Movie Review: Zootopia

Do you like animation? How about great films?

If you answered "yes" to either of those questions, this is where you stop reading. Because I've got very little to say about this movie that isn't a spoiler, and you're better off seeing this with as little information as possible. This is a stellar movie, and I'd honestly prefer you discover why for yourself.

If you're not sold, feel free to keep reading, but - fair warning - I'm not holding back. Otherwise, save this and all other reviews until after you've seen it.

Alright. I'm going to assume everyone still reading has either seen Zootopia or is waiving their rights to be upset when I give away the major plot twists. Only I'm not going to do that, because - while I think the movie had a good story - it's only tangentially connected to why it's worth everyone's time. I am, however, about to spoil the theme, and believe me: that's a bigger deal.

On the surface, Zootopia is set in a world inhabited by anthropomorphic animals. More specifically, mammals - we never find out if there are cities of talking birds or lizards, too (maybe in the sequel). Or, hell, maybe this is secretly in continuity with Ducktales or Tailspin or something: those definitely feel like the prototypes Zootopia is working off of.

But this isn't Duckburg: this is a nuanced, complex setting with very real problems. The movie is full of jokes, the majority of which are fun and well executed. And, honestly, I kind of wish they'd gone through and cut every last one of them out. Because while the movie is funny, its core isn't comedy. This is a story of systemic and unconscious racism in law enforcement, politics, and culture at large. It's about bias, privilege, and fear.

It's almost impossible to watch Zootopia in 2016 and not draw parallels to the Black Lives Matter movement: this digs beneath the surface to explore the reasons why well-meaning police officers may find themselves reacting differently to the same behavior from people of different races. Likewise, it's not hard to see similarities between the political fear-mongering of the movie's villain and Donald Trump's speeches. It's easy to forget that this was written three years ago. But then again, it works just as well as an allegory for profiling of Muslims in the name of the War on Terror, decades of law enforcement disproportionately targeting minorities in the drug war, or countless other examples you can dredge up from human history.

What's perhaps most impressive is the way the movie unveils its theme. The film's protagonist is a rabbit trying to be the first of her species to join the police. We follow her as she fights to achieve her goals, despite being told her whole life it's impossible for someone like her to join the force. We believe that she's the underdog, that she's persecuted and held back.

And, in a way, that's true. But rabbits are herbivores, as is ninety percent of the population. Predators, on the other hand, are a small minority, and they're commonly feared and shunned by others. Society treats them differently without noticing. When a rabbit gets upset, it's seen as a normal reaction, but when it's a lion, they're seen as dangerous.

At first, there's a connection between the two situations, as if the opposition to a rabbit becoming a cop is the same problem faced by the predators. But, just as quickly, the movie exposes this as false equivalence. A majority that is afraid and has a manufactured sense of persecution can do horrible things. This is the point of Zootopia, and if it succeeds in teaching that lesson to eight-year-olds, maybe the next generation will be smart enough to see something like Trump's hate speech for what it is.

This is an astonishingly good movie. But if you've been to Rotten Tomatoes recently you probably already figured that out - it's at 99% positive right now. The movie melds numerous genres together, but the dominant inspiration is a 70's/80's cop drama. One of my biggest complaints from the trailer was that the culture was modernized, a decision that will eventually date the movie. But I can see now it was the right choice - this had to be set now, because this is happening now.

I've got a handful of issues with various elements, including some reservations with the pacing of the ending, but... I just can't pick at this thing. It's too good, too smart, and too important a film to waste time with trivial details.

I honestly hope no one who hasn't seen Zootopia made it this far, but just in case, I'll say it one more time: go see this movie.

A Disturbing Trend

Before we begin, we would like to state clearly that we've nothing against the British. Their contributions to geek culture cannot be understated, and we have nothing but admiration for what they've given us. From the trigger-happy, drunken womanizing of James Bond to the disease-ridden aliens of War of the Worlds, the British have a long history of developing characters and stories beloved by geeks everywhere.

But a recent trend has disturbed us deeply. In July we alerted our readers to a frightening instance of a religious organization from the United Kingdom slandering the Black Canary, an American super-heroine.

At the time, we assumed this would be an isolated incident. We are disheartened to report that we were wrong. The Redcoats, it seems, are up to their old tricks again. And this time, the British are acting through official, legal channels.

It is unclear why the Batmobile was in London - indeed, it is our sincere opinion that the Dark Knight's secrets should remain unknown - but whatever the reason, the Caped Crusader was in England, where he was issued a parking ticket.

This development is nothing short of stunning. First of all, Batman and the British police (or "bobbies") share a common philosophy, fighting crime without the use of a firearm (it is, after all, the weapon of the enemy; a coward's weapon, one might say).

So why then the animosity? Are the Brits still angry that Batman has taken the title of "World's Greatest Detective" from their beloved Sherlock Holmes?

No, we think the truth is somewhat more distressing. When the incident with Black Canary occurred, we drew your attention to a doll representing Electra, a far better example of what the religious organization was trying to express, but one they conveniently omitted.

At the time, we assumed this was an oversight. In light of this recent development, we must now amend this assumption. We now have reason to believe that the United Kingdom has instituted a systemic program of intimidation and slander against the heroes of the DC Universe.

Why? At this stage, it is impossible to say for certain. But we suspect that the reason ties to the fact that DC Comics contains few recognizable heroes from England. Sure, there's John Constantine, but even he was changed into an American for the mediocre movie.

This may seem paranoid, but ask yourself this: why is it always a DC character targeted by the British? Why wasn't the Spider-Mobile ticketed? We have our theories....

Politics Bleeds into the Geek

Well, it was only a matter of time. Here in The Middle Room we have remained mostly silent on the subject of politics, because politics (for the most part) has steered clear of us.

But it was not to last.

Barack Obama has invoked us, as so we must comment. For those of you who haven't heard, Obama recently compared the relationship between John McCain and George Bush to that between Robin and Batman.

We must admit to finding the comparison a bit baffling for a variety of reasons. The first and most obvious is that finding parallels between Bush and Batman would be trying: Bush simply isn't a heroic figure. On the other hand, similarities may exist between Bush and the persona Batman projects - that of a disturbed millionaire playboy with issues living up to his father's legacy.

But in the case of Batman this is merely a disguise used to misdirect suspicions. There is little evidence that Bush is living a secret life battling the criminal element in Crawford, Texas (though that may explain why he spends so little time in Washington).

What truly confuses us, however, is the lack of specificity: which Robin is Obama referring to?

Dick Grayson is the obvious candidate: he's the original and best known version. However, he's a capable leader, ready to take up the mantle of Batman should the need ever arise. While lacking some of his mentor's abilities, he is less disturbed and obsessed. It is hard to understand the connection, unless he was complimenting his rival.

Jason Todd might make the most sense: he was the least stable and least popular of the Robins, after all. What's more, he served the shortest term, which could be viewed as a veiled reference to McCain's age and the possibility he may be replaced by a different Robin (in this case, Palin). A similar innuendo could be drawn from Tim Drake, who briefly had to give up the mantle of Robin at his father's demand. In that situation, Stephanie Brown took over, with disastrous results.

While we continue to support Obama, we in The Middle Room question the wisdom of comparing Bush or McCain to Batman or any of his protege. Especially when he could have said that McCain is to Bush as The Riddler is to The Joker. That one has some merit.