THE PACK Message Boards

What a lot of people who are furries don't realize, is that while furry might seem normal to them, it repulses 98% of the population who ARENT furries. The furry "fandom" is a sub-genre of all the collective fandoms..that is even looked down upon by trekkies ( sad, but true ) In any case, even now, if you attend an animation school, your instructors are going to play scenes from robin Hood and tell you "don't make movies like this because then you're making a furry movie and that's bad"

I know this, because it happened to ME when I went to school. I liked Robin Hood, but didn't admit it, because who wants to be called a furry in animation? No one, because FURRIES DON'T GET HIRED.

How do movies like Happy Feet, Surf's Up, Open Season, Over the Hedge, Kung-Fu Panda, Brother Bear, ect get made then? All of those a furry would love. They are all about anthropomorphic animals. Sounds like if anyone even pitched the idea for that they would be fired on the spot....fursecuted if you will....

Those aren't "furry" movies, okay? And I really wish furry fans would learn the difference and stop referring to any animal-themed movie as "furry" See, in the minds of Hollywood Producers, "furry" refers to highly sexually explicit art featuring human characters with animal heads ( or close to that..the stuff that comprises most modern furry art. ) It's the sex aspect that producers refer to when defining what is a "furry" film.

None of the films you listed above have, or will ever feature explicit animal sex. FURRY, to most non furry fans, means LOTS OF SEX! There's a difference, and that's why you will NEVER see a sexual cartoon come out of America, save for COOL WORLD, and that was godawful ( it's what you get when you hire a lout like Ralph Bakshi to direct )

Don't agree with me? When I went off to college, I used to draw humanoid animals, and was warned against it by seniors, who told me all about this "mysterious fandom of fat 50-year olds who have sex in hotels and screw animals" Bear in mind, this was 1991, just as the internet was becoming big, long before anyone knew what "furry" was. back then, professionals used to get together to draw cartoon animals in fanzines. There wasn't ANY sexual content. As soon as the sex started showing up, the professionals quit drawing funny animal art, and stuck mostly to animation or commercial art. They didn't want to be part of furry fandom because as the years went on it just got dirtier, and dirtier, and now it's even gone so far as to be borderline pedophilic. i can break it doen like this:

FURRY FILM = Limited to internet. Heavily sexual, for adults. Appreciated by only a small sub-fandom, aminority of the general sci-fi/fantasy genre.

ANIMATED FILM = Product made for commercial exhibition and mass profits. Sexual content nonexistent or innuendo. Does not carry the stigma furry does.

As years went by, the fandom discovered each other and started labeling ANY animated movie that featured talking animals as "furry" instead of "animated", which is the proper term for any animated film. Sorry, that furry tendency to name animal films "furry" is almost as annoying as people who call costumes "fursuits". I just don't get it, but that's just me. It doesn't seem to bother too m any other people. To each his own.

I never said those movies were 'furry movies'. I said those would really appeal to the furry fandom for obvious reasons. And they all feature anthropomorphic characters. Doesn't mean they have to have hominoid bodies and big tits. Any animal with human qualities is technically anthropomorphic. Like talking, walking on its hind legs, surfing( ) ect.

Also, why would Hollywood consider Robin Hood a 'furry' movie then? Their is no crazy sex/nudity/whatever in there. (not to say I agree that all furries are perverted sex-freaks....)

here's an example of some storyboards from an animated kangaroo movie that was never finished. This..is an ANIMATED film. There's no human parts or anything, it's just straight up cartoon.