The Gang of Five

Beyond the Mysterious Beyond => The Fridge => Topic started by: Petrie157578641 on March 07, 2016, 11:11:12 AM

Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 07, 2016, 11:11:12 AM
Does anyone else feel upset that reptiles were completely left out and it's only about mammals? They used to make reptiles villains before, but this time they went completely overboard with it. what do you think?
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: DarkHououmon on March 07, 2016, 12:13:36 PM
No, I'm not really bothered by the fact that they focused only on mammals. Here is a Q&A regarding why they stuck with just mammals.


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

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

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

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

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

Byron Howard: It's very difficult to make things simple. There's always the temptation to over-explain things. At Disney the goal is to cut, to simplify, to be direct. To trust the public and their intelligence.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Campion1 on March 07, 2016, 12:29:49 PM
I get a rabbit lead while my scalie friends don't get a single scale. Pretty unfair!
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 07, 2016, 01:23:52 PM
Quote from: DarkHououmon,Mar 7 2016 on  11:13 AM
No, I'm not really bothered by the fact that they focused only on
 "To trust the public and their intelligence."
How are we, as viewers supposed to figure out why there were no reptiles? they say they have no time, but they could have shown some mammals less, while including reptiles instead, and main characters would still be mammals as the focus of the film, I don't see a problem with that other than Disney studio disliking reptiles in general.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: DarkHououmon on March 07, 2016, 01:50:31 PM
Personally, I never really thought "why aren't there any reptiles", as I don't consider it an important question to ask. I had accepted before the movie was released that it would only be mammals. I'm not really all that upset that there aren't any reptiles.

Besides, would including a few reptiles really improve the movie that much? Personally, I don't think so, other than just to add a bit more diversity, which they already accomplished with the mammals. I should also point out that people in general, from what I've seen, tend to identify more readily with mammals than other species. I am not sure if this was another reason or not, but it would make sense.

In the end, I don't see the lack of reptiles as being a huge issue. I mean, sure it's an annoyance to those who wanted to see reptiles. But the overall movie quality, diversity, and story is not really damaged by not including reptiles.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 07, 2016, 02:06:30 PM
Including reptiles would improve the movie a lot. I for one, would go watch the movie in the movie theatre if if had reptiles(not villainous, but as normal citizens), but without them I'm just gonna give it lowest ratings andf hate it whenever I can. Yes it is an issue, because
1 the title implies it's about animals of all kinds, not just mammals. It's called Zootopia, not mammaltopia.
2 it deals with animal stereotypes, and the stereotypes abotu reptiles(that they are evil and all) are the strongest, it would make much more sense including them
3 it is compltely unfair to reptile fans. Appearently, the big part of the target audience is furries. Well they completely left out those who like scalies(I myself not a scalie or furry, but would hate the movie even more if I was)
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: DarkHououmon on March 07, 2016, 02:14:00 PM
Quick thing that I just found out.

Apparently there is talk of a potential Zootopia sequel. Considering how well this movie is doing, this is a very likely possibility. If there is a sequel, then, if I'm understanding right, there is consideration to include reptiles and birds in the next film.

Of course there's no confirmation; this is just talk. Only time will tell if this is going to be a serious consideration down the line.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: aabicus (LettuceBacon&Tomato) on March 07, 2016, 07:33:46 PM
Why aren't there aliens in Firefly?

Why aren't there anthropomorphic plants in Bojack Horseman?

Why aren't there humans in My Little Pony Friendship is Magic?

Why aren't there dinosaurs in Arthur?

Why aren't there halflings in The Elder Scrolls?

Why aren't there females in Outlast?

Because there aren't. Because the creators decided that. Because of the reason DarkHououmon quoted for you. Every work has to cut things, and that's a thing Zootopia decided to cut. It's not "unfair" or "a big middle finger to scalies", it's just not the angle they took. There are plenty of other animated furry movies for you to watch if that's truly a dealbreaker for you.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: DarkHououmon on March 07, 2016, 08:44:02 PM
If you want an anthropomorphic animal movie with reptiles, then here's something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FZjfMfPDJ8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FZjfMfPDJ8)

I've seen this trailer before and there are indeed reptiles in the movie (along with other animals, such as a snail).
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 07, 2016, 09:31:03 PM
Quote from: LettuceBacon&Tomato,Mar 7 2016 on  06:33 PM
Why aren't there aliens in Firefly?

Why aren't there anthropomorphic plants in Bojack Horseman?

Why aren't there humans in My Little Pony Friendship is Magic?

Why aren't there dinosaurs in Arthur?

Why aren't there halflings in The Elder Scrolls?

Why aren't there females in Outlast?

Because there aren't. Because the creators decided that. Because of the reason DarkHououmon quoted for you. Every work has to cut things, and that's a thing Zootopia decided to cut. It's not "unfair" or "a big middle finger to scalies", it's just not the angle they took. There are plenty of other animated furry movies for you to watch if that's truly a dealbreaker for you.
you're putting examples of something minor against something big. This is a fricken movie that has "animal" in title, presenting inself as a movie about animals.
As for humans in MLP - first, completely unnecessary, it's not called "my little pony in a human world", second, humans are not the stereotyped species, they are the ones who make stereotypes, not animals. your comparisson makes no sense here. It promotes itse;f "a world where Humans never existed", not "a world where humans, and no animals exist except most of mammalian species"
Yes, it does show a middle finger to people who like reptiles. Because in fact this movie is not for them, even though its announcement gave high hopes to people who like reptiles.
Geez, for a forum based on LBT I expected more support with what Zootopia is doing.
And it would be ok if it was just a small low budget project, but with all the hype and high ratings it gets I just can't ignore the fact how prejudiced it is.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Truttle on March 07, 2016, 11:28:42 PM
I did notice this in the movie specifically. Didn't imagine a topic would come up though. But yeah, Zootopia does not have reptiles, birds, or any primates at all, not even lemurs. It does not ruin the film at all though. Heck, I for one wanted more bears, but for what we got, the film is still very awesome and the decision of what was included, (And the exclusion of having to explain no humans, or animals that can fly) was a very good decision as it would have been a waste of time having to explain the origin.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Truttle on March 07, 2016, 11:46:47 PM
Quote
Including reptiles would improve the movie a lot. I for one, would go watch the movie in the movie theatre if if had reptiles(not villainous, but as normal citizens), but without them I'm just gonna give it lowest ratings andf hate it whenever I can. Yes it is an issue, because
1 the title implies it's about animals of all kinds, not just mammals. It's called Zootopia, not mammaltopia.
2 it deals with animal stereotypes, and the stereotypes abotu reptiles(that they are evil and all) are the strongest, it would make much more sense including them
3 it is compltely unfair to reptile fans. Appearently, the big part of the target audience is furries. Well they completely left out those who like scalies(I myself not a scalie or furry, but would hate the movie even more if I was)

Don't be like me. I hate the movie "Finding Nemo" and the reason I hate it is quite immature and selfish, I will openly admit that. The reason I hate it is because I felt it was very unfair in a category of animated movies, all the other movies were traditional 2D and they threw in Finding Nemo. Brother Bear was sure to win that category but could not compete with the 3D of the other one.

So I'm telling you, don't hate the movie simply because it has no reptiles in it. It's odd enough that you hate it when you aren't even a scaly.


Edit: I posted this in a rush. If it's not clear, I'm speaking about the Oscars. Brother Bear lost to Finding Nemo at the Oscars.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: aabicus (LettuceBacon&Tomato) on March 08, 2016, 12:09:54 AM
Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 7 2016 on  08:31 PM
you're putting examples of something minor against something big.

Says who? You? I don't think the absence of reptiles matters at all. Most people don't think it matters at all.

You're suffering from myopia. You think its a big deal, but you're trying to speak for some nonexistent majority.

Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 7 2016 on  08:31 PM
Yes, it does show a middle finger to people who like reptiles. Because in fact this movie is not for them, even though its announcement gave high hopes to people who like reptiles.

What about people who like fish? What about people who like fungus? What about people who like monkeys? And dragons? And insects? And the literally uncountable number of biological classifications who did not get anthropomorphic representations in this film? Do you think the creators should have shoehorned all of those types into the movie somewhere, and that their failure to do so constitutes an attack on those fandoms?
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Campion1 on March 08, 2016, 02:38:58 AM
Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 7 2016 on  01:06 PM
I for one, would go watch the movie in the movie theatre if if had reptiles(not villainous, but as normal citizens), but without them I'm just gonna give it lowest ratings and hate it whenever I can.
Well that's just being flat out unreasonable. It's a good movie, it doesn't really deserve that treatment when you haven't even watched it.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 08, 2016, 03:47:56 AM
Quote from: Truttle,Mar 7 2016 on  10:46 PM
Don't be like me. I hate the movie "Finding Nemo" and the reason I hate it is quite immature and selfish, I will openly admit that. The reason I hate it is because I felt it was very unfair in a category of animated movies, all the other movies were traditional 2D and they threw in Finding Nemo. Brother Bear was sure to win that category but could not compete with the 3D of the other one.

So I'm telling you, don't hate the movie simply because it has no reptiles in it. It's odd enough that you hate it when you aren't even a scaly.

Edit: I posted this in a rush. If it's not clear, I'm speaking about the Oscars. Brother Bear lost to Finding Nemo at the Oscars.

 
It is not just because of my own taste. You people have no clue, do you? Read this

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main...lesAreAbhorrent (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ReptilesAreAbhorrent)

Trust me, someone who studied this topic his whole life, the examples on this page or just a tip of the iceberg. And You're telling me that while it's a Disney movie(one of creators admitted that he liked the idea of anthropomophic animals in Robin Hood, and in that movie there was an evil snake and an evil crocodile), which most often avoided and made villains of reptiles so often didn't include them and, that most of cartoon creators make mammals main characters "because they are cute" and more appealing to adult audience is JUST a coincidence here?
The hate to reptiles in the world even goes to a point where people put a mammal life over a reptile life.I am in an animal protecting soeciety, quite a big one(several hundred people), and I was the first one to start protecting reptiles(people use reptile skin for making purses and stuff, obviously), not just furry animals liek others did,  So how can this be compared even remotely which kind of animation you like, 2D and 3D?

No, not a scaly, but a huge reptile fan. There is a difference.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 08, 2016, 03:54:12 AM
Quote from: LettuceBacon&Tomato,Mar 7 2016 on  11:09 PM
Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 7 2016 on  08:31 PM
you're putting examples of something minor against something big.

Says who? You? I don't think the absence of reptiles matters at all. Most people don't think it matters at all.

You're suffering from myopia. You think its a big deal, but you're trying to speak for some nonexistent majority.

Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 7 2016 on  08:31 PM
Yes, it does show a middle finger to people who like reptiles. Because in fact this movie is not for them, even though its announcement gave high hopes to people who like reptiles.

What about people who like fish? What about people who like fungus? What about people who like monkeys? And dragons? And insects? And the literally uncountable number of biological classifications who did not get anthropomorphic representations in this film? Do you think the creators should have shoehorned all of those types into the movie somewhere, and that their failure to do so constitutes an attack on those fandoms?
if you're a troll, just let me know, because you really seem more liek a troll to me than someone who wanted to give a honest answer
Likie "Why aren't there halflings in The Elder Scrolls?"
If we compared it to Zootopia, it would be like "why are there no crocodiles in it", not fricken all other classes except for mammals! so yes it's a big deal. Not to mention that all fantasy worlds are different. Some include hobbits, some don't. Again, this movie was promoted as one "where humans never existed", no mention of only mammals being in it.

As for animals you mentioned above - they could have included most of classes, putting a few animals of it here and there, and don't tell me it was hard to do, because it wasn't. And I'm not talking about dragons and fish for obvious reasons, and fungus, while not a plant, isn't an animal either.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Serris on March 08, 2016, 11:41:17 AM
There's a solution called fanfiction. Want to have a Zootopia where reptiles are present...write it yourself and let your imagination run free.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Truttle on March 08, 2016, 12:25:01 PM
[/QUOTE]
It is not just because of my own taste. You people have no clue, do you? Read this

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main...lesAreAbhorrent (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main...lesAreAbhorrent)

Trust me, someone who studied this topic his whole life, the examples on this page or just a tip of the iceberg. And You're telling me that while it's a Disney movie(one of creators admitted that he liked the idea of anthropomophic animals in Robin Hood, and in that movie there was an evil snake and an evil crocodile), which most often avoided and made villains of reptiles so often didn't include them and, that most of cartoon creators make mammals main characters "because they are cute" and more appealing to adult audience is JUST a coincidence here?
The hate to reptiles in the world even goes to a point where people put a mammal life over a reptile life.I am in an animal protecting soeciety, quite a big one(several hundred people), and I was the first one to start protecting reptiles(people use reptile skin for making purses and stuff, obviously), not just furry animals liek others did, So how can this be compared even remotely which kind of animation you like, 2D and 3D?

No, not a scaly, but a huge reptile fan. There is a difference.
Quote

Hey, I get you. I understand. I love all animals too. But you're misunderstanding. You're trying to make assumptions when you don't even know if this was the intention of the creators. The point I was trying to make is that you shouldn't hate a movie simply because you "think" that is the reason behind the movie. Lots of people like reptiles and other less-used creatures. Some reptiles are the heroes in certain created arts. To name a few, Spyro the dragon, Gex the gecko, Yoshi the dinosaur, Croc the crocodile, and the snake brothers in Snake Rattle and Roll.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: aabicus (LettuceBacon&Tomato) on March 08, 2016, 07:09:33 PM
Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 8 2016 on  02:54 AM
if you're a troll, just let me know, because you really seem more liek a troll to me than someone who wanted to give a honest answer

I've got over six-thousand posts and zero infractions. Feel free to consider me a troll, but what I'm doing is bluntly stating the truth and not sugar-coating it for you.

Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 8 2016 on  02:54 AM
Likie "Why aren't there halflings in The Elder Scrolls?"
If we compared it to Zootopia, it would be like "why are there no crocodiles in it", not fricken all other classes except for mammals! so yes it's a big deal. Not to mention that all fantasy worlds are different. Some include hobbits, some don't. Again, this movie was promoted as one "where humans never existed", no mention of only mammals being in it.

Not all rectangles are squares. The statement "humans don't exist" does not require or imply that any possible non-human does exist.

Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 8 2016 on  02:54 AM
As for animals you mentioned above - they could have included most of classes, putting a few animals of it here and there, and don't tell me it was hard to do, because it wasn't. And I'm not talking about dragons and fish for obvious reasons, and fungus, while not a plant, isn't an animal either.

I never said it would be hard, I said it would be unnecessary. You don't add unneeded crap into a story, and their story clearly didn't need reptiles.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: DarkHououmon on March 08, 2016, 10:44:39 PM
Petrie15,

Cluttering a story with too much stuff isn't really a good idea. Sometimes, it gets to a point where things just have to be cut. The story needs to be able to flow in an understandable way, or else you risk losing the audience.

What purpose would showing reptiles have had? Showing diversity? They already accomplished this with the wide variety of mammals. Adding reptiles wouldn't have really added much to the story. Perhaps a sequel can work them in with a different plot, but the plot of Zootopia and its setting did not really require reptiles.

While inclusion is nice, things added in a story have to have a purpose beyond just trying to appeal to a minority.

And as pointed out before, excluding something isn't really an attack or a statement against those groups. Streamlining a story is important. While you don't want a story to be lacking in substanence, you also don't want it to be overflowing with too much stuff either, as that can do harm in its own right. And the reasons for exclusion can vary, but it isn't always a jab or because they don't like it. It could be because the material is not necessary for the story they want to tell.

If not having reptiles causes Zootopia to be a deal breaker for you, Petrie15, then okay. As pointed out, there are other options. For instance, Sing, which I posted a trailer to earlier on, which has reptiles in it, not just mammals.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 09, 2016, 04:06:56 AM
Quote from: LettuceBacon&Tomato,Mar 8 2016 on  06:09 PM
Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 8 2016 on  02:54 AM
if you're a troll, just let me know, because you really seem more liek a troll to me than someone who wanted to give a honest answer

I've got over six-thousand posts and zero infractions. Feel free to consider me a troll, but what I'm doing is bluntly stating the truth and not sugar-coating it for you.

Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 8 2016 on  02:54 AM
Likie "Why aren't there halflings in The Elder Scrolls?"
If we compared it to Zootopia, it would be like "why are there no crocodiles in it", not fricken all other classes except for mammals! so yes it's a big deal. Not to mention that all fantasy worlds are different. Some include hobbits, some don't. Again, this movie was promoted as one "where humans never existed", no mention of only mammals being in it.

Not all rectangles are squares. The statement "humans don't exist" does not require or imply that any possible non-human does exist.

Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 8 2016 on  02:54 AM
As for animals you mentioned above - they could have included most of classes, putting a few animals of it here and there, and don't tell me it was hard to do, because it wasn't. And I'm not talking about dragons and fish for obvious reasons, and fungus, while not a plant, isn't an animal either.

I never said it would be hard, I said it would be unnecessary. You don't add unneeded crap into a story, and their story clearly didn't need reptiles.
You don't want sugar coating? Fine. People in animal protecting societies ignore reptiles MUCH more than mammals, simply almost not carting for reptiles life. How is that for sugrar coating for ya? What they did in Zootopia is a clear case of animal racism to me, using only animals that people find cuter in real life.

And comparing reptiles to crap... I wonder what are you even doing on this forum... over 6000 thousand posts and most of them about a cartoon about crap.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 09, 2016, 04:14:38 AM
Quote from: DarkHououmon,Mar 8 2016 on  09:44 PM
Petrie15,

Cluttering a story with too much stuff isn't really a good idea. Sometimes, it gets to a point where things just have to be cut. The story needs to be able to flow in an understandable way, or else you risk losing the audience.

What purpose would showing reptiles have had? Showing diversity? They already accomplished this with the wide variety of mammals. Adding reptiles wouldn't have really added much to the story. Perhaps a sequel can work them in with a different plot, but the plot of Zootopia and its setting did not really require reptiles.

While inclusion is nice, things added in a story have to have a purpose beyond just trying to appeal to a minority.

And as pointed out before, excluding something isn't really an attack or a statement against those groups. Streamlining a story is important. While you don't want a story to be lacking in substanence, you also don't want it to be overflowing with too much stuff either, as that can do harm in its own right. And the reasons for exclusion can vary, but it isn't always a jab or because they don't like it. It could be because the material is not necessary for the story they want to tell.

If not having reptiles causes Zootopia to be a deal breaker for you, Petrie15, then okay. As pointed out, there are other options. For instance, Sing, which I posted a trailer to earlier on, which has reptiles in it, not just mammals.
I'm not saying to cram too much stuff into a story. I told you - instead of certain mammals there could have been just reptiles, the overall amount could have stayed the same. I don't see a problem with that when other cartoons do it, so how is this a problem all of a sudden?


But Sing doesn't make so much hype around it, does it? Zootopia is like one of the most popular animated movies of all time, this is one of reasons it makes me so mad that it's ONLY about mammals. It just feels liek people are racists to reptiles. If there was a big, super popular movie with only white people, I imagine other races would be pretty mad about it(especially if it was promoted as, "the whole humanity must unite before this threat"). But if reptiles, whos lives are often ignored and put lower than mammal lives not included it's totally fine. People basicly put more effort in saving mammalian species in the world than reptilian species. It's liek this movie wants us to forget about animals existing at all except for the cutest ones
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Truttle on March 09, 2016, 05:37:20 PM
Once again, you are simply making assumptions based on your displeasure and are pushing this towards extremism and hate.

Land before time was one of the most famous movies out there for more than 30 years and it's ALL about reptiles. Rango is the star of the movie and he fights mammals and a snake, they don't care about speiciesims. Jurassic Park shows the varieties of dinosaurs and they EAT the people. People would put humans over animals always but that isn't the case because people don't care about the racism/speciesism in the movies. They watch it because the movies are GOOD!

And Zootopia did not exclude birds, primates, and reptiles because of speciesism.

You're ignoring Sing because of hype? Isn't that what you wanted? The full inclusion of more species but you hate it because of no hype? I for one am very excited to see Sing too, but to me it just sounds that you're trying to promote your own agenda.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: DarkHououmon on March 09, 2016, 06:17:53 PM
I'm not really sure what you want, Petrie15. Should all animal movies squeeze in a reptile or two to avoid speciesism, even if including a reptile adds nothing to the story/makes no sense? Should animal movies have as many groups of animals as possible shoehorned in, even at the cost of plot, just to appeal to even the smallest minority?

As Truttle pointed out, there are already big movies that have included reptiles in their lineup. Rango is a good example, as it features a few reptilian characters, including one as the designated hero and two who play antagonistic roles. And of course, that's just one of several examples.

I gave Sing as an example because it was a movie that was more inclusive, showed more species, but you decide to ignore it anyway. So I'm starting to wonder if being more inclusive is really what you want, or if you're just trying to find more reasons to complain. It has been explained to you more than once why a movie would cut material, and your responses seem to only nitpick at said decisions in order to try to find ways that they could have "done things differently".

Yes, things could have been done differently. This is something that can be said about every story. There's literally limitless ways a story could be done differently. But in the end, final decisions have to be made, and not everyone is going to be satisfied with the final product. You're not happy with Zootopia's decision to cut reptiles? Well okay. That's fine. That's your opinion.

But you should be careful about making assumptions. Unless you can find an actual quote from the people involved with the movie, your statement of them excluding reptiles being a statement against people who like those animals is nothing more than a wild guess. There may have been several reasons, but it being because of speciesism and a middle finger to reptile lovers is likely not one of the reasons. Cutting a material out is not a statement against anything. Sometimes material has to be cut. And for Zootopia, cutting out reptiles was something they felt they had to do.

There are people disappointed in this decison. It's not just you. But no movie can please everyone. It didn't matter what Zootopia did in regards with animal species; there would always be someone to complain about things in the movie. So the only thing that Zootopia and other movies can do is just make the decisions they feel are best for the movie and hope for the best.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 09, 2016, 07:46:22 PM
Quote from: Truttle,Mar 9 2016 on  04:37 PM
Once again, you are simply making assumptions based on your displeasure and are pushing this towards extremism and hate.

Land before time was one of the most famous movies out there for more than 30 years and it's ALL about reptiles. Rango is the star of the movie and he fights mammals and a snake, they don't care about speiciesims. Jurassic Park shows the varieties of dinosaurs and they EAT the people. People would put humans over animals always but that isn't the case because people don't care about the racism/speciesism in the movies. They watch it because the movies are GOOD!

And Zootopia did not exclude birds, primates, and reptiles because of speciesism.

You're ignoring Sing because of hype? Isn't that what you wanted? The full inclusion of more species but you hate it because of no hype? I for one am very excited to see Sing too, but to me it just sounds that you're trying to promote your own agenda.
And this is why love LBT so much, the creators clearly don't hate reptiles if they made movies about them as main characters. In case with Rango  - the villain iks a snake so the whole "reptiles are not evil in cartoons) cancel each other. And I wasn't talking just about inclusion of reptiles in cartoons, I said before - the creators either usually make them evil or avoid them, in case of Zootopia they are ignoring them to such a level that they don't even exist here.
As far as I know from Disney channel(which is basicly a huge commercial for this movie) there were shown 64 species of aninals in the movie. So you people are saying they couldn't make like 10 species of reptiles, 10 of birds and make the rest 44 mammals? It doesn't make any sense except for "the creators avoid reptiles because they don't like them" as most of cartoon creators do. And like mammals, all birds and reptiles are differentm some are omnivores, some are herbiores and some are predators, so clearly, there was no problem with including them, really.

And I never said I hate Sing movie, don't put words into my mouth. I just said I'm focusing specificly on Zootopia because of what hype is around it(I'm pretty sure it will be most popular and highest rated animated movie of this year, the box office and ratings are already huge). I have nothign against Sing and will watch it when it comes out, but I'm more looking forward to "The secret life of pets", which clearly has no prejudice to any animals if you look at the trailer hence they even had neutral(or even friendly) snakes in it.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Truttle on March 09, 2016, 08:02:54 PM
Quote
It doesn't make any sense except for "the creators avoid reptiles because they don't like them" as most of cartoon creators do.

That's it. I'm done. Believe whatever it is you want. You're stubborn beyond recognition and refuse to review any of the information we give you. To you it's all a conspiracy.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 09, 2016, 08:05:42 PM
Quote from: DarkHououmon,Mar 9 2016 on  05:17 PM
I'm not really sure what you want, Petrie15. Should all animal movies squeeze in a reptile or two to avoid speciesism, even if including a reptile adds nothing to the story/makes no sense? Should animal movies have as many groups of animals as possible shoehorned in, even at the cost of plot, just to appeal to even the smallest minority?

As Truttle pointed out, there are already big movies that have included reptiles in their lineup. Rango is a good example, as it features a few reptilian characters, including one as the designated hero and two who play antagonistic roles. And of course, that's just one of several examples.

I gave Sing as an example because it was a movie that was more inclusive, showed more species, but you decide to ignore it anyway. So I'm starting to wonder if being more inclusive is really what you want, or if you're just trying to find more reasons to complain. It has been explained to you more than once why a movie would cut material, and your responses seem to only nitpick at said decisions in order to try to find ways that they could have "done things differently".

Yes, things could have been done differently. This is something that can be said about every story. There's literally limitless ways a story could be done differently. But in the end, final decisions have to be made, and not everyone is going to be satisfied with the final product. You're not happy with Zootopia's decision to cut reptiles? Well okay. That's fine. That's your opinion.

But you should be careful about making assumptions. Unless you can find an actual quote from the people involved with the movie, your statement of them excluding reptiles being a statement against people who like those animals is nothing more than a wild guess. There may have been several reasons, but it being because of speciesism and a middle finger to reptile lovers is likely not one of the reasons. Cutting a material out is not a statement against anything. Sometimes material has to be cut. And for Zootopia, cutting out reptiles was something they felt they had to do.

There are people disappointed in this decison. It's not just you. But no movie can please everyone. It didn't matter what Zootopia did in regards with animal species; there would always be someone to complain about things in the movie. So the only thing that Zootopia and other movies can do is just make the decisions they feel are best for the movie and hope for the best.
All of you seem to be completely ignoring the fact that(and I repeat for like 5-th time already) that this movie is promoted like a world where HUMANS never existed, and that it's an animal world. But pretty much nobody mentiones that it's an inclomplete animal world, as far as I know, not even explained in the movie where are reptiles and other classes. Moreover, in one of commercials to it on Disney channel they said that this movie has ALL animal species.Very true, very. One more confirmnation that they don't want other classes to even exist. Plot reasons? I descrived in message above how easily it could have been done with other classes.
Simplicity? Chilcren will think the movie is too complex for them if there would be reptiles in it? No, it makes no sense.
And I already said, Rango is a bad example, because it also features reptile villains. I'm not saying the creators of Rango dislike reptiles in general, but I was saying in my first messages that creators either ignore reptiles OR make them villains. Or do you think I sent that link "Reptiles are abhorrent" for nothing?

And like I said - I'm ignoring Sing because it's not the topic here. I';m not saying there are absolutely no cartoons with reptiles in them, I'm saying that most of cartoons either ignore rpetiles or make them villains, lucikly, more neutral reptiels appear in cartoons nowdays, but one of top animation companies - Disney is still doing their thing with it.

Are yout out of your mind? no creators would openly say "we did it because we only like mammals" of course it would summon a lot of negativity, instead they always try to evade the truth. But the way they answer these questions - makes me thing again and again that they mainly did it because mammals are more appealing.
Oh which reminds me, in a new Lion king series one of characters said "Why are crocodiles always so violent?" while there were lions, rhinos and hippos around him. And that with crocodiles generally being less violent predators, certanly better than lions at it(who sometimes do terrible things in real life).



Why did I come here? I came here to find some support. As an animal protector, who was the first in this city to start protecting reptiles, who were mostly ignored in terms of animal protection, as a huge reptile fan sicne childhood I was lookign for support and agreement from fellow reptile fans, because of how unfair Disney made that movie, but I was wrong about this society. I would even leave GOF right now, but it would be unfair to people who may agree with me but simply didn't see this topic and my messages.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 09, 2016, 08:07:00 PM
Quote from: Truttle,Mar 9 2016 on  07:02 PM
Quote
It doesn't make any sense except for "the creators avoid reptiles because they don't like them" as most of cartoon creators do.

That's it. I'm done. Believe whatever it is you want. You're stubborn beyond recognition and refuse to review any of the information we give you. To you it's all a conspiracy.
Clearly you didn't see as many cartoons and movies with monstrous reptiles and people who are disgusted by reptiles in real life as much a I did. you have no experience here and already makign assumptions.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Truttle on March 09, 2016, 08:12:34 PM
No assumptions. I've quoted you on verbatim all the way so it's all true. You are saying it yourself. You are making the assumptions.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 09, 2016, 08:14:49 PM
you're making assumtions that to me it's all a conspiracy. No, it's people's disgust towards reptiles, no conspiracy here, Simple as that.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Nick22 on March 09, 2016, 08:20:00 PM
petrie you have the right to your opinion. however, you do NOT have the right to denigrate other people. as for Zootopia, its mostly cuddly animals. Disney has been showing cuddly animals in one form or another for nearly 100 years. its their stock in trade. if zootopia gets a sequel (which is also something Disney does a lot) I imagine there will be lizards and reptiles in it.  a lot of stuff gets cut out in making a movie, particularly one thats 90 or so minutes long.
 in Rango, the villain  wasnt Jake, even though he was viewed as one, but the mayor. so it subverted the ' all reptiles are evil/bad trope, by having one as a hero.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 09, 2016, 08:31:43 PM
Quote
however, you do NOT have the right to denigrate other people.
when did I ever do that?
Quote
Disney has been showing cuddly animals in one form or another for nearly 100 years.
and that's what I blame them for. I hate all their movies featuring evil reptiles. Their only exception was princess and the frog but first, crocodile was completely silly, and the snake had no character(unlike villanous Kaa and Sir Hiss) and couldn't even talk, and other crocodiles were hellishly agressive, second, the main villain still used a snake motif using his diabolical powers.
Quote
in Rango, the villain wasnt Jake, even though he was viewed as one, but the mayor. so it subverted the ' all reptiles are evil/bad trope, by having one as a hero.
Like I said, a movie where they cancel each other out. There are FAR less cartoons where there are good reptiles without any evil ones than the other way around. I usually dislike cartoons where the story revolves around only mammals, but Zootopia jsut crossed all limits. Saying how much it's about animals and only including mammals in the whoel world.
And if there will be a sequel featruign reptiles, I see no reasonable explanations why they weren't in the first movie, unless they had some kinda comflict and now live seperately, which is again very racistic, and again shows that they should have been in Zootopia, not somehwre else all this time.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Nick22 on March 09, 2016, 08:41:17 PM
Just setting boundaries Petrie, and reminding you to keep things civil.  Reptiles arent featured as much because they aren't considered ' cuddly". But there are games where reptiles are heroes- take the various Spyro games for instance or Sly Cooper, or the various Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
 as for the sequel, well you can only show so much of a world in 90 minutes, there's always going to be areas or people or characters who get overlooked. even large films like lord of the Rings, which show lots of a world, leave stuff out. you need to leave stuff open for a potential sequel.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 09, 2016, 08:49:43 PM
Well first, I never used name calling here, so I didn't give a reason to say that I don't have a right to denigrate other people.
As for the movie - yes, exactly, finally. They used mammals because "they are cuddly". This is exactly what racism is, preffering someone because of looks, not character\behaviour. As for 90 minute runtime I once afgain remidn all of you, that it had 64 species of mammals. I'm not saying it should have added additional amount of animals, just reptiles and birds instead of many, could have been such an amazing movie.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: vonboy on March 09, 2016, 09:03:41 PM
Quote from: Nick22,Mar 9 2016 on  06:41 PM
Just setting boundaries Petrie, and reminding you to keep things civil.  Reptiles arent featured as much because they aren't considered ' cuddly". But there are games where reptiles are heroes- take the various Spyro games for instance or Sly Cooper, or the various Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
 as for the sequel, well you can only show so much of a world in 90 minutes, there's always going to be areas or people or characters who get overlooked. even large films like lord of the Rings, which show lots of a world, leave stuff out. you need to leave stuff open for a potential sequel.
There's also the upcoming Yooka Laylee game, that has a chameleon and a bat pair protagonists in it.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: aabicus (LettuceBacon&Tomato) on March 09, 2016, 09:25:11 PM
Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 9 2016 on  07:49 PM
Well first, I never used name calling here, so I didn't give a reason to say that I don't have a right to denigrate other people.
You called me a troll.
Title: Zootopia - no reptiles?
Post by: Petrie157578641 on March 09, 2016, 09:38:28 PM
Quote from: LettuceBacon&Tomato,Mar 9 2016 on  08:25 PM
Quote from: Petrie157578641,Mar 9 2016 on  07:49 PM
Well first, I never used name calling here, so I didn't give a reason to say that I don't have a right to denigrate other people.
You called me a troll.
No I didn't, I asked if you were, and said that you seem like a troll to me, not that you are.