Skip to main content

I mean, I am just a dumb bunny, but, we are good at multiplying.

Zootropolis
(2016)

(SPOILERS) The key to Zootropolis’ (or Zootopia as our American cousins refer to it; the European title change being nothing to do with U2, but down to a Danish zoo, it seems, which still doesn’t explain the German title, though) creative success isn’t so much the conceit of its much-vaunted allegory regarding prejudice and equality, or – conversely – the fun to be had riffing on animal stereotypes (simultaneously clever and obvious), or even the appealing central duo voiced by Ginnifier Goodwin (as first rabbit cop Judy Hopps) and Jason Bateman (fox hustler Nick Wilde). It’s coming armed with that rarity for an animation; a well-sustained plot that doesn’t devolve into overblown set pieces or rest on the easy laurels of musical numbers and montages.


So credit’s due to co-directors Byron Howard (Bolt, Tangled) and Rich Moore (of The Simpsons, Futurama, and latterly, the great until it kind of rests on its laurels Wreck-It-Ralph) and Jared Bush (presumably one of the three was really good at making tea?), and the SIX other credited writers for bashing this thing out. They don’t wholly get there, but they’re close enough.


I feared a Blue Sky-DreamWorks sugar rush rainbow early in the proceedings, as Judy arrives in the titular city to the accompaniment of a Shakira tie-in dance anthem (she’s a Gazelle, called, remarkably, Gazelle). For a couple of minutes Zootopia is reduced to life-affirming vacuity by way of aural bubblegum, and all the worse for it (likewise, you’re not missing anything if you don’t stay for the reprise over the end credits). But, that aside, those NINE credited writers have clearly done their best brainstorming the ins-and-outs and ways-and-means of this world, often to clashes in terms of internal logic but mostly imaginative effect (Nick’s money-making nous in servicing several different species’ wants through a mixture of astute recycling and vertical integration is particularly winning).


But regarding that allegory. Devin Faraci’s (very well-argued) review a month or so back asserted Zootopia is a muddled movie in terms of meaning, one where, rather than the clearly defined lines of Animal Farmthe animals are laid over the political message”. I have some sympathy with this take, as the picture certainly confronts us with its own set of pre-conceived definitions in forwarding the idea of predator-prey prejudice. It’s difficult to imagine prey not being justified in their fear of predators, particularly as the general starting point in campaigning against prejudice and for equality is that such fears and intolerance aren’t and never have been reasonable. But I don’t think it’s as difficult to move past the barrier of interpretation as Faraci suggests, particularly since the picture plays fast and loose with its metaphors, and evidently purposefully so. It becomes fairly clear Zootropolis wants to take in prejudice very broadly, rather than applying itself to specific signifiers and groups.


We’re told the traditional predator-prey relationship evolved into one of mutual equanimity a long time - thousands of years –  ago. But, as with prejudices generally, the filmmakers ensure they are very much alive in the voiced present. One might expect such crutches as affirmative action programmes to have long since become unnecessary, all creatures having moved into a place where they happily co-exist, but each species brings with it its own set of ingrained ideas, something the filmmakers both work against and play off.


All animals are carrying them around all day, every day, so it makes you wonder how any of it is expected to work. And thus how any big city environment is expected to work. Rabbits continue to fear foxes and weaker, smaller animals still haven’t mustered respect from their peers (except in the criminal underworld, where the shrewish can become godfathers). Nick doesn’t have a problem because he’s prey so much as his species is seen as inherently untrustworthy.


Nick and Judy are each battling prejudice and stereotyping in their own ways, while – since this is an animated comedy, it has little other recourse, and so rightly so – most of the gags revolve around stereotypical animal posturing, from v-e-r-y slow sloths, to rabbits breeding like rabbits (the Bunny Boro sign) and only mostly growing carrots, to weasels doing what they do best. But they’re both, at different points, guilty of prejudice and stereotyping themselves. Everyone’s at it, not necessarily like rabbits, which makes the picture’s imbalances perversely inclusive, and also quite untidy in a very likeable way.


We see Judy’s prejudice against predators (Nick), and theirs against “weaker” prey (so addressing traditional gender roles, via the Mammal Inclusion Initiative). Neat metaphors are mustered that can apply to racism or sexism or even religious intolerance, such as using certain words (only Judy can refer to herself as a cute bunny), while her Fox repellent pepper spray incorporates both. And, of course, the villains of the piece are traditionally oppressed sheep. So yeah, Zootropolis can be a tad an ungainly as a catch-all for prejudice, but that is its self-confessed theme (“Zootopia, where anyone can be anything they want”; one in the eye for the absence of aspiration, Judy’s parents encouraging her to know her place). And, if its grasp exceeds its reach, it’s nevertheless to be praised for trying.


The makers have gone to a lot of trouble populating their zoological melting pot in intriguing and mismatched manners, often in ways that are appealingly oddball rather than making cohesive sense; the attempts to include all shapes and sizes (although insects seemed not to get much of a look-in, aside from the ones buzzing around Tommy Chong’s head – Chong yet again avoiding typecasting by playing a stoned Yak), from the miniature city-within-a-city where Mr Big’s daughter hangs out, to the frankly bizarre depiction of an animal naturist retreat, where the various creatures’ shamelessness is rather diffused by their computer-airbrushed absence of genitalia. I’d like to think that was the joke, but this is a Disney movie, so it it isn’t; the directors could at least have included some Bewoulf-esque outrageous concealment of bits.


Which goes to highlight the Zootropolis is more engaged with plot than non-stop jokes, to an extent that’s ultimately refreshing (and it’s not like the absence of funnies has damaged its box office; mind you, the sloth alone guarantees its classic scene longevity). There are numerous asides, sight gags and quips (I particularly like Duke Weaselton – Alan Tudyk - selling movies and sequels not even on release yet, referencing existing Disney properties, of course) but they’re very much in their place, secondary to a plot relishing detective work that puts most bona fide detective movies to shame. Zootopia has a Chinatown-esque span to it, revealing a web of corruption that extends to the highest office in the land, and if it rather neatly locates its arch-perpetrator at the end, she at least isn’t an obvious suspect (well, as far as the picture goes, only having so many potentials in its cast of characters).


Mostly, it’s just refreshing to see animations stretching themselves (the design isn’t exactly ground-breaking, referencing Bugs Bunny’s female alter ego with Judy’s sexy rabbit – as far as I’m aware Disney haven’t called the film Zoophilia anywhere – and Disney’s own Robin Hood in the design of Nick). It’s surprising – and heartening – that it should be Disney that has recaptured this territory, where competitors are mostly mired in frivolous, frothy fare. Even Disney-owned Pixar’s Inside Out, very good as it is, is ultimately extremely cosy and unthreatening in its scope (like the majority of Pixar’s movies). If Zootropolis doesn’t quite get there, it receives full marks for trying. And it also uses Idris Elba to show-stealing effect as the traditionally irascible police chief (here a water buffalo); given how poorly Hollywood has served the actor post-The Wire, that’s something of a minor miracle.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

If this is not a place for a priest, Miles, then this is exactly where the Lord wants me.

Bad Times at the El Royale (2018)
(SPOILERS) Sometimes a movie comes along where you instantly know you’re safe in the hands of a master of the craft, someone who knows exactly the story they want to tell and precisely how to achieve it. All you have to do is sit back and exult in the joyful dexterity on display. Bad Times at the El Royale is such a movie, and Drew Goddard has outdone himself. From the first scene, set ten years prior to the main action, he has constructed a dizzyingly deft piece of work, stuffed with indelible characters portrayed by perfectly chosen performers, delirious twists and game-changing flashbacks, the package sealed by an accompanying frequently diegetic soundtrack, playing in as it does to the essential plot beats of the whole. If there's a better movie this year, it will be a pretty damn good one.

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

It was one of the most desolate looking places in the world.

They Shall Not Grow Old (2018)
Peter Jackson's They Shall Not Grow Old, broadcast by the BBC on the centenary of Armistice Day, is "sold" on the attraction and curiosity value of restored, colourised and frame rate-enhanced footage. On that level, this World War I documentary, utilising a misquote from Laurence Binyon's poem for its title, is frequently an eye-opener, transforming the stuttering, blurry visuals that have hitherto informed subsequent generations' relationship with the War. However, that's only half the story; the other is the use of archive interviews with veterans to provide a narrative, exerting an effect often more impacting for what isn't said than for what is.

You kind of look like a slutty Ebola virus.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
(SPOILERS) The phenomenal success of Crazy Rich Asians – in the US at any rate, thus far – might lead one to think it's some kind of startling original, but the truth is, whatever its core demographic appeal, this adaptation of Kevin Kwan's novel taps into universally accepted romantic comedy DNA and readily recognisable tropes of family and class, regardless of cultural background. It emerges a smoothly professional product, ticking the expected boxes in those areas – the heroine's highs, lows, rejections, proposals, accompanied by whacky scene-stealing best friend – even if the writing is sometimes a little on the clunky side.

Prepare the Heathen’s Stand! By order of purification!

Apostle (2018)
(SPOILERS) Another week, another undercooked Netflix flick from an undeniably talented director. What’s up with their quality control? Do they have any? Are they so set on attracting an embarrassment of creatives, they give them carte blanche, to hell with whether the results are any good or not? Apostle's an ungainly folk-horror mashup of The Wicker Man (most obviously, but without the remotest trace of that screenplay's finesse) and any cult-centric Brit horror movie you’d care to think of (including Ben Wheatley's, himself an exponent of similar influences-on-sleeve filmmaking with Kill List), taking in tropes from Hammer, torture porn, and pagan lore but revealing nothing much that's different or original beyond them.

He mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.

Darkest Hour (2017)
(SPOILERS) Watching Joe Wright’s return to the rarefied plane of prestige – and heritage to boot – filmmaking following the execrable folly of the panned Pan, I was struck by the difference an engaged director, one who cares about his characters, makes to material. Only last week, Ridley Scott’s serviceable All the Money in the World made for a pointed illustration of strong material in the hands of someone with no such investment, unless they’re androids. Wright’s dedication to a relatable Winston Churchill ensures that, for the first hour-plus, Darkest Hour is a first-rate affair, a piece of myth-making that barely puts a foot wrong. It has that much in common with Wright’s earlier Word War II tale, Atonement. But then, like Atonement, it comes unstuck.

It seemed as if I had missed something.

Room 237 (2012)
Stanley Kubrick’s meticulous, obsessive approach towards filmmaking was renowned, so perhaps it should be no surprise to find comparable traits reflected in a section of his worshippers. Legends about the director have taken root (some of them with a factual basis, others bunkum), while the air of secrecy that enshrouded his life and work has duly fostered a range of conspiracy theories. A few of these are aired in Rodney Ascher’s documentary, which indulges five variably coherent advocates of five variably tenuous theories relating to just what The Shining is really all about. Beyond Jack Nicholson turning the crazy up to 11, that is. Ascher has hit on a fascinating subject, one that exposes our capacity to interpret any given information wildly differently according to our disposition. But his execution, which both underlines and undermines the theses of these devotees, leaves something to be desired.

Part of the problem is simply one of production values. The audio tra…