Judith Halberstam has a very unique perspective on animated childrens films. She made up her own term called “pixarvolt”. The way she explains pixarvolt is “a new genre of animated feature films that use CGI technology instead of standard linear animation techniques and that surprisingly foreground the themes of revolution and transformation.”(Halberstam 29) In other words, she is identifying different ideas and theories within the typical animated children's film and grouping them together. It is a combination of the overall Pixar related movies, and how the main characters revolt. In the film I be will discussing, the main character ignores what others tell her, and she does what she feels is right anyway, which is a great example of revolting
…show more content…
One thing she would notice is the focus on queer theory. The relationship between Judy Hops and the fox, Nick Wilde, would be queer in her eyes because of their non-reproductive stance. Not only are they different species, but their relationship is platonic. Halberstam states “children are not coupled, they are not romantic, they do not have religious morality, they are not afraid of death or failure, they are collective creatures, they are in a constant state of rebellion against their parents, and they are not the masters of their domain” which is explaining that the young innocence of children is essentially just being queer (Halberstam 47). Since in the city of Zootopia, all the animals and different species are living together, that shows that overall it is non-reproductive because they all are co-existing with the other species. One of the few romantic couples that are shown in this is the parents of Judy, and that is because they are both rabbits and have a large nuclear family of their own. Because of there being so few romantic relationships, this film would be looked at as extremely queer in the eyes and perspective of …show more content…
There was not just one species that took over the film, because the two main characters were a rabbit and a fox, which are not remotely similar since one is a predator and the other is a prey. The fact that they became friends and got along with other animals of different species shows how collective of a film it is. With that being said, that is another example of how Halberstam would think this film is a pixelvolt because of the collective aspect, instead of there being mainly one species like she talked about in the story “Chicken Run”, primarily based off of just chickens. Overall, Halberstam has some really interesting ideas. With talking about revolt, which is half the name of Pixarvolt itself, and looking at so many different aspects of film, she truly has opened viewers eyes to what they are really seeing right in front of them. Along with the whole revolt aspect, her other ideas that fit into her genre are beyond intuitive. For instance, her queer theory. She would definitely agree that Zootopia fits into her queer theory, due to the lack of reproduction. This films also displays how real humanism is within animated films, and how the animals themselves are basically portrayed as people. Halberstam has such an intellectual mind, and will be fantasting to see if the next animated film you watch falls under the category
One thing she would notice is the focus on queer theory. The relationship between Judy Hops and the fox, Nick Wilde, would be queer in her eyes because of their non-reproductive stance. Not only are they different species, but their relationship is platonic. Halberstam states “children are not coupled, they are not romantic, they do not have religious morality, they are not afraid of death or failure, they are collective creatures, they are in a constant state of rebellion against their parents, and they are not the masters of their domain” which is explaining that the young innocence of children is essentially just being queer (Halberstam 47). Since in the city of Zootopia, all the animals and different species are living together, that shows that overall it is non-reproductive because they all are co-existing with the other species. One of the few romantic couples that are shown in this is the parents of Judy, and that is because they are both rabbits and have a large nuclear family of their own. Because of there being so few romantic relationships, this film would be looked at as extremely queer in the eyes and perspective of …show more content…
There was not just one species that took over the film, because the two main characters were a rabbit and a fox, which are not remotely similar since one is a predator and the other is a prey. The fact that they became friends and got along with other animals of different species shows how collective of a film it is. With that being said, that is another example of how Halberstam would think this film is a pixelvolt because of the collective aspect, instead of there being mainly one species like she talked about in the story “Chicken Run”, primarily based off of just chickens. Overall, Halberstam has some really interesting ideas. With talking about revolt, which is half the name of Pixarvolt itself, and looking at so many different aspects of film, she truly has opened viewers eyes to what they are really seeing right in front of them. Along with the whole revolt aspect, her other ideas that fit into her genre are beyond intuitive. For instance, her queer theory. She would definitely agree that Zootopia fits into her queer theory, due to the lack of reproduction. This films also displays how real humanism is within animated films, and how the animals themselves are basically portrayed as people. Halberstam has such an intellectual mind, and will be fantasting to see if the next animated film you watch falls under the category