>>51736
Is there any reason for the characters to be anthropomorphized in this movie? Doesn't really add much, aside from exploiting racial differences. Hence the shitstorm that is this thread. Nor does it help to progress talking animal characters as a separate medium. So what is there to talk about besides the current political issues of that time disguised under fur, paws, and tails? None of the characters are particularly interesting or worth talking about. Structurally, the film is a mess, instead working purely off of controversy. That was it's main gimmick, the entire film was designed as a provocative art push. Cartoons, even still now, are seen more as children's entertainment. And not only was it a cartoon, it was the first R-rated or X-rated cartoon, and with talking animals nonetheless which were supposed to be cuddly, cute, and inoffensive.
This thread just goes to show that the controversy it caused still works to this day. It's not even a particularly good film, but that's the reason it was so popular. The whole "bad publicity is better than no publicity" sort of deal.