Y'know what the weirdest part is? In real life, there's animals that can be both predator AND prey. Snakes can eat mice while eagles can eat snakes. And that's just one example
There's also the fact that many "docile prey" animals will actually eat other animals when they feel like it. Cows and horses will eat mice and snakes and even deer will eat the carcass of another animal just because it's there. There's literally pictures of a doe chewing on a human rib bone she found at a body farm trail, sucking the marrow out. Bunnies will cannibalize each other if there is no other food immediately available or just to prove they are the top rabbit. Nature is horrifying sometimes.
@@CWG500SUBSWBC Mammals do this too. Hamsters will eat their children out of stress. Cows will eat snakes because they can. Rabbits eat other rabbits because they got hungry or because they're the better rabbit. It's quite common honestly. Herbivores only need plants but theyll still eat meat if they so wish.
@@alteregobruh Agreed but that is in desperate measures. Ofc when someone gets hungry to point that they are about to die, they'll commit cannibalism. Though, it is not that common in Zootopia because it is like a Topia. You would not see cannibalism in a city, but in a scorching or treacherous environment. But that does seem really interesting subject to touch on. I wonder if Zootopia touches on 'Topias' that suffer outside of their district. Imagine Taliban Leopards, or Communist Pandas, or Facist peacocks (as they are a proudful species). It gives out the grittiness nature of different countries and how Judy can do something change, or not. Maybe she can accept the terrible reality of animalistic instinct and nature.
Ironically, Bellwether _was_ a predator, just because she was a sheep and an herbivore, does not mean Bellwether lacks the instincts of a hunter. Not only that, Bellwether recruited other sheep extremists, Doug was her hitman, shooting carnivores with a sniper air rifle, plus there were other sheep conspirators who concocted the Night Howlers chemical, if anything, Bellwether and her co-conspirators, became the very thing they hated the most - predators, and they didn't care how many prey mammals who would get hurt in the process. This is the paradox of extremism, it can turn against the very oppressed group it tries to liberate, Bellwether may of had a point, but it was not a good point to start off with, because she believed in the superiority of prey mammals, two wrongs don't make a right.
They accidentally hit on a truth that Disney wouldn't want to broadcast. The sheep are a group of people that are ineffectual at running things themselves, and therefore hate the success of the predators. They cozy up to the predators, but then say to the other prey 'we are like you, see how dangerous it is for us because of these vicious predators'. They put into motion a means to pit the majority prey against the strong predators they can't topple outright on their own, but they don't actually care about the other prey animals, only sheep. This is why they only work with each other, and why Bellwether has no problem with sacrificing Judy, and putting prey animals in danger either with feral predators, or if the predators decide they've had enough being pushed around.
What about the entire point of the drug that turned the predators wild also turning prey wild? I think that was meant to be an example of that no matter how things appear, or who appears to be the victim, everyone is capable of terrible things.
I think the point of the movie was more of "don't judge a book by its cover" in a more general sense, as in "predators can seem dangerous but they were being forced to with the drugs and you didn't know that until after the damage was already done" and "just because a sheep looks cute and fluffy doesn't mean it's harmless"
This line of thinking only really works if all non predators where small and weak animals like bumnys and sheep, but they aren't. There are many big and strong non predators like rhinos and buffalos, who we see being in places of political power and discriminate the weaker animals like judy. An example being the chief of the police departement (a buffalo), who belittles judy. In turn there are also weak and small predatora like seals and otters and i don't see any of them being in important positions
also we have other small predators around like a fennec fox and a weasel. Both of them at the bottom of the ladder (though arguably, they still are predatory as both are criminals). On the opposite end, there is the shrew mob boss that bosses around polar bears, though to be fair since only mammals seem to be sentient insectivores may not be seen in the same light as other predators.
@@bearerofbadnews1375 Ehh... Maybe? Beaststars has the issue of predators having an innate urge to kill and prey having... Apparantly an urge to be eaten? Its a great story but i think given this vidéo is about how Zootopia is a poor *allegory*, Beastars isnt the best example otherwise
@@thomastakesatollforthedark2231 Eh....Zootopia isn't a poor allegory either, Beastars is kinda similar especially with the differences between prey and predators.
@@Jdudec367 true but it has the same (if not worse) issues that Smartypants saw in zootopia. Both are great, but beastars is not better pwr the video logic is all
"More police brutality against black people is fine bc all black people are super strong and aggressive" levels of justifying discrimination 🤦♀️ When will these racism allegory writer wannabes realize that the point is that racism starts for arbitrary reasons/features based on whoever was more socially powerful at the time?
I actually disagree with your take on this. Life isn't black and white. There is no group that is entirely "good" and "in the right," and there is no group that is entirely "bad" and "in the wrong." People find many reasons to hate and discriminate others. I don't think this is supposed to be a straight allegory to racism. I think it highlights the messiness of prejudice. Just because you're in a marginalized group doesn't mean you get off scot-free for being prejudiced. Prejudice goes in all different directions. Judy was discriminated against, and she's right to fight for her place in society. But that doesn't give her the right to judge predators, particularly foxes, and the movie calls her out on that. Same for Bellweather. And just because Nick was discriminated against doesn't mean he is right for resorting to bad behavior. This movie shows the dangers of overcorrecting when trying to even the playing field. Firstly, there is no evening the playing field. Because as I said, there will always be people who find a reason to dislike others, whether it be based on sex, race, sexuality, disability or ability, nationality, hair color, height, weight, hobbies---doesn't matter. Discrimination is messy, and no group is without blame. I don't side only with Nick when I watch this movie. I side with many characters at the same time. Just like in real life, I side with lots of different people with different perspectives and different problems.
exactly! life is way more complicated. just making the argument "the movie isnt well written because I have to consider the points both sides make and sympathize with both" is wild
This isn't that related to the video but I've always felt like it's weird media uses this "prey vs predator" or "herbivore vs carnivore" allegory to talk about people because like, omnivores exist??! some animals scavenge, others are both prey and predator and some prey/herbivores are more dangerous than predators/carnivores; it's a giant spectrum, making it a black and white thing doesn't make any sense. If they picked specific animals like sheep vs wolves or zebras vs lions to center the whole story on then sure, go off, but a generalized thing with *every* animal? just doesn't work, unless your end goal is to show there IS a spectrum.
YES. Thank you. I’m all for critiquing movies when they miss the mark or catching odd contradictions but this one was starting to get on my nerves for that very reason.
In the movie they actively tell us that predators ate prey literally thousands of years ago and the natural history museum tells us that prey started evolving and using tools first so prey turned the tables on predators long before the movie began
Honestly it reads more like big animal versus small animal as every animal in a position of power in the movie is large including the Buffalo who is the police chief.
Prey wasn't targeted by Bellwether because she was technically targeting carnivores still, she thinks they prey are better. Talking about racism is really difficult.
Because "racism" is a word used and perhaps invented by bolsheviki to undermine þe hegemony of a dominant eþnic group in a region, as happened 1922 to undermine slavic domination in þe Soviet union. Hence it is a term, þat tries to defy nature, portraying it as evil, hence is a deceptive subversive term þat should not be used, when talking about group preferential behaviour... Unless you want to disfavour your own people
It's not difficult to talk about any more than any other form of discrimination. The problem is that people tend to think that it's very specific or overly general depending on who you ask. It's wrong to assume that someone is a criminal, just because they happen to fit a specific profile, but it's equally just as wrong to assume that they're not a part of the stereotype just because you want to "not be discriminatory". Case and point with when Judy first met Nick and Finick. She shouldn't have judged them so quickly, yes. Good lesson. However, despite we should always give people the benefit of doubt, that doesn't mean you shouldn't still be suspicious. The world ain't perfect and there is never just one solution fits all. Be aware, sure, but be Fair. Or as Detective Conan's Shinichi once said, "Yes, I would turn you(Ran) in. And then I'd be exhausted.... I'd be exhausted because I'd know that before I turned you in, I'd do everything in my power to prove that you didn't do it first." Same concept, different scenario.
@@Beleidigen-ist-Pflicht Actually the word "Racism" was invented because of WWII. (In other words it was made durring the late 40's or early 50's not the early 20's) Before Adolf's whole thing, there was no word for it (on the basis of genetic identifiers, at least). Before that point people were discriminated against due to their Nationality (as in which Nation/country/tribe they're a part of) moreso than their race or even sex throughout the entire world. On that note, the word "Slave" was also derived from the word "Slav" as the Slavics were the most common slaves in Europe and the Middle East. Had very little to do with the Soviet Union and the like. However, there is one point that you got right even if it was unintentional. When you're "racist" against one group, you're racist against them all.
@@Snowmon89 you are misinformative, dude, þe term "racism" or "racisme" was already known ,some say invented, by a man called Charles Malato, who used þis term in his book "Philosphie de l'anarchie" þat was published in *1897* ! So þis alone disproves þe þesis þat þe term was iNvEnTeD after world war numero due. 5 minutes of web search sufficed! You can't make þis s н i т up !! And ,surprise, surprise, he turned out to be an anarchist. You're dangerously unknowledgable about þe world. Try finding a european family from þe middle ages letting þeir offspring marry a black man. I assure you þere will be none.
I think the thing is that in zootopia it isn’t straight up an allegory for racism. It’s a lot to do with many different types of discrimination. It tackles sexism, racism, appearance shaming, cultural backgrounds with predators taking the place of the upper class and rich persons (a minority with power). It takes on a stance particularly with the twist villain that no singular group can be classified as bad guys. Everyone in society has their own struggles and that is reflected in this, and as such it pushes the message that by never giving up and working against the system you can make real change, violence against a corrupt system is NOT the answer and only seeks to corrupt the system further.
I feel like your view on this only works if we went with Zootopia's original storyline, where Predators wore shock collars to control their impulses, like the watches from Zombies. This is because the Zootopia we got established there was a utopia made for animals to coexist, implying they made alternatives for the predators to not eat meat and not hunt prey. This takes place in modern times, but Judy like other prey, are shown to still have biases towards Predators based on their past. Nick is an example of this, since Judy and other prey view him as an untrustworthy person due to being a fox, even though he's more than that shown through his backstory of trying to be a boy scout. Zootopia isn't a black and white story, it shows the biases Predators as well as Prey have towards each other, while also showing how multiple different species of animals are treated. The rodents for example are part of a mafia led by a guy who is shown to also be a proud father, showing that they aren't defined by just their group. You can see this in every character that they introduce from a different species. Is Zootopia perfect? No, but it's still solid in the story it tells and shows how biases as well as beliefs impact different people, from Belleweather seeking revenge for the past sins of the Predators by attacking modern day Predators, causing her to be rightfully arrested for attacking innocent Predators as well as trying to ostracize them, to Nick being cold to others for the treatment he endured as a child, ultimately warming up when Judy helps him be more than his stereotype. Definitely a solid take on these topics, compared to the likes of Zombies and Descendants. This is coming from a guy who hasn't supported Disney in years btw.(On a side note, Descendants 1-2 were solid, but 3 just ruins it, with them blindly dropping the barrier on an isle full of villains who want revenge.)
Honestly, this is one of the rare instances where I think Disney missing the mark actually made the film better. Real life isn’t black-and-white. It’s not always clear who’s in the right.
No, the prey animals that are scared of the predators are right. That's the problem. The writers tried to frame them as immoral, but the messed up reality is that they have biological basis for their fears.
@@TheSEAempire there was no biological basis for their fears, that was kinda the point. the prey would've done the same thing if they were shot with the night howler thing.
Disney trying to give a racism lesson but accidentally telling a reality lesson: no group history is without fault, all groups have their own struggles, we have our strengths and weaknesses, and we should not begrudge one group on the basis of thinking your struggles validate your actions, as ultimately the content of your individual character outweighs anything else.
I always find racism allegories with predator and prey animals as the racial stand in questionable because them being vastly different species and even more so when they used to have a more real predator and prey relationship in the past. It just makes me wonder how and why they changed their ways to even get to when the story starts, what the predators eat, etc.. It honestly works better to use different dog breeds than predator and prey animals, since dogs come in a lot of shapes, backgrounds and got their own stereotypes, but are still the same species. Just like us humans.
I agree completely. It makes a lot more sense to make them all the same species. They can still have their own like backstories for why there is racism, but at the very least they aren't treated as different species all together.
I never liked using different literal animal species as an allegory for races because that in itself is racist. We humans are all the same, meanwhile different animal species are not. A mixed baby will not be born with deformities because it's mixed; a hybrid will suffer from deformities and health issues because it's a hybrid. To see different animal species respectively as different human ethnicities is textbook scientific racism. Unfortunately, there are lots of people out there who will see two groups of different animal species of anthros and go "oh yes, this one is white and this one is poc!" And then get mad when the hybrid is unhealthy, because guess what.... It's a hybrid, born by a mix of two different species, not of two ethnicities...
No. Giving reasons to racism from both sides is just good writing. Racism can and will come from both sides. And insanity coming from drugs is not a completely fictional. Getting both sides in racism is good. Black and white is not good at stories about racism. As a Muslim person, I've experienced racism and I've seen others ofy race give racism.
@@otakunogitsune5999 Beastars is a fascinating story and world, and I greatly enjoy it, but it really doesn't work as an allegory for racism like Zootopia was built to. Not a close one, anyway. The feared minorities of real life don't have an ingrained instinct to kill and eat people and a black market with which to sate that instinct. They have crime rates spurred by the golem effect and reporters ready to paint the minority as villainous at a moment's notice -- as Zootopia explores.
What were you looking for? Its called nuance. Of course the show runners wouldn't paint each sides with broad brushes. Besides, the word "racism" was never used in the movie. It can also be an allegory for classism or even sexism. Just pick your ism. Its like in Star Wars. The rebels are either terrorists or heroes depending on which angle you look at them. Even the Empire did some good, giving recruits from rural planets bright milirary careers and get their families out of poverty.
@@CordeliaWagner1999 While I think this example isn’t the best, nuance is important when dissecting narrative meanings. It would be better to address the Jedi (who are often touted as just heroes.) They were not agents of balance. They were agents of stagnation and preservation of unfair power structures. They were, by nature, anti-humanist. This is why Anakin becoming the sith who nearly eliminated the Jedi fulfilled the prophecy of bringing “balance” to the force. He was the villain. But his actions weren’t wrong in impartial context of the narrative. He wasn’t meant to bring good or evil to society. He was meant to bring necessary change. That’s an instance of properly displayed nuance.
On the topic of discrimination, two things can be true at the same time. I don't think the movie was trying to sell its audience to believe one side is overly discriminated against. Rather, it was showing the tension between to different groups. They showed discrimination on both sides. They even have two villains representing each group (the lion and sheep). I agree with your point, that not everyone is discriminated against equally; but that doesn't mean that some people are above being discriminated against. Overall, I like your video, man. I think the moral of the story really is as simple as "don't judge a book by its cover."
Judy and Nick show us to different way of dealing with discrimination. Nobody believed Judy could be a real cop, but she was determined to be one regardless. Nick saw what others believed about foxes, and let it define him. He became what others saw, instead of what he wanted to be. Both end up working together and overcome prejudice. Whatever Disney was intending to say, there’s good lessons in this movie. You can’t just say it’s about racism, or oppression because there is definitely more to it.
Just because some animals are herbivores, it does not mean they are not aggressive or dangerous. We all know how much dangerous hippos and cassowary birds are despite the fact that they consumed plants, right?
@@lerneanlionyeah they will eat grass if they have upset stomach’s but also dogs and cats like certain fruits and vegetables sooooo 😂 But I wonder what raccoons and chickens (omnivores) are considered in sootopia
@@HotgirlenergySo far non mammals animals are considered non sapient, and I hope it stays like that in the sequel. It's just better to not go with all animals being sapient, it's the better solution to what is considered a plot hole in all these stories involving anthropomorfic animals, and it also makes zootopia more unique amongst those stories too.
@@reinweissritter No, they knew before the release of Zootopia that there are other sapient groups, like reptiles. It was fish and I think amphibians they were unsure of, although the preview for Zootopia 2 shows that they have decided to make fish regular animals.
The movie says that in the past, the animals weren’t sentient (like how a few million years ago, we didn’t diverge from chimps yet and were still arboreal), and that the predators ate prey. But it’s implied that the Prey held positions of power for most of history. I think it makes the story better, you shouldn’t hold a grudge because a group in the past did bad stuff.
So the biggest issue with Zootopia is introducing nuance to the story? That doesn't make sense. In real life, no one is without blame, even if some groups suffer more than others.
A lot of the things he said really makes it seem like he's really radical in his political views. Like him saying that it's a bad thing that the movie that's trying to push the message of having empathy for everyone, is showing that everyone is a victim of prejudice, inequality, and suffering in some way. That's the truth
I watched this when it came out and I’m surprised at how smart the writing actually is. It has a lot of gray area and both sides can have arguments to justify their actions and it makes it more interesting. I feel like if disney made it super black and white, it would feel very on the nose like in some of their recent projects. It shows this topic with a lot of nuance so everyone can enjoy it, not just the “oppressed” twitter mob.
Honestly I think it’s good that there’s 2 sides to the story, since as Judy said life is messy. There’s rarely only one side to the story, and to me the movies message of not judging a book by it’s cover and treating everyone equally I think it works even better them both sides having a good argument to be made on the issue.
Going to disagree with you to some extent. Every race/every person is racist or has been a victim of racism to some degree. Just because a person or group was heavily victimized by racism doesn't mean that they can't be just as prejudice towards another group of people; sometimes that group they're prejudiced toward is the same group that victimized them in the first place because, sadly, unaddressed or perpetuated trauma can invertedly lead to racism, sexism, and other such prejudices. Lionheart is a belligerent jerk who only hired Bellweather for the diversity clout, so yeah, he's a racist individual. He has the slime of most political figures. He kidnapped carnivores going crazy under the guise of not wanting to cause an uproar, but it was just to save his political career. He went out of his way to save his image. He is not a good person. However, he did not go out of his way like Bellweather did to ruin someone else's life to make herself look better and take over (at least from what we see in the story). A victim of racism and verbal abuse took it upon herself to be racist against an entire group by staging a fake reality based on the past facts and it was so easy to dup the vast majority because people are sheep who don't bother to look past skin color, headlines, or etc.
I have to commend you on how excellently and simply you explained this. I've tried to explain this years ago, but was only told, "No, x types of people can never be racist/sexist/religiophobic or otherwise prejudice no matter what they do or say to others (wholly because of those traits)." It's important that each and every person is able to look within themselves more often than judging others. If we want to make a positive change, we have to be a good example, not a hypocritical one. All that does is create more unjust conflict, and also robs us of that same self-reflection, growth, and awareness that we tend to expect in others. I think that if Lionheart genuinely wanted to do good, he should've treated both predators and prey with respect. If there had been transparency from Zootopia's government, awareness would've been raised, the professionals could've rooted out the cause of these "savage" (obviously framed) attacks, and Judy's job could've been completed way sooner by qualified personnel. But because Zootopia's government, much like IRL, is full of corruption, egotism, and contempt, the good citizens had to do their jobs for them.
no smarty pants makes a good point here and I actually thought about this too after watching the film Like seriously prey do have a good reason to feel some what of an aversion from predators. And their "prejudice" is someone justified I understand that Disney tried to compare it to real life racism (blacks being predators and whites being prey) however it's not the same because in the animal world, predators constantly hunt prey to feast on them aka "oppress" them however in the real human world it's not the same because black people weren't constantly hunting white people to "feast" on them (or whatever is equivalent to pressing someone) it was actually the other way around. So in reality judy did nothing wrong and nick should've realized this before trying to act like a victim
@@macias7125 You are kind of missing the simple message here. All prejudice is bad. There isn't one side that is right to be prejudice against an entire group. People are individuals. Saying that the prey have a historic reason for their prejudice and thus there racism is good makes just as little sense as someone who is racist against black people saying, historically they have been convicted of more violent crime and have lower test scores so me thinking that all or nearly all Black people are inherently dangerous and stupid is justified. Or someone who is racist against middle eastern people saying that 9/11 and other suicide bombings have happened, therefore I should hate and fear every single one of them. Or someone who hates men saying, historically men have committed most violent crime and rapes, and started most wars, so It make perfect sense to hate all men. The truth is there isn't and has never been a good reason to be a racist, prejudice, bigot. The bigootry on both sides is wrong because crimes are committed by individuals, not skin color, or gender, or sexuality, etc. The people you are hating for their skin color today, didn't commit the crimes of the past, they are their own people. Hold those people responsible for their crimes rather than lashing out at everyone and assuming your side has the good racism this time. There could be long-term systemic problems caused by past racism that still affect people lives today. But you don't need to be a racist in turn in order to tackle those issues. You're just causing new problems.
and predators have a right to fear prey. Do you not understand that animals like moose and hippos (peaceful prey) are responsible for more human deaths than predator animals? Time for some facts. a predator will kill because it has to eat to survive. Many prey animals will just decide they don't like that you breathed and will take you out. You could go to an African preserve where a elephant/water buffalo/rhino/hippo has never seen a human hurt one of it's own kind, and if you stand somewhere it doesn't like, it will mow your a*** down.
@@saribeepo.o5111Oml Moose are fucking terrifying- I've heard some horror stories about them from my friend's dad (he's a hunter), them shits are SCARY.
@@saribeepo.o5111 That is a very good point that I knew about but had never properly considered in the context of Zootopia. Like. sitting here thinking about it actually Really good. That just adds layers to the whole thing of viewers going in with the notion that "of course predators are inherently more dangerous" -- the notion is not only inaccurate to the world of Zootopia, but to actual nature. Forget "sneaky foxes", a cape buffalo like Bogo would wipe the floor with _any_ of the predator species in the film, and eagerly so.
So about that never hearing of a human going crazy and eating people thing, yeah, that's happened at least twice that I know of. For a similar reason as in the movie too. Two different men, one black and one white if I remember correctly, on two separate occasions. The black dude, high on bathe salts, a briefly popular drug in America, ate his own son's eyes out. The white man, also on the same drug, attacked a random man on the street and nawed his face off. So there you go. Fiction imitating realty. Also, the point of the movie wasn't for either group to be a one to one representation of any real world group. It was just to show that we all have prejudice and that we should look past that to work together for a better world. There are good and bad people in all groups and we shouldn't judge the group as a whole solely off the good or bad eggs. Nor should hide behind the past to justify our own negative biases.
I do like how the movie blurs the lines. In real life these things play out almost like in the film. Though, I do wonder how and why the predators allowed that to happen to themselves. A prequel would be cool. 8:33 You’re right. He was Chinese. 😂😂
I think the mayor has a point just like his deputy mayor. He's trying to prevent a mass panic by quietly getting his men to solve the problem. Like he says at the end a wrong thing for the right reason. Also, I'll give him credit for not considering murder as an option, unlike his deputy mayor.
Yes, but the mayor also was only doing it to save his image Because if people knew predators, we’re going savage they wouldn’t want him as mayor So, on the outside it looked like he didn’t want to cause panic, but on the inside it was for the wrong reason
@@Hotgirlenergy Saving his image is a bad thing? Why would that be a bad thing? Of course he would want to who the hell wouldn’t? To say that’s a bad thing is ridiculous.
@@StarDreamsStudios Because it was covering up the facts of the case. All Lionheart knew at the time was that predators were the only ones going savage, so he kept it hidden. Keeping it out of the eyes of the public turned out to be a good move (as we saw what happened when "predators are going savage" was actually reported) but it was entirely motivated by Lionheart's self-interest and got in the way of detectives and cops and so on actually solving the criminal case.
@@peeblekitty5780 but the mayor did actually have his people searching for a solution. the facility they were holding all the crazy animals, they were trying to figure the problem out albeit covertly.
I think Zootopia actually does a great job of representing the race issue, just not in the narative the media tries to spin. It sends the message that racism now does not fix racism going the other way in the past. Historically, the prey were oppressed, but largely this is not the case now, although there are still a few pockets of inequality. In reaction to this, a few prey extreemests spin a public narative of themselves being victims while ensiting violence against innocent people who happen to be of the group that historically were the oppresors, the predetors, causing open hate and racism against the predetors, which no one is willing to call out because these extreemists among the prey control public opinion. Zootopia is a causionary tale. We're not at their extreem yet, but were pretty darn close. It draws a distinction between who was oppressed historically, and who is oppressed now, and pleads that switching the roles does not fix the problem.
Mixed race person here. For myself I think the sympathetic prey stuff was intentional and intended. In the same way how we can understand why people might be racist without it being justified, we can understand why the prey function in the way they do. So to give a bit of historical context, during slave times there were some instances where people would "breed" (euch thats awful to type) slaves together to fit their respective needs. Now wether or not this was effective is up for debate but the idea was to produce offspring that were stronger and more capable of the jobs given. Because of this when slavery ended the fear was of that built up hatred/retaliation black people could have had, and since in their minds they were much stronger and "dangerous/feral" then they were, that fear stayed awhile. And because generational teaching is a thing when they had kids they taught those kids fear and basically racism without necessarily fully giving the reasons why. So now a couple years down the line you got this generation of racists fearing something thats pattonly untrue. I think Zootopia was trying to do something with that concept, but it gets muddied with both the predator and prey sides of things getting different aspects of the racism allagory. Good intention, bad execution.
You need to stop drinking the koolaid my friend. If people were all so afraid of black people because of this nonsense, you wouldn't have had white people intentionally breaking the law to teach them to read and help them escape to the free states. The whole reason the Jim Crow laws were needed was because it required the corrupt political party (democrats ) to keep people in their proper place as a matter of political power. ... Time for a fact check my friend, white people did more to free blacks than they could ever do themselves (obviously), this simply would not have happened if everyone lived in terror of the 'superior black physic due to selective breeding' .
I personally feel like Zootopia was less about saying "Oh, it's the predators who are victimized", then "oh, it's the prey who are victimized", then back to the predators. It is indeed muddled, but I think the message was more about "xenophobia is bad, regardless of who is doing it." and that even if something might've been true in the past, it might not be true anymore. As for Lionheart, he might've managed to get into a position of power as a predator, but as it was shown later in the movie, that mattered very little when he was on the list of those who could've been forced to go feral, which would have destroyed not only HIS rights and freedoms, but those of other predators. Lionheart rightly wanted answers in hopes of stopping the seemingly random afflction that seemed to be able to target any predator, including him, as well as trying to get a cure made as soon as possible. Was he unethical about how he went about it? Questionably, in my opinion. Since there didn't seem to be an airborne spread to whatever was going on, consolidating those who were affected to a single facility was the best choice, as it would allow all of the researchers on the problem to focus more time and effort on said problem and less on traveling to various facilities and hoping those who were taking care of the "nighthowled" were actually paying attention to any noteworthy changes. Considering the circumstances, not only would the afflicted have been treated poorly (or even worse, not at all) in various other facilities, but it was likely the best possible path towards a cure. Hell, if he hadn't needed to be so secretive about it, he likely wouldn't have been in any trouble whatsoever. If anything, I wouldn't have been shocked if Bellwether hadn't suggested the whole thing to him to help set him up, so even if things hadn't gone exactly to her plan, he would have done something unethical enough to get him removed from his position anyway.
I think it was intentional as a storytelling tool. Audiences are _meant_ to go in with the idea "but it's literally predator and prey, it's only logical for predator to be more dangerous and for prey to be fearful of them" because the whole movie is _about_ subconscious racial bias. We get this backstory that predators used to be as we know them in real life, but in actuality, we see these predator characters act just as human as any other. But thanks to how we grew up seeing the world, just like Judy, we're prime to think that there's something inherently dangerous to them that must be behind their "going savage". You're _supposed_ to be able to see where Judy is coming from with her conclusion and learn _alongside_ her how harmful those biases can be, even in those who mean well. Of course it's not a perfect allegory, but a perfect allegory ceases to be an allegory. Zootopia was uniquely clever in using the flaws of its allegory _as_ a storytelling device.
Correct me if I understood you wrong but according to you we should judge a race on what the race has done in the past? Like owning slaves was wrong and apartheid was wrong but in honestly I don't think we should call all modern day white people bad just because past white people were bad. Yes, those who are still racist are bad but that's oviously not everyone. Whoever your ancestors were and what they have done does not define you. The same goes to the Zootopia allegory. Just because the main villain's (forgot her name) species was hunted in the past does not justify what she has done in the film. The same goes for predators but backwards. (For me at least,) true race equality is when we stop seeing skin color and define someone's personality on that. Like your ancestors might have experienced racism but that doesn't mean I won't call you a douchebag when you do a crime. Someone's ancestors might have been slave owners but that doesn't automatically mean he will be racist as well. The film treated the main villain for her ACTIONS and I think that's good.
It's actually very simple, and that makes the movie surprisingly accurate. Life. Is. Messy. There isn't just one side is bad, or black and white. It's all just jumbled together making a chaotic grey. You have different perspectives that shifts each persons goals in positive or negative directions, depending on who is viewing those goals and actions. Yes the mayor was trying to protect his image, but it is also true that his actions where preventing panics and riots while he tried to find a solution for the victims. Sure Bellwether was trying to protect and empower prey animals, but most of those animals were content until she stirred things up. Plus she was hurting innocent predators to do it. What this story teaches us is how to step back, set our biases to one side, and judge things by facts/logic. Which is why law and order is so important, but should remain neutral.
Can we also talk about how having Judy be the first bunny cop is silly as you need police of other small races as well, just look at when she runs through the rodent part of the town she's massive in there, know imagin any other one of the police need to go through there
Honestly the "messiness" of "who is the historically oppressed one" is what makes the movie both great and more realistic to real life if you've actually studied any real history and not just listened to the popular and "politically correct" narratives. One example: People like to constantly bang their pots and pans about the Transatlantic Slave Trade (they're doing it in the comments of this video, in fact. Go figure). But you won't catch those same people constantly screaming about the Berber Slavers from North Africa that were raiding European coastlines for millions of white slaves hundreds of years before Europeans started settling the Americas and needed copious amounts of free labor. Its not exactly an accident that the biggest players in the black slave trade were the Spanish and Portuguese (or that the overwhelming majority (95%+) of black slaves went to south america to work silver mines owned by the Spanish and Portuguese), who were geographically next door neighbors to the Berber Africans, and thus were hit the most by them. That made it very easy for Spain and Portugal to justify their subjugation of black slaves when the Transatlantic Slave Trade was established; because it had been done to them and many other European countries by Africans and Arabs before that. The only real difference between the enslavement of Europeans by the Berbers, and the enslavement of Africans by Europeans/Americans, was how many traceable records they kept about it.
Interesting fact about the white slaves. The Turkish also had those and, of all people, John Smith himself was one of them. If you want to know more, read up on the guy’s life. There is some interesting stuff in there.
It works with the context of the world they create.I like it better when the story fits the world rather than just mirror our own. Not sloppy just good world building. And seeing it from both angles is good writing.
I think any allegory for any kind of discrimination looses some of its meaning or doesn’t quite work perfectly when you transpose the matter you are referencing with a fantasy version; no allegory works as a 1-2-1 comparison because discrimination is a very messy topic that manifests in different ways for different groups or individuals. There’s passive discrimination, active discrimination, positive discrimination, hate crimes and different reasons why people act discriminatory towards someone, whether that be racial, gender, sexuality, religion ect. Discrimination takes many forms and effects so many different people and it means different things to different people; and as a result when stories try to address discrimination in a general term with a fantasy version there are often holes in the portrayal because it is a nuanced issue that gets boiled down to broad strokes
@@DragonGoddess18 an example of positive discrimination is things like when companies have diversity hires; it’s when a person is positively treated or benefits from something that is exclusively connected to them having a protected characteristic. It’s often the result of people or organisations attempting to fulfil diversity requirements or to make themselves look good rather than actually to benefit the individual on the receiving end
@@StrawberryStar7 Thanks to OP's statement, I think another example of "positive discrimination" is this: "You should ask an Asian person for help on your math homework because Asians are naturally good at math." Even if some people see that as a compliment, that's still discrimination because not every Asian is the same when it comes to math. People are still people, regardless of their nationality or ethnicity
@@StrawberryStar7 positive discrimination is a form of discrimination that is legally recognised. While I can’t speak for every country’s individual Equality and Discrimination laws, in the UK it is covered in the 2010 Equality Act. It is defined as: “Positive Discrimination, which entails treating someone more favourably and which inherently means others are treated less favourably”
The movie should have been more clear about how long ago it was that the predators ate the prey. Was it a generation ago or millions of years ago. They call that behavior savage and visual how ancient that behavior is with images of Cave rabbits and Sabretooth tigers. It would be very odd to judge modern human behavior based on what cavemen used to do. The same could apply to the predators. Judging a race of people based on physical characteristics passed down by their ancient ancestors sounds like what the Nazis used to do with myth of the Aryan ubermensch. The predators never hurt anyone with their teeth and claws until they were induced to by a drug
I think it was many many generations ago. Whatever timeframe they say humans evolved from ape like creatures in, that’s the timeframe we’re looking at. After they stopped acting like normal animals, I think they had a Stone Age, an Iron Age, a Bronze Age, ect. I think the history of nonhuman mammals in zootopia mirrors real history to a degree. Like, they’re was a dog Alexander the Great, a cat cleopatra, ect. But they’ve still hung on to old ideas about predators from prehistoric times, because that self preservation is so strong.
A personal observation I've had over the years is that webcomics don't get nearly enough attention on youtube unless it's animation those pictures of yours aren't gonja go far but I found a webcomic that alot of people can resonate with Oren's Forge it's mostly like Zootopia or Beastars in most ways with it's anthro characters but it give what both of them have never thought about; the origins how predator and prey tried to make peace and for all it's writing, worldbuilding and themes it barely has a presences on other platforms so Smarty, anyone if you're reading this give it a proper look at it I think you might have somethings to say about it...Too preachy?
This is exactly what you want to portray actually. Villains with a reason for acting beyond being greedy/ evil. Not that it excuses their actions but it informs. As for the lion being mayor that's a nod to lions being kings of the beasts. What other powerful figure is a predator though? Deputy major, mob boss, chief of police, major popular idol, all prey species.
I thought the two way message was on purpose and well done. Life is messy and is never cut and dry. I thought it was a good reflection of that. Its also worth noting that this messiness would be even more chaotic in an animal world, and I think that should be acknowledged too.
The problem is people trying to write stories in which racism has a reason, because they probably think if they don't it'll be seen as a "plot hole". It's utterly illogical in our world, why should that be different in our stories?
Exactly! There was no real reason for people to be afraid of blacks, except for the skin color There’s no real backstory to that it’s just people being irrational about something they dotm understand
The racism in Zootopia DOESN'T have a reason. It has a perceived reason, but they're all discriminating against people who at their core are exactly the same. Predators aren't bloodthirsty and prey aren't stupid, but both discriminate against the other because they perceive each other as though they are. Their reasons for discrimination don't exist.
Or maybe all those faucets are in the story because things just aren't black & white. Sometimes you do sympathize with the reasons someone ends up doing bad things not with the things their doing but the reasons that got them there.
I always felt like the dynamic not being cut-and-dry was part of the point, partly so as not to blindly alienate (or, inversely, parrot) parts of the wider dialog and thus letting peoples' real-world attachments get in the way. This makes for a better "how to think, not what to think" theme, something I find sorely lacking in films that are willing to tackle such big issues. I think two strong lessons kids (and others) could learn from Zootopia are "Sometimes other people have hardships that you might not easily recognize, as they are not familiar to your own" and "When you need to make up for the past, you must not be blind to what future you are making as well".
Zootopias message is that anyone can have racist bigoted ideas and that anyone can be hurt by them witch is something everyone should now. Every racist beleif is based on something often false assumptions but something none the less like for example muslims being terrorist comes from the 911 terrorist attacks or the idea that black people cant swim coming from the fact that black people weren't aloud to be at swimming pools in the past niether assumption is right but those beliefs did not come out of thin air. Also in some places like south africa groups that where oppressed but then come to power start treating others poorly, for example in modern south africa racially motivated crimes against the white population are more common and the government has even considered making laws that allow them to confiscate white people lands without compensation just like Zimbabwe , before anyone roasts me for saying this ask yourself how would you feel if the government just took your land or house or anything from you and said it was because of your skin colour this question is for everybody that is reading this. Further more with people nowadays who say things like black people cant be racists, as well as many others things I think that Zootopias message is more important then every anyone can have horrible prejudice ideas and people need to be on guard against them so that people in power dont take advantage of them.
the movie was about how everyone, no matter their shape or size, can be capable of harboring harmful prejudice that undoes any and all progress towards living in harmony, even if predators used to kill and eat prey in the past, that doesn’t mean that it’s ok, let alone healthy for prey species today to harbor that grudge and hold it against modern day predators that had jack squat to do with that, nor does it justify any prejudice or hatred they may hold as a result of that. And heres a side note: just because zootopias major was a corrupt major that treated his assistant like garbage, that doesn’t mean that the whole system is corrupt beyond belief and favoring predators at any and all points, if it were, nobody would’ve endorsed bellwether to become the next major, let alone allowed her to reach the position she did in the first place; also the concerns of the prey species over predators going feral would’ve been dismissed as “unfounded ramblings” of a group of people “known to be skittish and overly paranoid”
I've noticed that everyone in Zootopia is a mammal... I really do wonder what the birds, reptiles, and fish are like in this universe, because strangely they aren't mentioned at all. Are _only_ the mammals human-like? Are all the predators now vegetarian, or do they eat the non-humanoid animals like birds and fish? Do we have fish, bird, and lizard people in this universe, and if so why aren't they ever seen in the city???
Supposedly there was a fish market shown in Tundratown, said fish being dead so possible some animals aren't sentient... Though it could be Ducktales logic, in that some animals are still animals, while others are sentient.
It’s almost like how in real life there are good and bad people in all categories, so profiling anyone based off any feature should be discouraged and we should stop thinking in group terms in general.
The Mayor wasn’t currpt though he was trying to figure out what the heck was going on silently as to not cause panic and because he himself is a predator. So that is going to make him look bad as well.
Wow, my take was totally different. In "Zootopia," the city is portrayed as a harmonious place where predators and prey coexist. However, the underlying plot reveals how individuals seeking power manipulate this harmony. Bellwether orchestrates a plan to make predators revert to their "savage" instincts. She then uses the resulting fear and chaos to turn prey animals against predators. This division allows her to position herself as a leader who can "protect" the prey majority. I saw it as a warning that those craving power can exploit existing tensions and prejudices, pitting different groups against each other to advance their own agendas.
it was clarified in Zootopia Plus that "iceing" dose not kill people it just literally puts them in a big block of ice, probably should have seen it coming since everyone is so casual about it
I see what you’re saying, but I think it’s even more complicated than that, because Gideon wouldn’t have been bullying Judy like that if she were an elephant or a bison or something
There is some irony here in the end when you talk about how you don't want the prey to be sympathetic at all. You took a movie with a simple message that prejudice is bad, and criticized it for not making one group completely evil so you could feel justified in feeling prejudice against them. Dude, you weren't supposed to pick a side and find the deserving winner while coming to hate the other side. That would make it a bad story about prejudice being bad. Adding nuance is actually a good thing. Every racist always thinks they have the justified racism this time. It is important to be able to see past that. There isn't one side that is right to be prejudice against an entire group. People are individuals. Saying that the prey have a historic reason for their prejudice and thus there racism is good makes just as little sense as someone who hates men saying, "historically men have committed most violent crime and rapes, and started most wars, so It make perfect sense to hate all men", or someone who is racist against black people saying, "historically they have been convicted of more violent crime and have lower test scores so me thinking that all or nearly all Black people are inherently dangerous and stupid is justified". Or someone who is racist against middle eastern people saying that 9/11 and other suicide bombings have happened, therefore I should hate and fear every single one of them. Or someone from the middle east saying. "The US military has bombed schools, therefore I should hate all Americans", etc. Everyone always feels like they have a reason to be an asshole, but in the end they are just the new asshole flavor of the generation. The truth is there isn't and has never been a good reason to be a racist, prejudice, bigot. The bigootry on both sides is wrong because crimes are committed by individuals, not skin color, or gender, or sexuality, etc. The people you are hating for their skin color today, didn't commit the crimes of the past, they are their own people. Hold those people responsible for their crimes rather than lashing out at everyone and assuming your side has the good racism this time. There could be long-term systemic problems caused by past racism that still affect people lives today. But you don't need to be a racist in turn in order to tackle those issues. You're just causing new problems at that point.
Throughout this entire video I couldn't stop thinking of Beastars. Almost every issue with Zootopia brought up in this video is acknowledged and tackled in Beastars.
Only thing I don’t understand is we’re do scavengers, opportunistic hunters, and omnivores fit into this? Also it’s like the herbivores are the oppressed minority and the carnivores are the viscous oppressors even though most herbivores are opportunistic eaters. Rabbits, deer, goats, pigs, buffalo, horses, will eat primarily plants but if they see a injured animal or a baby they will scarf it down.
So you’re basically mad that the story isn’t basic black and white good perfect guy and bad horrible guy doing bad things for the sake of doing bad things and call it a bad story
What are you confused about? A group who was mistreated in the past exploiting it in order to advance themselves? Surely this isn't entirely unfamiliar to you.
Personally I think this makes the story stronger. As a half black man it's easier for me to see the extremisim the real world allagories to this story bring from all sides. It's a cautionary tale about how everyone can be bigoted and we ALL need to keep that in check. There have been many real life examples of oppression by a minority as well as a majority. Hell Anglicans saxxons and galic people where enslaved and slaughtered wholesale by the multi ethic roman colonists who invaded thier lands so it's not as though "white" people have had the upper hand forever. The moral of the cyclical nature of hatred and violence is a good one to learn. If you becone your enemy to defeat them, then they were never defeated. All people are equally capable of truly disgusting violence and hatred, but sadly only have limited empathy to counter this. It takes a constant willful effort to be better and I hope everyone who saw this movie took that away because in the end that's how racicim really dies.
Part of the reason for this was that the original plot of the movie was scrapped for being "too dark".....and in the original plot, the racism alegory was much more blatant and in your face. In the original plot, Nick was the protagonist not Judy. In that version of the plot, all Predators in Zootopia, in order to live in the city, had to wear T.A.M.E. collars, which where shock collars that would shock them whenever they experienced emotional highs...whether that be "negative" emotions like anger prey animals feared, or positive emotions like extreme joy or happiness. This was supposedly put in place for "predators and prey to live alongside each other in peace" but was really just an oppressive tool prey used to control the predator population and keep them under their thumb. In addition to the very overt symbolism of the collar, the original plot also was gonna portray predators generally being treated as second class citizens, being forced into low-paying jobs or crime by a prey-dominated society, and particularly when it came to Nick being denied loans by banks to start his own business, as the plot was focused around Nick building a theme park, called Wild Times for predators where they could take off their T.A.M.E. collars and just have fun and relax, for a change. Judy was a minor character and actually initally a well-intentioned but extremely misguided antagonist, though she eventually did come around and become an ally of Nick. The cops in the original plot where mostly villainous/evil though, with the elite swat team of the Zootopia PD who where known as "the Razorbacks" (as they where all wild boars) being the main evil thugs/evil henchmen the then main villain of the film, Mayor Swinton (a pig who was mayor, since predators where second class citizens in this plot so Mayor Lionheart wasn't a thing).
I think the prey has mostly been terrorized before the tribal form, since in the museum scene we can see jackalopes in the background cornering a smilodon. And about the political thing - i feel like it's kind of a cherry picking. We can see Clawhauser working as a secretary, polar bears being the bodyguards for Mr. Big, Gideon working at a farm, just like Judy's parents and etc. Yes, the herbivores has been killed left and right back when carnivores had their instincts, but it's been centuries and prey animals are still afraid of what *was.*
Also not to mention that a lot of the "prey" are opportunistic Hunters back in the day which means if that they need the protein Orca hurt or injured animal they will eat it they aren't completely innocent in the idea of "they don't eat meat" , it's just that predators are more commonly known for it so I think the movie still holds up for the idea that it's more nuanced and not so black and white
Well, it's explicitely said that the ancient history of preys and predators is no longer relevant thanks to whatever happened, and maybe it's just me, but Bellweather seems to have been ready to use any means necessary to gain more power as a person, not even as a woman or a prey. A ruling by fear, that's not what a person would want for their own group, to keep them terrorized. That's just her being at least as corrupt as Lionheart. And yeah, the police officers are mostly preys, and who arrest both of the bad guys ? It's the police, so the preys. Like for Gideon, he was a jerk who just happened to be a Fox, and there are jerk Bunnies too. So yeah, it's a story that goes multiple ways : big vs little, prey vs predators using a new found mistrust, and everyone suffered from it at one point or another in the story. Judy's parents likely saw their daughter suffer at the hands of a Fox, Judy was misconsidered because she's a little Bunny, Nick was miustrusted because he's a Fox, but also Bogo who lost a good cop due to the societal damages, both corrupt politicians went to jail... It's multiple types of discrimination in a single story, ranging from species to groups.
In my opinion, the whole point of Zootopia is that the world is not black and white and I really love how everything is shown from so many different angles. And ability to make different opinions on what's going on in the movie is making it a good story, not just the message
The problem with using different species as an allegory for human racism is that you can never make an equivalent because, well, THEY'RE NOT THE SAME SPECIES! Racism among humans is stupid because our genetic differences don't matter to our interactions, they don't make someone better or worse than the other, so judging based on race isn't only cruel but also idiotic. But discrimination between prey and predator is inherently understandable, as a lion among a bunch of gazelles, well, I'm sure you've seen National Geographic at some point in your life. If you want to make a story about racism, you have to keep it within a single species. There was that Lord of the Rings travesty that was The Rings of Power, and it had a plot about humans discriminating against elves because the elves were stealing the humans' jobs. Well, turns out elves live for hundreds, if not thousands of years, making them much more knowledgeable and capable than the humans in their respective areas of expertise, but the elves also don't require sleep and work for longer hours without tiring. Why would anyone hire the humans for the job the elves can do much better, work at times the humans can't and possibly for the same price? That story tried to paint the humans as unjustified in their discrimination against the elves, but since their genetics make them objectively better than the humans, the "discrimination" is justified (but then again, why would the elven folk even want to be on the same environment as humans in the first place, especially the ones written by those hack writers?). There is a game called Xenoblade X that tackles discrimination between different species rather well. Essentially these aliens fear humans because their bodies contain something that could be harmful to them, so they attack Earth and end up destroying it in the process, while the survivors move to a different planet and end up making friends with the local population. Except some humans are not so welcoming of them, some are fearful that they will bring diseases unknown to the humans, others believe letting the aliens immigrate to their city will make the survivors forget what Earth was like in the first place, and some races you bring in end up fighting with other alien races because of their past transgressions against each other. There's even a quest where your human boss wants to make a giant refugee work for them as a fighter because the cost of feeding him exceeds the value he can bring to the city, but said giant hates violence and wants nothing to do with the battlefield, yet he can't survive on his own if he leaves your care. The solution the characters found was for his human sized alien friend to fight on his instead and your human boss finds other work the giant can do in the city using his size and sheer strength to benefit the population without putting him in harm's way. That is the type of story you have to tell when dealing with different types of races. Zootopia tried to tackle racism but made the two sides inherently different from each other - hell, they made every species of animal inherently different from each other, there are portions of their city where small creatures live in and Judy is seen as a giant compared to them! The reason Judy isn't seen as cop material is because she's small and frail, while the job requires big and strong animals, hence why the police force hire hippos, elephants and lions. Racism among the same race is dumb because the genetic differences don't make any race inherently different from the other. Racism among different types of races, such as carnivores and herbivores or different sized alien species, is justified as the genetic differences do cohabitation a challenge!
I agree that the movie should make it more clear that racism is never justified but I think that it also somewhat depicts how not everything is black and white in the real world and depicts the different perspectives and stories making it so we know there’s not a single correct way to solve everything.
A flaw I see in this argument is that the film shows examples of discrimination from all angles and that the message is that prejudice no matter who it's from or who it's directed to, is wrong. When I watched the movie I didn't think that only the predators where victims and only the prey where oppressors. That's just not an accurate view of racism in both real life and in the film.
I have the same problem with the film. a very cute story in itself, but with weird implications when you think about it. It's hard to think "hervivores bad because racism" when their kind used to be literally eaten by the same group of people who are now randomly going mad and attacking everyone. I think the scene that bothers me the most is the one where Judy instintively grabs her fox spray after an angry Nick makes a sudden menacing gesture. It's suposed to show that Judy is prejudiced against carnivores, but HOW is she suposed to not be scared in that moment?
@@mariajosecabrera1784 Who "victimized themselves"? They were scared of a very real threat. The hervivores were historically eaten by the carnivores, so of course they will be alarmed when it seems to be happening again. Yes I know the attacks were orchestrated by the sheep, but the general public didn't know that.
@@martiA113you see the problem with that is that not all prey animals are weak and helpless like you have rhinos and elephants and not all predators are big and scary like an otter so the point isn't a complete match
@@ayoublahrach4169 I've noticed that too. The general rule seems to be, big animals are in positions of power and authority, and small animals are more marginalised and vulnerable. That being said, prey animals have a legitimate resson to fear their natural predators (as in, a fox isn't a threat to an elephant, but it is to most rodents).
@@martiA113 yeah I agree but the movie makes it seem like every predator is a danger to every prey also a lot of species are both prey and predator I wonder how they are viewed in that world
This is a place to remember Dumbo - every child identifies with Dumbo, even the meanest bully. Every ethnic prejudice feels justified to the person with prejudice. In Zootopia, people of all sides can identify with multiple axes of oppressed and oppressor at different points throughout the story. That's what makes it good. Everyone is happy to discard ridiculous and untrue prejudices. People who hold those prejudices always feel like their views are justified. Thus, you need stories where people's prejudices are at least somewhat justified if you want them to have any value.
I believe that the movie is telling you to judge the person their character and not what they look like. Racism is everywhere and affects everyone, some people more than others, yes, but white people now are experiencing racism, black people have always dealt with racism. The movie isn't sloppy, its showing todays world very well.
Sloppy? How is showing that a world is filled with many different people with many different reasons and experiences, that lead them to do both good and bad things in ways that could be; in some ways, sympathetic, but not always justified sloppy? That just sounds kind of how the world is.
Don’t forget, that the mayor being a Lion, could just have been by coincidence in there time frame takes place. The predator and prey being more modern and that eating and killing why in the past with there ancestors. But also we only get to see the mayor the Lion a predator in a high spot, but isn’t assistant mayor also a pretty high spot too?
I think the message is that we’re all in danger of prejudice and bias. No matter what group or race or gender you’re from, we all suffer from it. Particurally people of color.
Not remotely. The biggest mistake of Zootopia is the ice cream shop. You can't have ice cream without milk which means someone somewhere in Zootopia is getting milked
The reason she was "Marginalized" and was given parking inspection duty was because it was literally her first goddamn day. Did she think she'd immediately become a detective on her first day?
The original idea for Zootopia had the predators wearing shock collars, since they’re assumed to be dangerous. It made me think “Gender-bent Handmaid’s Tale”
YES!!! THANK YOU! I've been saying this since the film came out, and everyone around me thought I was crazy! The allegory doesn't work in this setting. It's the same issue I have with the DCOM movie Zombies (the first one). The message is supposed to be acceptance and tolerance. However, that message is completely lost by the simple fact that if the tech keeping the zombies in check glitches out, then they are going to become killer monsters. Being afraid and intolerant in this case isn't just about 'they're different, we don't like different' - it's a matter of survival of the human race! The Descendants DCOM franchise handles the racism allegory so much better. The Villain Kids (VKs) are discriminated against by the citizens of Auradon because... their parents were evil. That's it. That's the only reason these kids are hated and locked away on a tiny little island to live in poverty. Because their parents are Maleficent and Jafar and Hades and Cruella and the Evil Queen and Ursula and Captain Hook. Because nurture always determines nature, right? Yeah, the allegory works much better here, and even adds the additional lesson that you can be whoever you want to be, despite your background.
Interesting comparison, but it's inherently flawed my friend. First of all, Zombies established that they created the watches to maintain their civil sides, while Zootopia had the animals develop a society in which they could coexist. Predators most likely developed a meat substitute and aren't defined by eating meat in their modern time, but are judged for what happened in the past. Zombies want equality without showing they are equal, whereas Predators showed that they are equal by being just as capable of civility as prey. Secondly, Zombies just hand waves every problem between the groups, I mean Werewolves can just come in and say they were wronged in the past, then you have Mary Sue say sorry I believe you, with no actual deeper look into these allegations. Zootopia on the other hand shows the intolerance on both sides as well as between each animal species, showing how every group is capable of wrong doing, but also capable of good. Finally, Zootopia shows that Predators only became a huge danger, when they're given the Howler plant, which reverts them to their primal state. The predators aren't given technology to control their impulses like Zombies, hence why Zootopia does the bigotry and intolerance message better. Zootopia shows what happened in the past and then shows current time where they're peacefully coexisting. Zombies just shows the Zombies using flimsy watches to manage themselves, then acts like the humans are wrong for not trusting the beings who are on the edge of attacking them.
@@MikeFireheartThe two stories are very similar, though, even if they’re not direct 1:1 comparisons. Both stories are poor examples of a racism allegory and needed more time in the think tank.
Maybe I’m in the minority (no pun intended), but from my first viewing of the movie, I thought predators were the upper class. They’re stronger, smarter, etc. and had their violent history to hold over herbivores’ heads. The kid Judy bullying scene cemented that for me and I carried that through the rest of the movie. However, things started to get more nuanced when it was made clear that predators don’t actually make a habit of savaging other animals (well, other mammals at least). In Zootopia, with their emphasis on “inclusion” ironically put predators on the back foot, where they became the oppressed minority. I think anywhere else, predators have the power. There’s also obvious division between predators that eat other mammals (foxes, cats, bears) and predators that don’t (otters, shrews, etc). Prey mammals have no reason to actually fear the latter group, making any prejudice they face solely a social one and not a practical one. Similarly, any prey animal on a rampage can do considerable amounts of damage (as noted by Judy’s father when first talking about the night howlers).
Yeah, two major flaws here. It is firmly established the predatory behavior stayed in the past. So, to argue predator species are justifiable to be discriminated because they used to hunt pray falls moot. You can read from the tone of the movie, such behaviors are virtually extinct, as the rather filmsy dozen of recent victims is enough to return the topic to the social consciousness. In other words, this ain't Beastars! Before the nighthowlers, it appears attacks were all but history. The second major flaw is demographics. You claim that the prey having political power is the proof that the balance of power has turned the other way around. But that doesn't mean that a prey won't feel the actual intimidation of the sheer size difference, between them and the predators. Say, the balance of power is different between a demographic, and a personal perspective. The only reason prey having higher political power, is the one teased early in the movie. Prey, like rabbits, breed... well, like rabbits. In real life, prey animals tend to reproduce many times more than their carnivorous counterparts. So, the political power is a given by sheer numbers... how many were they? 9 to 1, something something? As you can see from my response, our points seem to be contradictory. If you claim that prey play victim while having political power, but they are actually justified to fear "terrorists," then you are contradicting yourself the same way I do to criticize your point; to claim prey have inherent political power, but on a personal basis, they might feel intimidated by the predators that, anyway, have no proof against them regarding they primal instincts before the sheep came into play. And I think that's exactly why Zootopia is an excellent analogue. As it is in real life, this kind of discussion is actually always flawed; always unsatisfactory. Because we all present true facts, where the how to act on it will invariably affect our lives to even challenge our survival as people. But all we can do is to act against those evil actors that come in, try to exploit such fallacies, in order to push agendas. Be it woke people that actually want to steal donations from unaware compassionate souls, or hillbillies that think sending the military to Mexico won't become another Afghanistan-like embarrassment. (Of course, as a Mexican, I had to add that to my notes, lol) While there might never be a perfect answer to social justice, the movie can only say, hate and fear will bring us nowhere.
Not to mention the clear historian biased in zootopia history against predators Since pray can be just as biologically Savage and the most prey are opportunistic Hunters which means they will eat other animals if they don't feel like they have enough protein or if they just see an injured one they will take advantage, but this is clearly not acknowledged within the zootopia history because they show it as a black and white Clearly their ancient history animals are supposed to reflect the animals that are in real life which means the prey are not innocent nor are they only victims to predators
Lots of people already said this, but that's the point. Both sides have a point, because not one side is right or wrong. Things aren't black and white, especially life.
To me, Zootopia comes off more as a cautionary tale about the overreach of feminism than about racism, although it certainly touches on both. Here's my argument: 1. Every single major predator character is a man, and predators are only ever seen in male-dominated roles (cops, politicians, criminals). 2. The stereotypes applied to Judy and Bellweather by other characters (that they're small and weak, are "just a secretary/meter maid" etc.) sound more like things sexist men would say about women than any kind of racial prejudice. 3. The way the prey talk about predators sounds a lot like how 3rd-wave feminists talk about men. They claim that they have some inherent aggression that they can't control, that their existence is inherently threatening to prey animals, and that society can only work if they suppress their natural behaviors. 4. The predators seem to actually have a lot political power, which wouldn't really make sense if they were supposed to represent a downtrodden minority group. The South Africa analogy is interesting, certainly, but it doesn't really explain why there are so many lower-class predators like Nick or the jaguar. If it was supposed to represent SA, we would see almost all of the predators being significantly wealthier than their prey counterparts, which we simply don't. I think the real allegory here is that Judy is an idealistic young progressive girl who goes off to college thinking she's going to "change the world," but then realizes that the world is a bit complicated: that men, despite how they may have been oppressive to women throughout history, are mostly decent people who should be treated with respect instead of pure contempt, and that not everyone who claims to be in favor of "inclusion" actually has good intentions in mind. At the end of the movie, she's still basically a feminist, but now she realizes that past injustices are not a valid excuse to hate people or treat them poorly.
I'll admit I had a kneejerk reaction to your first sentence -- a lot of privileged folk like to treat pushes for equality as "overreaches" or like they're being oppressed -- but upon seeing the parallels with actual misandry, yeah, you have a point. Especially with the "inherent uncontrollable aggression, are inherently threatening" messaging often used by misandrists (let's not get these terms conflated). I don't see the wider predator vs prey thing as an allegory for the sexes because there are a lot of ways it just doesn't fit -- women don't have the greater social power like zootopia's prey do, and men aren't a 10:1 minority like zootopia's predators are. Those lend themselves much better to a racial discrimination metaphor. But there's definitely some gender commentary, I think, in "the little guys". Judy's ability as a cop isn't doubted because she's an herbivore--there are huge powerful herbivores out there, after all, the police chief is a buffalo--but because she's a bunny, a small animal. The male-dominated field of the police force is portrayed in the movie not as all-carnivore but as all-large-animal, carnivore _and_ herbivore. We even get an on-the-nose bit where Judy responds to Clawhouser calling her cute: "Ooh-- ah, you probably didn't know, but, a bunny can call another bunny cute, but when other animals do it, it's a little..." very likely referencing how girls can call each other cute as a compliment or term of endearment, but it comes off as demeaning and/or creepy coming from random men. And Bellwether. I can definitely hear her "it's a real proud day for us little guys" as excitement for another woman breaking into a male-dominated field despite the difficulty and stacked odds. And of course, post-twist, she shows us that the "little guys" can do just as horrible things as anyone else, possibly even enabled by being seen as weak and unassuming. Also not a perfect allegory, but unlike the racial parallels of the predator/prey discrimination arc, we don't really have any real-world parallel to a prolific species of tiny farmers. In the city itself, the social parallels feel very distinct.
I saw it as victims of polarity. If you were a predictor, you were “supposed” to be a violent, almost dominant being, seen through straight up eating prey and holding high social positions and vice versa for prey. However, we know that everyone isn’t this black and white, like how nick is pretty kind and caring, which goes against this predator stigma. This difference invokes prey characters like bellwether to force predators into this extremely polar position of violence. Thus, predators were oppressed because prey saw them as pure black - violent, dominant; and prey were originally oppressed by that violence, but branched into lack of power to get higher positions like Judy being a cop, and a forced mindset that ALL predators will hurt and manipulate you, masking over any manipulation prey may do themselves such as bellwether. Thus concludes that, yes, prey did have a justification, but the actions that were justified by the means led to a universal oppression to both factions. But who knows :3
Zootopia's metaphor falls apart the second you think about it for more than five seconds, because while there are biological differences between the races of humans, this is absolutely miniscule compared to the world of difference between a lion and a sheep, for example. A much better lesson that could have been taught through Zootopia is that "We're all different and good at different things, so we should all use our different talents and levels of skill for the good of society." Ex: Lions are large, imposing and attractive to look at, thus they make good leaders. Sheep are numerous and good at cooperation, so they make good bureaucrats. They're also not that bright, so it makes sense that they would be the ideal underlings.
The movie was preachy and the analogy doesn’t work here. Of course the predators should be feared as they literally eat prey to live. It doesn’t translate too well with racism.
I think it’s supposed to be sloppy because in real life everything is, it’s no more white or black. We wish it was. We hope it is. but it really isn’t.
Y'know what the weirdest part is? In real life, there's animals that can be both predator AND prey. Snakes can eat mice while eagles can eat snakes. And that's just one example
There's also the fact that many "docile prey" animals will actually eat other animals when they feel like it. Cows and horses will eat mice and snakes and even deer will eat the carcass of another animal just because it's there.
There's literally pictures of a doe chewing on a human rib bone she found at a body farm trail, sucking the marrow out. Bunnies will cannibalize each other if there is no other food immediately available or just to prove they are the top rabbit.
Nature is horrifying sometimes.
Maybe that’s why they stuck to mammals.
@@CWG500SUBSWBC Cow, doe, deer, horse and bunnies are mammal 🗿
@@CWG500SUBSWBC Mammals do this too. Hamsters will eat their children out of stress. Cows will eat snakes because they can. Rabbits eat other rabbits because they got hungry or because they're the better rabbit. It's quite common honestly. Herbivores only need plants but theyll still eat meat if they so wish.
@@alteregobruh Agreed but that is in desperate measures. Ofc when someone gets hungry to point that they are about to die, they'll commit cannibalism. Though, it is not that common in Zootopia because it is like a Topia. You would not see cannibalism in a city, but in a scorching or treacherous environment.
But that does seem really interesting subject to touch on. I wonder if Zootopia touches on 'Topias' that suffer outside of their district. Imagine Taliban Leopards, or Communist Pandas, or Facist peacocks (as they are a proudful species). It gives out the grittiness nature of different countries and how Judy can do something change, or not. Maybe she can accept the terrible reality of animalistic instinct and nature.
Ironically, Bellwether _was_ a predator, just because she was a sheep and an herbivore, does not mean Bellwether lacks the instincts of a hunter. Not only that, Bellwether recruited other sheep extremists, Doug was her hitman, shooting carnivores with a sniper air rifle, plus there were other sheep conspirators who concocted the Night Howlers chemical, if anything, Bellwether and her co-conspirators, became the very thing they hated the most - predators, and they didn't care how many prey mammals who would get hurt in the process. This is the paradox of extremism, it can turn against the very oppressed group it tries to liberate, Bellwether may of had a point, but it was not a good point to start off with, because she believed in the superiority of prey mammals, two wrongs don't make a right.
They accidentally hit on a truth that Disney wouldn't want to broadcast. The sheep are a group of people that are ineffectual at running things themselves, and therefore hate the success of the predators. They cozy up to the predators, but then say to the other prey 'we are like you, see how dangerous it is for us because of these vicious predators'. They put into motion a means to pit the majority prey against the strong predators they can't topple outright on their own, but they don't actually care about the other prey animals, only sheep. This is why they only work with each other, and why Bellwether has no problem with sacrificing Judy, and putting prey animals in danger either with feral predators, or if the predators decide they've had enough being pushed around.
You could say that they are wolves in sheep's clothing?
@@barrybend7189heh good one
I mean sheep eat meat
Any animal can easily be a predator.
What about the entire point of the drug that turned the predators wild also turning prey wild? I think that was meant to be an example of that no matter how things appear, or who appears to be the victim, everyone is capable of terrible things.
That's genius!
Yeah. The movie was more about prejudice in general rather than racism specifically.
@@Here_is_Waldoyep. i love the nuance and “confusing” aspect of the movie. otherwise it would feel kinda propaganda-y
@@eesameesSame
That is the lesson of Ordinary Men as well
I think the point of the movie was more of "don't judge a book by its cover" in a more general sense, as in "predators can seem dangerous but they were being forced to with the drugs and you didn't know that until after the damage was already done" and "just because a sheep looks cute and fluffy doesn't mean it's harmless"
A cows kill more people than sharks kinda thing?
This line of thinking only really works if all non predators where small and weak animals like bumnys and sheep, but they aren't. There are many big and strong non predators like rhinos and buffalos, who we see being in places of political power and discriminate the weaker animals like judy. An example being the chief of the police departement (a buffalo), who belittles judy. In turn there are also weak and small predatora like seals and otters and i don't see any of them being in important positions
Yeah, in some ways it feels like the "big animal/small animal" power structure is more significant that the "predator/prey" power structure.
also we have other small predators around like a fennec fox and a weasel. Both of them at the bottom of the ladder (though arguably, they still are predatory as both are criminals). On the opposite end, there is the shrew mob boss that bosses around polar bears, though to be fair since only mammals seem to be sentient insectivores may not be seen in the same light as other predators.
@@thorveim1174 Oh shit! I'm your 666 like!
@@canadavatar not me, the OP ^^
@@TetsuDeinonychus Exactly
I personally enjoy how nuanced the story is. Why do we need group A = bad and group B = good? That's not how it works irl
Zootopia method how they handled it is fine. But, Beastars did it better.
@@bearerofbadnews1375 Ehh... Maybe? Beaststars has the issue of predators having an innate urge to kill and prey having... Apparantly an urge to be eaten? Its a great story but i think given this vidéo is about how Zootopia is a poor *allegory*, Beastars isnt the best example otherwise
@@thomastakesatollforthedark2231 Eh....Zootopia isn't a poor allegory either, Beastars is kinda similar especially with the differences between prey and predators.
@@Jdudec367 true but it has the same (if not worse) issues that Smartypants saw in zootopia. Both are great, but beastars is not better pwr the video logic is all
@@bearerofbadnews1375 Beastars is even worse.
Ah yes, the good old "let's do a racism allegory but accidentaly justify the discrimination within the story" trope.
Its not like its happening irl oh wait-
"More police brutality against black people is fine bc all black people are super strong and aggressive" levels of justifying discrimination 🤦♀️ When will these racism allegory writer wannabes realize that the point is that racism starts for arbitrary reasons/features based on whoever was more socially powerful at the time?
@@Pablo_Martin_aai'm sorry, can you explain the joke? i don't get get it /gen
@@Lovix13 in some states they want to teach that slavery benefited the African Americans
@@Pablo_Martin_aa what the fu--
that is... how can one even try to come to that conclusion???
I actually disagree with your take on this. Life isn't black and white. There is no group that is entirely "good" and "in the right," and there is no group that is entirely "bad" and "in the wrong." People find many reasons to hate and discriminate others. I don't think this is supposed to be a straight allegory to racism. I think it highlights the messiness of prejudice. Just because you're in a marginalized group doesn't mean you get off scot-free for being prejudiced. Prejudice goes in all different directions. Judy was discriminated against, and she's right to fight for her place in society. But that doesn't give her the right to judge predators, particularly foxes, and the movie calls her out on that. Same for Bellweather. And just because Nick was discriminated against doesn't mean he is right for resorting to bad behavior. This movie shows the dangers of overcorrecting when trying to even the playing field. Firstly, there is no evening the playing field. Because as I said, there will always be people who find a reason to dislike others, whether it be based on sex, race, sexuality, disability or ability, nationality, hair color, height, weight, hobbies---doesn't matter. Discrimination is messy, and no group is without blame. I don't side only with Nick when I watch this movie. I side with many characters at the same time. Just like in real life, I side with lots of different people with different perspectives and different problems.
Yep I was gonna comment the same.
exactly! life is way more complicated. just making the argument "the movie isnt well written because I have to consider the points both sides make and sympathize with both" is wild
THANK YOU !!!
This isn't that related to the video but I've always felt like it's weird media uses this "prey vs predator" or "herbivore vs carnivore" allegory to talk about people because like, omnivores exist??! some animals scavenge, others are both prey and predator and some prey/herbivores are more dangerous than predators/carnivores; it's a giant spectrum, making it a black and white thing doesn't make any sense. If they picked specific animals like sheep vs wolves or zebras vs lions to center the whole story on then sure, go off, but a generalized thing with *every* animal? just doesn't work, unless your end goal is to show there IS a spectrum.
YES. Thank you. I’m all for critiquing movies when they miss the mark or catching odd contradictions but this one was starting to get on my nerves for that very reason.
In the movie they actively tell us that predators ate prey literally thousands of years ago and the natural history museum tells us that prey started evolving and using tools first so prey turned the tables on predators long before the movie began
Honestly it reads more like big animal versus small animal as every animal in a position of power in the movie is large including the Buffalo who is the police chief.
Prey wasn't targeted by Bellwether because she was technically targeting carnivores still, she thinks they prey are better.
Talking about racism is really difficult.
Because "racism" is a word used and perhaps invented by bolsheviki to undermine þe hegemony of a dominant eþnic group in a region, as happened 1922 to undermine slavic domination in þe Soviet union.
Hence it is a term, þat tries to defy nature, portraying it as evil, hence is a deceptive subversive term þat should not be used, when talking about group preferential behaviour...
Unless you want to disfavour your own people
@Beleidigen-ist-Pflicht I'm getting real sick of your reddit anthropology bullshit.
It's not difficult to talk about any more than any other form of discrimination. The problem is that people tend to think that it's very specific or overly general depending on who you ask. It's wrong to assume that someone is a criminal, just because they happen to fit a specific profile, but it's equally just as wrong to assume that they're not a part of the stereotype just because you want to "not be discriminatory". Case and point with when Judy first met Nick and Finick. She shouldn't have judged them so quickly, yes. Good lesson. However, despite we should always give people the benefit of doubt, that doesn't mean you shouldn't still be suspicious.
The world ain't perfect and there is never just one solution fits all. Be aware, sure, but be Fair. Or as Detective Conan's Shinichi once said, "Yes, I would turn you(Ran) in. And then I'd be exhausted.... I'd be exhausted because I'd know that before I turned you in, I'd do everything in my power to prove that you didn't do it first." Same concept, different scenario.
@@Beleidigen-ist-Pflicht Actually the word "Racism" was invented because of WWII. (In other words it was made durring the late 40's or early 50's not the early 20's) Before Adolf's whole thing, there was no word for it (on the basis of genetic identifiers, at least). Before that point people were discriminated against due to their Nationality (as in which Nation/country/tribe they're a part of) moreso than their race or even sex throughout the entire world.
On that note, the word "Slave" was also derived from the word "Slav" as the Slavics were the most common slaves in Europe and the Middle East. Had very little to do with the Soviet Union and the like. However, there is one point that you got right even if it was unintentional. When you're "racist" against one group, you're racist against them all.
@@Snowmon89 you are misinformative, dude, þe term "racism" or "racisme" was already known ,some say invented, by a man called Charles Malato, who used þis term in his book "Philosphie de l'anarchie" þat was published in *1897* !
So þis alone disproves þe þesis þat þe term was iNvEnTeD after world war numero due. 5 minutes of web search sufficed! You can't make þis s н i т up !!
And ,surprise, surprise, he turned out to be an anarchist.
You're dangerously unknowledgable about þe world.
Try finding a european family from þe middle ages letting þeir offspring marry a black man.
I assure you þere will be none.
I think the thing is that in zootopia it isn’t straight up an allegory for racism. It’s a lot to do with many different types of discrimination. It tackles sexism, racism, appearance shaming, cultural backgrounds with predators taking the place of the upper class and rich persons (a minority with power). It takes on a stance particularly with the twist villain that no singular group can be classified as bad guys. Everyone in society has their own struggles and that is reflected in this, and as such it pushes the message that by never giving up and working against the system you can make real change, violence against a corrupt system is NOT the answer and only seeks to corrupt the system further.
I feel like your view on this only works if we went with Zootopia's original storyline, where Predators wore shock collars to control their impulses, like the watches from Zombies. This is because the Zootopia we got established there was a utopia made for animals to coexist, implying they made alternatives for the predators to not eat meat and not hunt prey. This takes place in modern times, but Judy like other prey, are shown to still have biases towards Predators based on their past. Nick is an example of this, since Judy and other prey view him as an untrustworthy person due to being a fox, even though he's more than that shown through his backstory of trying to be a boy scout. Zootopia isn't a black and white story, it shows the biases Predators as well as Prey have towards each other, while also showing how multiple different species of animals are treated. The rodents for example are part of a mafia led by a guy who is shown to also be a proud father, showing that they aren't defined by just their group. You can see this in every character that they introduce from a different species. Is Zootopia perfect? No, but it's still solid in the story it tells and shows how biases as well as beliefs impact different people, from Belleweather seeking revenge for the past sins of the Predators by attacking modern day Predators, causing her to be rightfully arrested for attacking innocent Predators as well as trying to ostracize them, to Nick being cold to others for the treatment he endured as a child, ultimately warming up when Judy helps him be more than his stereotype. Definitely a solid take on these topics, compared to the likes of Zombies and Descendants. This is coming from a guy who hasn't supported Disney in years btw.(On a side note, Descendants 1-2 were solid, but 3 just ruins it, with them blindly dropping the barrier on an isle full of villains who want revenge.)
Honestly, this is one of the rare instances where I think Disney missing the mark actually made the film better. Real life isn’t black-and-white. It’s not always clear who’s in the right.
They didn't miss the mark.
You're acting like they didn't do it on purpose, which they most likely did.
No, the prey animals that are scared of the predators are right. That's the problem. The writers tried to frame them as immoral, but the messed up reality is that they have biological basis for their fears.
@@TheSEAempire there was no biological basis for their fears, that was kinda the point. the prey would've done the same thing if they were shot with the night howler thing.
Disney trying to give a racism lesson but accidentally telling a reality lesson: no group history is without fault, all groups have their own struggles, we have our strengths and weaknesses, and we should not begrudge one group on the basis of thinking your struggles validate your actions, as ultimately the content of your individual character outweighs anything else.
If given the chance, an oppressed people can be just as vile as their oppressors.
@@TheBreakingBenny "Fiery but MOSTLY peaceful protest," comes to mind.....
Hm....or maybe it's intentional too?
The villains were sheep, aka ewes, so the whole thing was one big ewish conspiracy. No way that wasn't intentional.
@@braith117 The Z-Files sounds like a promising idea for a midquel or so.
I always find racism allegories with predator and prey animals as the racial stand in questionable because them being vastly different species and even more so when they used to have a more real predator and prey relationship in the past.
It just makes me wonder how and why they changed their ways to even get to when the story starts, what the predators eat, etc..
It honestly works better to use different dog breeds than predator and prey animals, since dogs come in a lot of shapes, backgrounds and got their own stereotypes, but are still the same species. Just like us humans.
I agree completely. It makes a lot more sense to make them all the same species. They can still have their own like backstories for why there is racism, but at the very least they aren't treated as different species all together.
wait no cause you're so right with the dog idea I love that
I never liked using different literal animal species as an allegory for races because that in itself is racist. We humans are all the same, meanwhile different animal species are not. A mixed baby will not be born with deformities because it's mixed; a hybrid will suffer from deformities and health issues because it's a hybrid. To see different animal species respectively as different human ethnicities is textbook scientific racism. Unfortunately, there are lots of people out there who will see two groups of different animal species of anthros and go "oh yes, this one is white and this one is poc!" And then get mad when the hybrid is unhealthy, because guess what.... It's a hybrid, born by a mix of two different species, not of two ethnicities...
No. Giving reasons to racism from both sides is just good writing. Racism can and will come from both sides. And insanity coming from drugs is not a completely fictional. Getting both sides in racism is good. Black and white is not good at stories about racism.
As a Muslim person, I've experienced racism and I've seen others ofy race give racism.
White Rhodesians and White South Africans do like your point.
I agree, expressing multiple perspectives is the best way to approach any issue.
But BEASTARS did it way better than Zootopia, imo.
@@otakunogitsune5999 facts. Then again, Beastars is an adult’s show with multiple episodes and Zootopia is a kids movie with limited runtime, so…
@@otakunogitsune5999 Beastars is a fascinating story and world, and I greatly enjoy it, but it really doesn't work as an allegory for racism like Zootopia was built to. Not a close one, anyway.
The feared minorities of real life don't have an ingrained instinct to kill and eat people and a black market with which to sate that instinct. They have crime rates spurred by the golem effect and reporters ready to paint the minority as villainous at a moment's notice -- as Zootopia explores.
@@peeblekitty5780 Funilly enough both of these animated media pretend most herbivores live on hay and sunshine when they eat meat pretty commonly...
What were you looking for? Its called nuance. Of course the show runners wouldn't paint each sides with broad brushes. Besides, the word "racism" was never used in the movie. It can also be an allegory for classism or even sexism. Just pick your ism. Its like in Star Wars. The rebels are either terrorists or heroes depending on which angle you look at them. Even the Empire did some good, giving recruits from rural planets bright milirary careers and get their families out of poverty.
While unaliving whole planets. Eff your nuance
@@CordeliaWagner1999 While I think this example isn’t the best, nuance is important when dissecting narrative meanings. It would be better to address the Jedi (who are often touted as just heroes.) They were not agents of balance. They were agents of stagnation and preservation of unfair power structures. They were, by nature, anti-humanist. This is why Anakin becoming the sith who nearly eliminated the Jedi fulfilled the prophecy of bringing “balance” to the force. He was the villain. But his actions weren’t wrong in impartial context of the narrative. He wasn’t meant to bring good or evil to society. He was meant to bring necessary change.
That’s an instance of properly displayed nuance.
On the topic of discrimination, two things can be true at the same time. I don't think the movie was trying to sell its audience to believe one side is overly discriminated against. Rather, it was showing the tension between to different groups.
They showed discrimination on both sides. They even have two villains representing each group (the lion and sheep).
I agree with your point, that not everyone is discriminated against equally; but that doesn't mean that some people are above being discriminated against.
Overall, I like your video, man. I think the moral of the story really is as simple as "don't judge a book by its cover."
Judy and Nick show us to different way of dealing with discrimination. Nobody believed Judy could be a real cop, but she was determined to be one regardless. Nick saw what others believed about foxes, and let it define him. He became what others saw, instead of what he wanted to be. Both end up working together and overcome prejudice. Whatever Disney was intending to say, there’s good lessons in this movie. You can’t just say it’s about racism, or oppression because there is definitely more to it.
They made Judy a Token, like a Trrr advertising Tampons.
Just because some animals are herbivores, it does not mean they are not aggressive or dangerous. We all know how much dangerous hippos and cassowary birds are despite the fact that they consumed plants, right?
Well hippos do sometimes eat meat, but I also read that most other herbivores will sometimes eat meat.
@@Robohead-z6z Also, I did see some carnivores consumed plants some times. I saw some stray dogs and cats did, of course.
@@lerneanlionyeah they will eat grass if they have upset stomach’s but also dogs and cats like certain fruits and vegetables sooooo 😂
But I wonder what raccoons and chickens (omnivores) are considered in sootopia
@@HotgirlenergySo far non mammals animals are considered non sapient, and I hope it stays like that in the sequel. It's just better to not go with all animals being sapient, it's the better solution to what is considered a plot hole in all these stories involving anthropomorfic animals, and it also makes zootopia more unique amongst those stories too.
@@reinweissritter No, they knew before the release of Zootopia that there are other sapient groups, like reptiles. It was fish and I think amphibians they were unsure of, although the preview for Zootopia 2 shows that they have decided to make fish regular animals.
The movie says that in the past, the animals weren’t sentient (like how a few million years ago, we didn’t diverge from chimps yet and were still arboreal), and that the predators ate prey. But it’s implied that the Prey held positions of power for most of history. I think it makes the story better, you shouldn’t hold a grudge because a group in the past did bad stuff.
So the biggest issue with Zootopia is introducing nuance to the story? That doesn't make sense. In real life, no one is without blame, even if some groups suffer more than others.
A lot of the things he said really makes it seem like he's really radical in his political views. Like him saying that it's a bad thing that the movie that's trying to push the message of having empathy for everyone, is showing that everyone is a victim of prejudice, inequality, and suffering in some way. That's the truth
@@destinpatterson1644Yup, that’s the left wing.
I watched this when it came out and I’m surprised at how smart the writing actually is. It has a lot of gray area and both sides can have arguments to justify their actions and it makes it more interesting. I feel like if disney made it super black and white, it would feel very on the nose like in some of their recent projects. It shows this topic with a lot of nuance so everyone can enjoy it, not just the “oppressed” twitter mob.
@@jaybeanzx Lately, I've seen more and more people on the left saying that we should have more empathy for groups of people.
@@A.B.-ub9un Yeah they say alot they don’t really mean
Honestly I think it’s good that there’s 2 sides to the story, since as Judy said life is messy. There’s rarely only one side to the story, and to me the movies message of not judging a book by it’s cover and treating everyone equally I think it works even better them both sides having a good argument to be made on the issue.
Going to disagree with you to some extent. Every race/every person is racist or has been a victim of racism to some degree. Just because a person or group was heavily victimized by racism doesn't mean that they can't be just as prejudice towards another group of people; sometimes that group they're prejudiced toward is the same group that victimized them in the first place because, sadly, unaddressed or perpetuated trauma can invertedly lead to racism, sexism, and other such prejudices.
Lionheart is a belligerent jerk who only hired Bellweather for the diversity clout, so yeah, he's a racist individual. He has the slime of most political figures. He kidnapped carnivores going crazy under the guise of not wanting to cause an uproar, but it was just to save his political career. He went out of his way to save his image. He is not a good person. However, he did not go out of his way like Bellweather did to ruin someone else's life to make herself look better and take over (at least from what we see in the story). A victim of racism and verbal abuse took it upon herself to be racist against an entire group by staging a fake reality based on the past facts and it was so easy to dup the vast majority because people are sheep who don't bother to look past skin color, headlines, or etc.
To a certain extent, it's possible for a person to be a victim and a bully
Maybe it doesn't happen all the time but it does happen
By your logic, are white people the victims? Are Nazis the victims?
I have to commend you on how excellently and simply you explained this. I've tried to explain this years ago, but was only told, "No, x types of people can never be racist/sexist/religiophobic or otherwise prejudice no matter what they do or say to others (wholly because of those traits)." It's important that each and every person is able to look within themselves more often than judging others. If we want to make a positive change, we have to be a good example, not a hypocritical one. All that does is create more unjust conflict, and also robs us of that same self-reflection, growth, and awareness that we tend to expect in others.
I think that if Lionheart genuinely wanted to do good, he should've treated both predators and prey with respect. If there had been transparency from Zootopia's government, awareness would've been raised, the professionals could've rooted out the cause of these "savage" (obviously framed) attacks, and Judy's job could've been completed way sooner by qualified personnel. But because Zootopia's government, much like IRL, is full of corruption, egotism, and contempt, the good citizens had to do their jobs for them.
no smarty pants makes a good point here and I actually thought about this too after watching the film
Like seriously prey do have a good reason to feel some what of an aversion from predators. And their "prejudice" is someone justified
I understand that Disney tried to compare it to real life racism (blacks being predators and whites being prey) however it's not the same because in the animal world, predators constantly hunt prey to feast on them aka "oppress" them however in the real human world it's not the same because black people weren't constantly hunting white people to "feast" on them (or whatever is equivalent to pressing someone) it was actually the other way around. So in reality judy did nothing wrong and nick should've realized this before trying to act like a victim
@@macias7125 You are kind of missing the simple message here. All prejudice is bad. There isn't one side that is right to be prejudice against an entire group. People are individuals. Saying that the prey have a historic reason for their prejudice and thus there racism is good makes just as little sense as someone who is racist against black people saying, historically they have been convicted of more violent crime and have lower test scores so me thinking that all or nearly all Black people are inherently dangerous and stupid is justified. Or someone who is racist against middle eastern people saying that 9/11 and other suicide bombings have happened, therefore I should hate and fear every single one of them. Or someone who hates men saying, historically men have committed most violent crime and rapes, and started most wars, so It make perfect sense to hate all men.
The truth is there isn't and has never been a good reason to be a racist, prejudice, bigot. The bigootry on both sides is wrong because crimes are committed by individuals, not skin color, or gender, or sexuality, etc. The people you are hating for their skin color today, didn't commit the crimes of the past, they are their own people. Hold those people responsible for their crimes rather than lashing out at everyone and assuming your side has the good racism this time. There could be long-term systemic problems caused by past racism that still affect people lives today. But you don't need to be a racist in turn in order to tackle those issues. You're just causing new problems.
The prey have a right to fear predators irl, but in a human context, it couldn't be displayed as such. Perhaps Zootopia 2 will touch more on it.
and predators have a right to fear prey. Do you not understand that animals like moose and hippos (peaceful prey) are responsible for more human deaths than predator animals? Time for some facts. a predator will kill because it has to eat to survive. Many prey animals will just decide they don't like that you breathed and will take you out. You could go to an African preserve where a elephant/water buffalo/rhino/hippo has never seen a human hurt one of it's own kind, and if you stand somewhere it doesn't like, it will mow your a*** down.
@@saribeepo.o5111Oml Moose are fucking terrifying- I've heard some horror stories about them from my friend's dad (he's a hunter), them shits are SCARY.
@@winterwitch8914 FOR REAL. If I ever met a moose I would shit my guts out.
@@saribeepo.o5111 That is a very good point that I knew about but had never properly considered in the context of Zootopia. Like. sitting here thinking about it actually Really good.
That just adds layers to the whole thing of viewers going in with the notion that "of course predators are inherently more dangerous" -- the notion is not only inaccurate to the world of Zootopia, but to actual nature. Forget "sneaky foxes", a cape buffalo like Bogo would wipe the floor with _any_ of the predator species in the film, and eagerly so.
@@peeblekitty5780 The only thing that could compete with him would be a polar bear or maybe a large grizzly or kodiak!
So about that never hearing of a human going crazy and eating people thing, yeah, that's happened at least twice that I know of. For a similar reason as in the movie too.
Two different men, one black and one white if I remember correctly, on two separate occasions. The black dude, high on bathe salts, a briefly popular drug in America, ate his own son's eyes out.
The white man, also on the same drug, attacked a random man on the street and nawed his face off.
So there you go. Fiction imitating realty. Also, the point of the movie wasn't for either group to be a one to one representation of any real world group. It was just to show that we all have prejudice and that we should look past that to work together for a better world. There are good and bad people in all groups and we shouldn't judge the group as a whole solely off the good or bad eggs. Nor should hide behind the past to justify our own negative biases.
How disturbing 😅
I heard about stuff like that happening when someone is high on bath salts
I do like how the movie blurs the lines. In real life these things play out almost like in the film. Though, I do wonder how and why the predators allowed that to happen to themselves. A prequel would be cool.
8:33 You’re right. He was Chinese. 😂😂
I think the mayor has a point just like his deputy mayor. He's trying to prevent a mass panic by quietly getting his men to solve the problem. Like he says at the end a wrong thing for the right reason. Also, I'll give him credit for not considering murder as an option, unlike his deputy mayor.
Yes, but the mayor also was only doing it to save his image
Because if people knew predators, we’re going savage they wouldn’t want him as mayor
So, on the outside it looked like he didn’t want to cause panic, but on the inside it was for the wrong reason
@@Hotgirlenergy Saving his image is a bad thing? Why would that be a bad thing? Of course he would want to who the hell wouldn’t? To say that’s a bad thing is ridiculous.
@@StarDreamsStudios I guess but it should’ve been to save everyone else, but it was just for his image
@@StarDreamsStudios Because it was covering up the facts of the case. All Lionheart knew at the time was that predators were the only ones going savage, so he kept it hidden.
Keeping it out of the eyes of the public turned out to be a good move (as we saw what happened when "predators are going savage" was actually reported) but it was entirely motivated by Lionheart's self-interest and got in the way of detectives and cops and so on actually solving the criminal case.
@@peeblekitty5780 but the mayor did actually have his people searching for a solution. the facility they were holding all the crazy animals, they were trying to figure the problem out albeit covertly.
"It's very sloppy"
also the MAIN CHARACTER at the end of the movie: "Real life is messy"
dude, that is VERY intentional
I think Zootopia actually does a great job of representing the race issue, just not in the narative the media tries to spin. It sends the message that racism now does not fix racism going the other way in the past. Historically, the prey were oppressed, but largely this is not the case now, although there are still a few pockets of inequality. In reaction to this, a few prey extreemests spin a public narative of themselves being victims while ensiting violence against innocent people who happen to be of the group that historically were the oppresors, the predetors, causing open hate and racism against the predetors, which no one is willing to call out because these extreemists among the prey control public opinion. Zootopia is a causionary tale. We're not at their extreem yet, but were pretty darn close. It draws a distinction between who was oppressed historically, and who is oppressed now, and pleads that switching the roles does not fix the problem.
Mixed race person here. For myself I think the sympathetic prey stuff was intentional and intended. In the same way how we can understand why people might be racist without it being justified, we can understand why the prey function in the way they do. So to give a bit of historical context, during slave times there were some instances where people would "breed" (euch thats awful to type) slaves together to fit their respective needs. Now wether or not this was effective is up for debate but the idea was to produce offspring that were stronger and more capable of the jobs given. Because of this when slavery ended the fear was of that built up hatred/retaliation black people could have had, and since in their minds they were much stronger and "dangerous/feral" then they were, that fear stayed awhile. And because generational teaching is a thing when they had kids they taught those kids fear and basically racism without necessarily fully giving the reasons why. So now a couple years down the line you got this generation of racists fearing something thats pattonly untrue. I think Zootopia was trying to do something with that concept, but it gets muddied with both the predator and prey sides of things getting different aspects of the racism allagory. Good intention, bad execution.
Interesting example but I can see what you're saying
You need to stop drinking the koolaid my friend. If people were all so afraid of black people because of this nonsense, you wouldn't have had white people intentionally breaking the law to teach them to read and help them escape to the free states. The whole reason the Jim Crow laws were needed was because it required the corrupt political party (democrats ) to keep people in their proper place as a matter of political power.
...
Time for a fact check my friend, white people did more to free blacks than they could ever do themselves (obviously), this simply would not have happened if everyone lived in terror of the 'superior black physic due to selective breeding' .
I personally feel like Zootopia was less about saying "Oh, it's the predators who are victimized", then "oh, it's the prey who are victimized", then back to the predators. It is indeed muddled, but I think the message was more about "xenophobia is bad, regardless of who is doing it." and that even if something might've been true in the past, it might not be true anymore. As for Lionheart, he might've managed to get into a position of power as a predator, but as it was shown later in the movie, that mattered very little when he was on the list of those who could've been forced to go feral, which would have destroyed not only HIS rights and freedoms, but those of other predators.
Lionheart rightly wanted answers in hopes of stopping the seemingly random afflction that seemed to be able to target any predator, including him, as well as trying to get a cure made as soon as possible. Was he unethical about how he went about it? Questionably, in my opinion. Since there didn't seem to be an airborne spread to whatever was going on, consolidating those who were affected to a single facility was the best choice, as it would allow all of the researchers on the problem to focus more time and effort on said problem and less on traveling to various facilities and hoping those who were taking care of the "nighthowled" were actually paying attention to any noteworthy changes.
Considering the circumstances, not only would the afflicted have been treated poorly (or even worse, not at all) in various other facilities, but it was likely the best possible path towards a cure. Hell, if he hadn't needed to be so secretive about it, he likely wouldn't have been in any trouble whatsoever. If anything, I wouldn't have been shocked if Bellwether hadn't suggested the whole thing to him to help set him up, so even if things hadn't gone exactly to her plan, he would have done something unethical enough to get him removed from his position anyway.
I think it was intentional as a storytelling tool. Audiences are _meant_ to go in with the idea "but it's literally predator and prey, it's only logical for predator to be more dangerous and for prey to be fearful of them" because the whole movie is _about_ subconscious racial bias.
We get this backstory that predators used to be as we know them in real life, but in actuality, we see these predator characters act just as human as any other. But thanks to how we grew up seeing the world, just like Judy, we're prime to think that there's something inherently dangerous to them that must be behind their "going savage". You're _supposed_ to be able to see where Judy is coming from with her conclusion and learn _alongside_ her how harmful those biases can be, even in those who mean well.
Of course it's not a perfect allegory, but a perfect allegory ceases to be an allegory. Zootopia was uniquely clever in using the flaws of its allegory _as_ a storytelling device.
Correct me if I understood you wrong but according to you we should judge a race on what the race has done in the past?
Like owning slaves was wrong and apartheid was wrong but in honestly I don't think we should call all modern day white people bad just because past white people were bad. Yes, those who are still racist are bad but that's oviously not everyone. Whoever your ancestors were and what they have done does not define you.
The same goes to the Zootopia allegory. Just because the main villain's (forgot her name) species was hunted in the past does not justify what she has done in the film. The same goes for predators but backwards.
(For me at least,) true race equality is when we stop seeing skin color and define someone's personality on that. Like your ancestors might have experienced racism but that doesn't mean I won't call you a douchebag when you do a crime. Someone's ancestors might have been slave owners but that doesn't automatically mean he will be racist as well.
The film treated the main villain for her ACTIONS and I think that's good.
It's actually very simple, and that makes the movie surprisingly accurate.
Life. Is. Messy.
There isn't just one side is bad, or black and white. It's all just jumbled together making a chaotic grey. You have different perspectives that shifts each persons goals in positive or negative directions, depending on who is viewing those goals and actions. Yes the mayor was trying to protect his image, but it is also true that his actions where preventing panics and riots while he tried to find a solution for the victims. Sure Bellwether was trying to protect and empower prey animals, but most of those animals were content until she stirred things up. Plus she was hurting innocent predators to do it.
What this story teaches us is how to step back, set our biases to one side, and judge things by facts/logic. Which is why law and order is so important, but should remain neutral.
Can we also talk about how having Judy be the first bunny cop is silly as you need police of other small races as well, just look at when she runs through the rodent part of the town she's massive in there, know imagin any other one of the police need to go through there
Honestly the "messiness" of "who is the historically oppressed one" is what makes the movie both great and more realistic to real life if you've actually studied any real history and not just listened to the popular and "politically correct" narratives.
One example: People like to constantly bang their pots and pans about the Transatlantic Slave Trade (they're doing it in the comments of this video, in fact. Go figure).
But you won't catch those same people constantly screaming about the Berber Slavers from North Africa that were raiding European coastlines for millions of white slaves hundreds of years before Europeans started settling the Americas and needed copious amounts of free labor.
Its not exactly an accident that the biggest players in the black slave trade were the Spanish and Portuguese (or that the overwhelming majority (95%+) of black slaves went to south america to work silver mines owned by the Spanish and Portuguese), who were geographically next door neighbors to the Berber Africans, and thus were hit the most by them.
That made it very easy for Spain and Portugal to justify their subjugation of black slaves when the Transatlantic Slave Trade was established; because it had been done to them and many other European countries by Africans and Arabs before that.
The only real difference between the enslavement of Europeans by the Berbers, and the enslavement of Africans by Europeans/Americans, was how many traceable records they kept about it.
Interesting fact about the white slaves. The Turkish also had those and, of all people, John Smith himself was one of them. If you want to know more, read up on the guy’s life. There is some interesting stuff in there.
It works with the context of the world they create.I like it better when the story fits the world rather than just mirror our own. Not sloppy just good world building. And seeing it from both angles is good writing.
I think any allegory for any kind of discrimination looses some of its meaning or doesn’t quite work perfectly when you transpose the matter you are referencing with a fantasy version; no allegory works as a 1-2-1 comparison because discrimination is a very messy topic that manifests in different ways for different groups or individuals.
There’s passive discrimination, active discrimination, positive discrimination, hate crimes and different reasons why people act discriminatory towards someone, whether that be racial, gender, sexuality, religion ect. Discrimination takes many forms and effects so many different people and it means different things to different people; and as a result when stories try to address discrimination in a general term with a fantasy version there are often holes in the portrayal because it is a nuanced issue that gets boiled down to broad strokes
I don't think I've heard of "positive discrimination" before
Not saying you're lying or anything
You're right that discrimination exists in many forms
@@DragonGoddess18 an example of positive discrimination is things like when companies have diversity hires; it’s when a person is positively treated or benefits from something that is exclusively connected to them having a protected characteristic.
It’s often the result of people or organisations attempting to fulfil diversity requirements or to make themselves look good rather than actually to benefit the individual on the receiving end
@@StrawberryStar7 Thanks to OP's statement, I think another example of "positive discrimination" is this: "You should ask an Asian person for help on your math homework because Asians are naturally good at math." Even if some people see that as a compliment, that's still discrimination because not every Asian is the same when it comes to math. People are still people, regardless of their nationality or ethnicity
@@StrawberryStar7 positive discrimination is a form of discrimination that is legally recognised. While I can’t speak for every country’s individual Equality and Discrimination laws, in the UK it is covered in the 2010 Equality Act.
It is defined as: “Positive Discrimination, which entails treating someone more favourably and which inherently means others are treated less favourably”
@@Halfbad-bf1ltlike queer baiting!
The prey were right to be scared, but there were better ways to handle the situation or for Judy to address.
The movie should have been more clear about how long ago it was that the predators ate the prey. Was it a generation ago or millions of years ago. They call that behavior savage and visual how ancient that behavior is with images of Cave rabbits and Sabretooth tigers. It would be very odd to judge modern human behavior based on what cavemen used to do. The same could apply to the predators. Judging a race of people based on physical characteristics passed down by their ancient ancestors sounds like what the Nazis used to do with myth of the Aryan ubermensch. The predators never hurt anyone with their teeth and claws until they were induced to by a drug
I think it was many many generations ago.
Whatever timeframe they say humans evolved from ape like creatures in, that’s the timeframe we’re looking at.
After they stopped acting like normal animals, I think they had a Stone Age, an Iron Age, a Bronze Age, ect.
I think the history of nonhuman mammals in zootopia mirrors real history to a degree.
Like, they’re was a dog Alexander the Great, a cat cleopatra, ect.
But they’ve still hung on to old ideas about predators from prehistoric times, because that self preservation is so strong.
A personal observation I've had over the years is that webcomics don't get nearly enough attention on youtube unless it's animation those pictures of yours aren't gonja go far but I found a webcomic that alot of people can resonate with Oren's Forge it's mostly like Zootopia or Beastars in most ways with it's anthro characters but it give what both of them have never thought about; the origins how predator and prey tried to make peace and for all it's writing, worldbuilding and themes it barely has a presences on other platforms so Smarty, anyone if you're reading this give it a proper look at it I think you might have somethings to say about it...Too preachy?
Can you drop the name of this webcomics?
@@revells1152 Oren's Forge on DA
@@revells1152 They mentioned it in the comment: Oren's Forge.
@@TheNyleve16 oh sry when u wrote this in first place show my a song with this same title
@@revells1152 No worries, it happens. Hope you enjoy reding it becausse it is a really good read. 👍
This is exactly what you want to portray actually. Villains with a reason for acting beyond being greedy/ evil. Not that it excuses their actions but it informs.
As for the lion being mayor that's a nod to lions being kings of the beasts.
What other powerful figure is a predator though?
Deputy major, mob boss, chief of police, major popular idol, all prey species.
Shrews are predators, actually. They're teeny tiny predators that are mostly just dangerous to insects, but they ARE predators nonetheless.
I thought the two way message was on purpose and well done. Life is messy and is never cut and dry. I thought it was a good reflection of that. Its also worth noting that this messiness would be even more chaotic in an animal world, and I think that should be acknowledged too.
The problem is people trying to write stories in which racism has a reason, because they probably think if they don't it'll be seen as a "plot hole". It's utterly illogical in our world, why should that be different in our stories?
Exactly! There was no real reason for people to be afraid of blacks, except for the skin color
There’s no real backstory to that it’s just people being irrational about something they dotm understand
Well we know why, it's still not really justified though. It's like saying sexism is justified in real life.
The racism in Zootopia DOESN'T have a reason. It has a perceived reason, but they're all discriminating against people who at their core are exactly the same. Predators aren't bloodthirsty and prey aren't stupid, but both discriminate against the other because they perceive each other as though they are. Their reasons for discrimination don't exist.
Or maybe all those faucets are in the story because things just aren't black & white. Sometimes you do sympathize with the reasons someone ends up doing bad things not with the things their doing but the reasons that got them there.
Another question you should ask is how the environment works in this universe when there are no insects or reptiles???
So random. I love it 😅
Or how there are domestic animals without humans.
@@freyakatze3042 maybe it’s like the movie cars a Post apocalyptic world or they just ran over all the people and kill them and took over
I always felt like the dynamic not being cut-and-dry was part of the point, partly so as not to blindly alienate (or, inversely, parrot) parts of the wider dialog and thus letting peoples' real-world attachments get in the way. This makes for a better "how to think, not what to think" theme, something I find sorely lacking in films that are willing to tackle such big issues.
I think two strong lessons kids (and others) could learn from Zootopia are "Sometimes other people have hardships that you might not easily recognize, as they are not familiar to your own" and "When you need to make up for the past, you must not be blind to what future you are making as well".
Zootopias message is that anyone can have racist bigoted ideas and that anyone can be hurt by them witch is something everyone should now. Every racist beleif is based on something often false assumptions but something none the less like for example muslims being terrorist comes from the 911 terrorist attacks or the idea that black people cant swim coming from the fact that black people weren't aloud to be at swimming pools in the past niether assumption is right but those beliefs did not come out of thin air. Also in some places like south africa groups that where oppressed but then come to power start treating others poorly, for example in modern south africa racially motivated crimes against the white population are more common and the government has even considered making laws that allow them to confiscate white people lands without compensation just like Zimbabwe , before anyone roasts me for saying this ask yourself how would you feel if the government just took your land or house or anything from you and said it was because of your skin colour this question is for everybody that is reading this. Further more with people nowadays who say things like black people cant be racists, as well as many others things I think that Zootopias message is more important then every anyone can have horrible prejudice ideas and people need to be on guard against them so that people in power dont take advantage of them.
the movie was about how everyone, no matter their shape or size, can be capable of harboring harmful prejudice that undoes any and all progress towards living in harmony, even if predators used to kill and eat prey in the past, that doesn’t mean that it’s ok, let alone healthy for prey species today to harbor that grudge and hold it against modern day predators that had jack squat to do with that, nor does it justify any prejudice or hatred they may hold as a result of that. And heres a side note: just because zootopias major was a corrupt major that treated his assistant like garbage, that doesn’t mean that the whole system is corrupt beyond belief and favoring predators at any and all points, if it were, nobody would’ve endorsed bellwether to become the next major, let alone allowed her to reach the position she did in the first place; also the concerns of the prey species over predators going feral would’ve been dismissed as “unfounded ramblings” of a group of people “known to be skittish and overly paranoid”
I've noticed that everyone in Zootopia is a mammal... I really do wonder what the birds, reptiles, and fish are like in this universe, because strangely they aren't mentioned at all. Are _only_ the mammals human-like? Are all the predators now vegetarian, or do they eat the non-humanoid animals like birds and fish? Do we have fish, bird, and lizard people in this universe, and if so why aren't they ever seen in the city???
Supposedly there was a fish market shown in Tundratown, said fish being dead so possible some animals aren't sentient...
Though it could be Ducktales logic, in that some animals are still animals, while others are sentient.
I'm more confused about the fact there are domesticated species of animals, such as the pigs and sheep
The analogy may not be perfect but what matters is that the message gets across
It’s almost like how in real life there are good and bad people in all categories, so profiling anyone based off any feature should be discouraged and we should stop thinking in group terms in general.
The Mayor wasn’t currpt though he was trying to figure out what the heck was going on silently as to not cause panic and because he himself is a predator. So that is going to make him look bad as well.
Wow, my take was totally different.
In "Zootopia," the city is portrayed as a harmonious place where predators and prey coexist. However, the underlying plot reveals how individuals seeking power manipulate this harmony. Bellwether orchestrates a plan to make predators revert to their "savage" instincts. She then uses the resulting fear and chaos to turn prey animals against predators. This division allows her to position herself as a leader who can "protect" the prey majority. I saw it as a warning that those craving power can exploit existing tensions and prejudices, pitting different groups against each other to advance their own agendas.
Are we going to overlook that prey animals can also be predators? Sheep often eat mice and baby birds.
it was clarified in Zootopia Plus that "iceing" dose not kill people it just literally puts them in a big block of ice, probably should have seen it coming since everyone is so casual about it
I see what you’re saying, but I think it’s even more complicated than that, because Gideon wouldn’t have been bullying Judy like that if she were an elephant or a bison or something
There is some irony here in the end when you talk about how you don't want the prey to be sympathetic at all. You took a movie with a simple message that prejudice is bad, and criticized it for not making one group completely evil so you could feel justified in feeling prejudice against them. Dude, you weren't supposed to pick a side and find the deserving winner while coming to hate the other side. That would make it a bad story about prejudice being bad. Adding nuance is actually a good thing. Every racist always thinks they have the justified racism this time. It is important to be able to see past that.
There isn't one side that is right to be prejudice against an entire group. People are individuals. Saying that the prey have a historic reason for their prejudice and thus there racism is good makes just as little sense as someone who hates men saying, "historically men have committed most violent crime and rapes, and started most wars, so It make perfect sense to hate all men", or someone who is racist against black people saying, "historically they have been convicted of more violent crime and have lower test scores so me thinking that all or nearly all Black people are inherently dangerous and stupid is justified". Or someone who is racist against middle eastern people saying that 9/11 and other suicide bombings have happened, therefore I should hate and fear every single one of them. Or someone from the middle east saying. "The US military has bombed schools, therefore I should hate all Americans", etc. Everyone always feels like they have a reason to be an asshole, but in the end they are just the new asshole flavor of the generation.
The truth is there isn't and has never been a good reason to be a racist, prejudice, bigot. The bigootry on both sides is wrong because crimes are committed by individuals, not skin color, or gender, or sexuality, etc. The people you are hating for their skin color today, didn't commit the crimes of the past, they are their own people. Hold those people responsible for their crimes rather than lashing out at everyone and assuming your side has the good racism this time. There could be long-term systemic problems caused by past racism that still affect people lives today. But you don't need to be a racist in turn in order to tackle those issues. You're just causing new problems at that point.
The cameo of the dog reporter from Chicken Little was my favorite part tbh, that movie was a huge part of my childhood when it first came out 🤣😂💜
same LOL I didn't care for the story but there were little moments in it that I thought were funny, like that
Throughout this entire video I couldn't stop thinking of Beastars. Almost every issue with Zootopia brought up in this video is acknowledged and tackled in Beastars.
Oh gosh Id rather watch Beaststars than this movie...
Only thing I don’t understand is we’re do scavengers, opportunistic hunters, and omnivores fit into this? Also it’s like the herbivores are the oppressed minority and the carnivores are the viscous oppressors even though most herbivores are opportunistic eaters. Rabbits, deer, goats, pigs, buffalo, horses, will eat primarily plants but if they see a injured animal or a baby they will scarf it down.
Thank you they are very few animals in the world that don't eat meat of some kind at some point even animals are supposed to eat vegetables primarily
So you’re basically mad that the story isn’t basic black and white good perfect guy and bad horrible guy doing bad things for the sake of doing bad things and call it a bad story
at 8:33 so he nerver had to take the sub anywhere. It's always them.
What are you confused about? A group who was mistreated in the past exploiting it in order to advance themselves? Surely this isn't entirely unfamiliar to you.
Personally I think this makes the story stronger. As a half black man it's easier for me to see the extremisim the real world allagories to this story bring from all sides. It's a cautionary tale about how everyone can be bigoted and we ALL need to keep that in check. There have been many real life examples of oppression by a minority as well as a majority. Hell Anglicans saxxons and galic people where enslaved and slaughtered wholesale by the multi ethic roman colonists who invaded thier lands so it's not as though "white" people have had the upper hand forever. The moral of the cyclical nature of hatred and violence is a good one to learn. If you becone your enemy to defeat them, then they were never defeated. All people are equally capable of truly disgusting violence and hatred, but sadly only have limited empathy to counter this. It takes a constant willful effort to be better and I hope everyone who saw this movie took that away because in the end that's how racicim really dies.
One thing you may not have realized is that many "prey" animals are, in fact, just as dangerous as any predator, if not moreso.
crazy how "very muddled and lacks a lot of sense" literally describes racism irl
Part of the reason for this was that the original plot of the movie was scrapped for being "too dark".....and in the original plot, the racism alegory was much more blatant and in your face. In the original plot, Nick was the protagonist not Judy. In that version of the plot, all Predators in Zootopia, in order to live in the city, had to wear T.A.M.E. collars, which where shock collars that would shock them whenever they experienced emotional highs...whether that be "negative" emotions like anger prey animals feared, or positive emotions like extreme joy or happiness. This was supposedly put in place for "predators and prey to live alongside each other in peace" but was really just an oppressive tool prey used to control the predator population and keep them under their thumb.
In addition to the very overt symbolism of the collar, the original plot also was gonna portray predators generally being treated as second class citizens, being forced into low-paying jobs or crime by a prey-dominated society, and particularly when it came to Nick being denied loans by banks to start his own business, as the plot was focused around Nick building a theme park, called Wild Times for predators where they could take off their T.A.M.E. collars and just have fun and relax, for a change. Judy was a minor character and actually initally a well-intentioned but extremely misguided antagonist, though she eventually did come around and become an ally of Nick. The cops in the original plot where mostly villainous/evil though, with the elite swat team of the Zootopia PD who where known as "the Razorbacks" (as they where all wild boars) being the main evil thugs/evil henchmen the then main villain of the film, Mayor Swinton (a pig who was mayor, since predators where second class citizens in this plot so Mayor Lionheart wasn't a thing).
I think the prey has mostly been terrorized before the tribal form, since in the museum scene we can see jackalopes in the background cornering a smilodon. And about the political thing - i feel like it's kind of a cherry picking. We can see Clawhauser working as a secretary, polar bears being the bodyguards for Mr. Big, Gideon working at a farm, just like Judy's parents and etc. Yes, the herbivores has been killed left and right back when carnivores had their instincts, but it's been centuries and prey animals are still afraid of what *was.*
Also not to mention that a lot of the "prey" are opportunistic Hunters back in the day which means if that they need the protein Orca hurt or injured animal they will eat it they aren't completely innocent in the idea of "they don't eat meat" , it's just that predators are more commonly known for it so I think the movie still holds up for the idea that it's more nuanced and not so black and white
@@caradiel2644 yeah true, completely forgot that the diets in nature are more complex than we think.
Well, it's explicitely said that the ancient history of preys and predators is no longer relevant thanks to whatever happened, and maybe it's just me, but Bellweather seems to have been ready to use any means necessary to gain more power as a person, not even as a woman or a prey. A ruling by fear, that's not what a person would want for their own group, to keep them terrorized. That's just her being at least as corrupt as Lionheart.
And yeah, the police officers are mostly preys, and who arrest both of the bad guys ? It's the police, so the preys. Like for Gideon, he was a jerk who just happened to be a Fox, and there are jerk Bunnies too. So yeah, it's a story that goes multiple ways : big vs little, prey vs predators using a new found mistrust, and everyone suffered from it at one point or another in the story. Judy's parents likely saw their daughter suffer at the hands of a Fox, Judy was misconsidered because she's a little Bunny, Nick was miustrusted because he's a Fox, but also Bogo who lost a good cop due to the societal damages, both corrupt politicians went to jail... It's multiple types of discrimination in a single story, ranging from species to groups.
It annoys me that Zootopia legacy has mainly become it being compared to other stories because of its detailed world building.
In my opinion, the whole point of Zootopia is that the world is not black and white and I really love how everything is shown from so many different angles. And ability to make different opinions on what's going on in the movie is making it a good story, not just the message
Yeah, it shows that hate does not discriminate, both the minorities and majorities can be racist to each other.
Majority was an odd word to use here lol. maybe I should change it
The problem with using different species as an allegory for human racism is that you can never make an equivalent because, well, THEY'RE NOT THE SAME SPECIES!
Racism among humans is stupid because our genetic differences don't matter to our interactions, they don't make someone better or worse than the other, so judging based on race isn't only cruel but also idiotic. But discrimination between prey and predator is inherently understandable, as a lion among a bunch of gazelles, well, I'm sure you've seen National Geographic at some point in your life.
If you want to make a story about racism, you have to keep it within a single species. There was that Lord of the Rings travesty that was The Rings of Power, and it had a plot about humans discriminating against elves because the elves were stealing the humans' jobs. Well, turns out elves live for hundreds, if not thousands of years, making them much more knowledgeable and capable than the humans in their respective areas of expertise, but the elves also don't require sleep and work for longer hours without tiring. Why would anyone hire the humans for the job the elves can do much better, work at times the humans can't and possibly for the same price?
That story tried to paint the humans as unjustified in their discrimination against the elves, but since their genetics make them objectively better than the humans, the "discrimination" is justified (but then again, why would the elven folk even want to be on the same environment as humans in the first place, especially the ones written by those hack writers?).
There is a game called Xenoblade X that tackles discrimination between different species rather well. Essentially these aliens fear humans because their bodies contain something that could be harmful to them, so they attack Earth and end up destroying it in the process, while the survivors move to a different planet and end up making friends with the local population. Except some humans are not so welcoming of them, some are fearful that they will bring diseases unknown to the humans, others believe letting the aliens immigrate to their city will make the survivors forget what Earth was like in the first place, and some races you bring in end up fighting with other alien races because of their past transgressions against each other. There's even a quest where your human boss wants to make a giant refugee work for them as a fighter because the cost of feeding him exceeds the value he can bring to the city, but said giant hates violence and wants nothing to do with the battlefield, yet he can't survive on his own if he leaves your care. The solution the characters found was for his human sized alien friend to fight on his instead and your human boss finds other work the giant can do in the city using his size and sheer strength to benefit the population without putting him in harm's way.
That is the type of story you have to tell when dealing with different types of races. Zootopia tried to tackle racism but made the two sides inherently different from each other - hell, they made every species of animal inherently different from each other, there are portions of their city where small creatures live in and Judy is seen as a giant compared to them! The reason Judy isn't seen as cop material is because she's small and frail, while the job requires big and strong animals, hence why the police force hire hippos, elephants and lions.
Racism among the same race is dumb because the genetic differences don't make any race inherently different from the other. Racism among different types of races, such as carnivores and herbivores or different sized alien species, is justified as the genetic differences do cohabitation a challenge!
they could use dolphins. they can genuinely be violently racist against spotted other dolphins in real life.
I like how you think nuanced writing that shows the complexity of the world is bad writing because it doesn't portray the world in black and white.
I agree that the movie should make it more clear that racism is never justified but I think that it also somewhat depicts how not everything is black and white in the real world and depicts the different perspectives and stories making it so we know there’s not a single correct way to solve everything.
A flaw I see in this argument is that the film shows examples of discrimination from all angles and that the message is that prejudice no matter who it's from or who it's directed to, is wrong. When I watched the movie I didn't think that only the predators where victims and only the prey where oppressors. That's just not an accurate view of racism in both real life and in the film.
I have the same problem with the film. a very cute story in itself, but with weird implications when you think about it. It's hard to think "hervivores bad because racism" when their kind used to be literally eaten by the same group of people who are now randomly going mad and attacking everyone. I think the scene that bothers me the most is the one where Judy instintively grabs her fox spray after an angry Nick makes a sudden menacing gesture. It's suposed to show that Judy is prejudiced against carnivores, but HOW is she suposed to not be scared in that moment?
the problem is that they victimized theme self and radicalized their ideologies
@@mariajosecabrera1784 Who "victimized themselves"? They were scared of a very real threat. The hervivores were historically eaten by the carnivores, so of course they will be alarmed when it seems to be happening again. Yes I know the attacks were orchestrated by the sheep, but the general public didn't know that.
@@martiA113you see the problem with that is that not all prey animals are weak and helpless like you have rhinos and elephants and not all predators are big and scary like an otter so the point isn't a complete match
@@ayoublahrach4169 I've noticed that too. The general rule seems to be, big animals are in positions of power and authority, and small animals are more marginalised and vulnerable. That being said, prey animals have a legitimate resson to fear their natural predators (as in, a fox isn't a threat to an elephant, but it is to most rodents).
@@martiA113 yeah I agree but the movie makes it seem like every predator is a danger to every prey also a lot of species are both prey and predator I wonder how they are viewed in that world
This is a place to remember Dumbo - every child identifies with Dumbo, even the meanest bully. Every ethnic prejudice feels justified to the person with prejudice. In Zootopia, people of all sides can identify with multiple axes of oppressed and oppressor at different points throughout the story. That's what makes it good.
Everyone is happy to discard ridiculous and untrue prejudices. People who hold those prejudices always feel like their views are justified. Thus, you need stories where people's prejudices are at least somewhat justified if you want them to have any value.
weird enough, this video was supposed to make me dislike zootopia but it actually kinda made me like it more.
Oh no! How dare someone cross the street when they feel threatened!
I believe that the movie is telling you to judge the person their character and not what they look like. Racism is everywhere and affects everyone, some people more than others, yes, but white people now are experiencing racism, black people have always dealt with racism. The movie isn't sloppy, its showing todays world very well.
Actually some of us have been saying the same things when the movie first came out
Sloppy? How is showing that a world is filled with many different people with many different reasons and experiences, that lead them to do both good and bad things in ways that could be; in some ways, sympathetic, but not always justified sloppy? That just sounds kind of how the world is.
Don’t forget, that the mayor being a Lion, could just have been by coincidence in there time frame takes place. The predator and prey being more modern and that eating and killing why in the past with there ancestors. But also we only get to see the mayor the Lion a predator in a high spot, but isn’t assistant mayor also a pretty high spot too?
I think the message is that we’re all in danger of prejudice and bias. No matter what group or race or gender you’re from, we all suffer from it. Particurally people of color.
Not remotely. The biggest mistake of Zootopia is the ice cream shop. You can't have ice cream without milk which means someone somewhere in Zootopia is getting milked
The reason she was "Marginalized" and was given parking inspection duty was because it was literally her first goddamn day. Did she think she'd immediately become a detective on her first day?
She was bamboozled by that square-jawed fantasy.
Thank you they really do act like she gets treated bad which she is kind of but not because of that
The original idea for Zootopia had the predators wearing shock collars, since they’re assumed to be dangerous.
It made me think “Gender-bent Handmaid’s Tale”
YES!!! THANK YOU! I've been saying this since the film came out, and everyone around me thought I was crazy! The allegory doesn't work in this setting. It's the same issue I have with the DCOM movie Zombies (the first one). The message is supposed to be acceptance and tolerance. However, that message is completely lost by the simple fact that if the tech keeping the zombies in check glitches out, then they are going to become killer monsters. Being afraid and intolerant in this case isn't just about 'they're different, we don't like different' - it's a matter of survival of the human race!
The Descendants DCOM franchise handles the racism allegory so much better. The Villain Kids (VKs) are discriminated against by the citizens of Auradon because... their parents were evil. That's it. That's the only reason these kids are hated and locked away on a tiny little island to live in poverty. Because their parents are Maleficent and Jafar and Hades and Cruella and the Evil Queen and Ursula and Captain Hook. Because nurture always determines nature, right? Yeah, the allegory works much better here, and even adds the additional lesson that you can be whoever you want to be, despite your background.
Interesting comparison, but it's inherently flawed my friend. First of all, Zombies established that they created the watches to maintain their civil sides, while Zootopia had the animals develop a society in which they could coexist. Predators most likely developed a meat substitute and aren't defined by eating meat in their modern time, but are judged for what happened in the past. Zombies want equality without showing they are equal, whereas Predators showed that they are equal by being just as capable of civility as prey. Secondly, Zombies just hand waves every problem between the groups, I mean Werewolves can just come in and say they were wronged in the past, then you have Mary Sue say sorry I believe you, with no actual deeper look into these allegations. Zootopia on the other hand shows the intolerance on both sides as well as between each animal species, showing how every group is capable of wrong doing, but also capable of good. Finally, Zootopia shows that Predators only became a huge danger, when they're given the Howler plant, which reverts them to their primal state. The predators aren't given technology to control their impulses like Zombies, hence why Zootopia does the bigotry and intolerance message better. Zootopia shows what happened in the past and then shows current time where they're peacefully coexisting. Zombies just shows the Zombies using flimsy watches to manage themselves, then acts like the humans are wrong for not trusting the beings who are on the edge of attacking them.
@@MikeFireheartThe two stories are very similar, though, even if they’re not direct 1:1 comparisons. Both stories are poor examples of a racism allegory and needed more time in the think tank.
@@broadwaybaby8914 Very true and that's why one works for the most part, while the other fails due to poor writing of the supposedly oppressed groups.
Maybe I’m in the minority (no pun intended), but from my first viewing of the movie, I thought predators were the upper class. They’re stronger, smarter, etc. and had their violent history to hold over herbivores’ heads. The kid Judy bullying scene cemented that for me and I carried that through the rest of the movie.
However, things started to get more nuanced when it was made clear that predators don’t actually make a habit of savaging other animals (well, other mammals at least). In Zootopia, with their emphasis on “inclusion” ironically put predators on the back foot, where they became the oppressed minority. I think anywhere else, predators have the power.
There’s also obvious division between predators that eat other mammals (foxes, cats, bears) and predators that don’t (otters, shrews, etc). Prey mammals have no reason to actually fear the latter group, making any prejudice they face solely a social one and not a practical one. Similarly, any prey animal on a rampage can do considerable amounts of damage (as noted by Judy’s father when first talking about the night howlers).
Yeah, two major flaws here. It is firmly established the predatory behavior stayed in the past. So, to argue predator species are justifiable to be discriminated because they used to hunt pray falls moot. You can read from the tone of the movie, such behaviors are virtually extinct, as the rather filmsy dozen of recent victims is enough to return the topic to the social consciousness.
In other words, this ain't Beastars! Before the nighthowlers, it appears attacks were all but history.
The second major flaw is demographics. You claim that the prey having political power is the proof that the balance of power has turned the other way around. But that doesn't mean that a prey won't feel the actual intimidation of the sheer size difference, between them and the predators. Say, the balance of power is different between a demographic, and a personal perspective. The only reason prey having higher political power, is the one teased early in the movie. Prey, like rabbits, breed... well, like rabbits. In real life, prey animals tend to reproduce many times more than their carnivorous counterparts. So, the political power is a given by sheer numbers... how many were they? 9 to 1, something something?
As you can see from my response, our points seem to be contradictory. If you claim that prey play victim while having political power, but they are actually justified to fear "terrorists," then you are contradicting yourself the same way I do to criticize your point; to claim prey have inherent political power, but on a personal basis, they might feel intimidated by the predators that, anyway, have no proof against them regarding they primal instincts before the sheep came into play.
And I think that's exactly why Zootopia is an excellent analogue. As it is in real life, this kind of discussion is actually always flawed; always unsatisfactory. Because we all present true facts, where the how to act on it will invariably affect our lives to even challenge our survival as people. But all we can do is to act against those evil actors that come in, try to exploit such fallacies, in order to push agendas. Be it woke people that actually want to steal donations from unaware compassionate souls, or hillbillies that think sending the military to Mexico won't become another Afghanistan-like embarrassment. (Of course, as a Mexican, I had to add that to my notes, lol)
While there might never be a perfect answer to social justice, the movie can only say, hate and fear will bring us nowhere.
Not to mention the clear historian biased in zootopia history against predators
Since pray can be just as biologically Savage and the most prey are opportunistic Hunters which means they will eat other animals if they don't feel like they have enough protein or if they just see an injured one they will take advantage, but this is clearly not acknowledged within the zootopia history because they show it as a black and white
Clearly their ancient history animals are supposed to reflect the animals that are in real life which means the prey are not innocent nor are they only victims to predators
Lots of people already said this, but that's the point. Both sides have a point, because not one side is right or wrong. Things aren't black and white, especially life.
To me, Zootopia comes off more as a cautionary tale about the overreach of feminism than about racism, although it certainly touches on both. Here's my argument:
1. Every single major predator character is a man, and predators are only ever seen in male-dominated roles (cops, politicians, criminals).
2. The stereotypes applied to Judy and Bellweather by other characters (that they're small and weak, are "just a secretary/meter maid" etc.) sound more like things sexist men would say about women than any kind of racial prejudice.
3. The way the prey talk about predators sounds a lot like how 3rd-wave feminists talk about men. They claim that they have some inherent aggression that they can't control, that their existence is inherently threatening to prey animals, and that society can only work if they suppress their natural behaviors.
4. The predators seem to actually have a lot political power, which wouldn't really make sense if they were supposed to represent a downtrodden minority group. The South Africa analogy is interesting, certainly, but it doesn't really explain why there are so many lower-class predators like Nick or the jaguar. If it was supposed to represent SA, we would see almost all of the predators being significantly wealthier than their prey counterparts, which we simply don't.
I think the real allegory here is that Judy is an idealistic young progressive girl who goes off to college thinking she's going to "change the world," but then realizes that the world is a bit complicated: that men, despite how they may have been oppressive to women throughout history, are mostly decent people who should be treated with respect instead of pure contempt, and that not everyone who claims to be in favor of "inclusion" actually has good intentions in mind. At the end of the movie, she's still basically a feminist, but now she realizes that past injustices are not a valid excuse to hate people or treat them poorly.
I'll admit I had a kneejerk reaction to your first sentence -- a lot of privileged folk like to treat pushes for equality as "overreaches" or like they're being oppressed -- but upon seeing the parallels with actual misandry, yeah, you have a point. Especially with the "inherent uncontrollable aggression, are inherently threatening" messaging often used by misandrists (let's not get these terms conflated).
I don't see the wider predator vs prey thing as an allegory for the sexes because there are a lot of ways it just doesn't fit -- women don't have the greater social power like zootopia's prey do, and men aren't a 10:1 minority like zootopia's predators are. Those lend themselves much better to a racial discrimination metaphor.
But there's definitely some gender commentary, I think, in "the little guys". Judy's ability as a cop isn't doubted because she's an herbivore--there are huge powerful herbivores out there, after all, the police chief is a buffalo--but because she's a bunny, a small animal. The male-dominated field of the police force is portrayed in the movie not as all-carnivore but as all-large-animal, carnivore _and_ herbivore.
We even get an on-the-nose bit where Judy responds to Clawhouser calling her cute: "Ooh-- ah, you probably didn't know, but, a bunny can call another bunny cute, but when other animals do it, it's a little..." very likely referencing how girls can call each other cute as a compliment or term of endearment, but it comes off as demeaning and/or creepy coming from random men.
And Bellwether. I can definitely hear her "it's a real proud day for us little guys" as excitement for another woman breaking into a male-dominated field despite the difficulty and stacked odds. And of course, post-twist, she shows us that the "little guys" can do just as horrible things as anyone else, possibly even enabled by being seen as weak and unassuming.
Also not a perfect allegory, but unlike the racial parallels of the predator/prey discrimination arc, we don't really have any real-world parallel to a prolific species of tiny farmers. In the city itself, the social parallels feel very distinct.
I saw it as victims of polarity. If you were a predictor, you were “supposed” to be a violent, almost dominant being, seen through straight up eating prey and holding high social positions and vice versa for prey. However, we know that everyone isn’t this black and white, like how nick is pretty kind and caring, which goes against this predator stigma. This difference invokes prey characters like bellwether to force predators into this extremely polar position of violence. Thus, predators were oppressed because prey saw them as pure black - violent, dominant; and prey were originally oppressed by that violence, but branched into lack of power to get higher positions like Judy being a cop, and a forced mindset that ALL predators will hurt and manipulate you, masking over any manipulation prey may do themselves such as bellwether. Thus concludes that, yes, prey did have a justification, but the actions that were justified by the means led to a universal oppression to both factions. But who knows :3
Zootopia's metaphor falls apart the second you think about it for more than five seconds, because while there are biological differences between the races of humans, this is absolutely miniscule compared to the world of difference between a lion and a sheep, for example.
A much better lesson that could have been taught through Zootopia is that "We're all different and good at different things, so we should all use our different talents and levels of skill for the good of society."
Ex: Lions are large, imposing and attractive to look at, thus they make good leaders. Sheep are numerous and good at cooperation, so they make good bureaucrats. They're also not that bright, so it makes sense that they would be the ideal underlings.
The movie was preachy and the analogy doesn’t work here.
Of course the predators should be feared as they literally eat prey to live.
It doesn’t translate too well with racism.
Careful or you'll set off a minefield of comments
I think it’s supposed to be sloppy because in real life everything is, it’s no more white or black. We wish it was. We hope it is. but it really isn’t.