Zootopia

[Blurr]

That fox just didnt give a fuck and the rabbit was just, HURRY UP ASSHOLE

[Death Blossom]

Yes, I loved that. That head desk.
It makes sense for the type of animals they are. Rabbits are speedy and I imagine her preferring to have stuff done quickly. While fox's are a bit more layed back.

[Blurr]

So I just got back from seeing it........

.................................I never expected to like a furry movie so much.

[Death Blossom]

Jesus frickin Christ.
Why are people still callin it a furry movie.
It's a movie about anthro animals. It's not like it's anything new Disney has done. Disney has done anthro animals before, and they weren't called "furry movies" before. Honestly, the fact that people didn't want to see if because it is a "furry movie" is stupid.

Ugh, anyway. I look forward to seeing it. I hear it's a good movie.

[Darrin]

It's not a FURRY MOVIE!  Aghhh!  Remember when Disney used to only make ANTHRO cartoon animals films?  Thats what this is, but in CGI. 

Any sneezes in the film, Blurr?

[Death Blossom]

Exactly. Jesus Christ, I hate it when people call it "a furry movie". It's not about furries. It's not a furry movie.
Although did you hear the news that apparently a furry orgy broke out in the middle of the screening of the movie someplace?

[yasl]

What distinguishes a "movie about anthros" from a "furry movie".  Aren't they essentially synonyms?

Or is the expectation that a "furry movie" involves spontaneous orgies onscreen as well as off?  Or unpleasantly colored hybrid snowflake OCs?

Because I think that's a tad silly; I'd count those older movies as falling within the broader aegis of the furry fandom, even if the label post-dates them.

[Death Blossom]

I'd call a furry movie if it were a movie about furries.
Also, this is a family movie. It wasn't made for furries. Saying its a furry movie makes it seem like it was made solely for the entertainment of furries. Which it isn't. Sure, furries can enjoy it, but calling it that will put people off. It also I feel does a huge disservice to the movie, making it seem they're only doing this for furries and it's only stuff a furry would enjoy. It feel like the label is limiting the movie. When it's obviously so much greater than what that label implies.

[yasl]

Also, this is a family movie. It wasn't made for furries. [...] making it seem they're only doing this for furries and it's only stuff a furry would enjoy. It feel like the label is limiting the movie. When it's obviously so much greater than what that label implies.

:/

Then I think we probably just have different baggage/connotations associated with the term "furry".

Though I do understand where you're coming from, which is probably why I used the term "furry fandom" later in my post, since I see that less ambiguously as denoting a broad church.

I guess I'm just not willing to cede the term to the channers; to be a term of unmitigated derision.  Though I grant that might be a lost battle, like I've come to accept with the "hacker" vs. "cracker" term conflation.

[Blurr]

jesus calm down chica I was saying it with jest

[Smiles2us]

I'm pretty sure this was just a movie for families... and last time I checked, kids and people like animals... so humanized animals?  That is totally an okay thing without it being called... THE F WORD.  

[yasl]

So, I cede that using TV Tropes as an authoritative source of definitions is, uh, not very rigorous.  But Zootopia's characters are pretty clearly within the category that TV Tropes calls Petting Zoo People.  And the aritcle goes on to say:

Petting Zoo People are also commonly referred to as "Furries". Fans of these are also commonly known as "Furries".

I guess I'm trying to point at a distinction between "furry" and "yiff" (or other Creepy stuff).  Media can be "furry" and entirely family friendly.  Or family-unfriendly on the basis of violence alone.  When someone says "this is a furry movie" I hear it as a shorthand for "this movie features characters that are furries[Petting Zoo People]", not "this movie is tailored for an audience of furries[Subculture]".

I'm not aware that an example of the latter even exists.

Certainly "furry movie" can be used as a term of derision, but I don't think it's safe to assume that's the intent of the speaker, unless it's clear in context.

[Anyponedrawn]

Oh, this isn't against furry people.  There are curries who do bad and good.  We know that, just like bronies or any other fandom.  I never knew the word furry until just a few years ago.  I would just see cartoons animals and think COOL or NOT COOL.  Would "Regular Show" be classified as furry fuel too?  I don't know because the term "Furry" is relatively new to me. 

Just in the sense of this film, I still just view it as cartoon animals as I think 99% of the country would. 

[Silverwing]

I saw this movie and no, there's no sneezing

Awww. 

You liked the movie?

[Bird]

I thought there was a messy-sounding sneeze from the yak? At least, that's how it sounded to me.

The movie was amazing, regardless. Really deep and relatable story, really strong morals. Definitely one of Disney's best, in my opinion. I really want to go out and see it again sometime this week.