film and do think it’s one of Disney best! I respect your opinions and analysis, as I can understand its flaws, I can just personally overlook them. Great video.
A person named nicholaswildes actually made an AU comic with the collar idea! The comic is called "Zistopia", and it's a very good read!
Give me something like Beastars with this, oh my word. An animator named Davvid broke this down really well around 1 year ago too and put the storyboards together and everything. I love both Nicks all things considered though, but the dark stuff is enjoyable.
the OG version of the story immediately had me hooked thats a way better way to go about it wow