I love how everyone's worked up over the definition of a "furry". I don't care what you guys think, if it's got fur, it's subject to a furry costume. Good on you, people. Good on you.
To be fair Where the "Wild Things Are" and "The Fantastic Mr. Fox" are based on classic children's books. Anthropomorphic animals have been staples of children's literature for hundreds...no thousands of years. Didn't you ever read Aesop's f'ing Fables? The aliens from Avatar aren't "furries" either. Furries are anthropomorphic animals. The Na'Vi or whatever Cameron called them are humanoid aliens who evolved as arboreal beings. Wolverine and Sabertooth aren't furries, either. They are human mutants who give in to their bestial natures when they fight. Most of us do. It's the fight or flight instinct.
@Bill-Lee: well it's clearly a trend right now, which is why we are talking about it. We're having fun with it, you remember fun, right? Should we just not say anything cause it's always been there? And we addressed the Na'vi issue and the sabey issues in the post. I'm not really sure where this hate is coming from. We furries are all about the love.
@Bill-Lee: Easy tiger. I'll give you Aesop and the Wild Things, but the Cameron SpaceCatElves? Come now. And much as I love Liev, Sabertooth was the biggest chunk of furry Ho Yay I've seen in a bit.
@Strakus: Oh, my, until you said it I didn't think it, but now I can't get it out of my head. That's not cool, man, not cool. Now I'm wondering how much Sabertooth/Wolverine Ho Yaoi fanfic there is out there...
@Meredith Woerner: So when someone disagrees with you, Ms. Woerner that's automatically "hate"? You're claiming things for this list that shouldn't be on the list because they don't fit the definition. You're stretching the definition of furry in the same way SyFy Channel stretches the definition of science fiction. Aliens are not furries. Mutants are not furries. That's like claiming Spock is an elf because both elves and Vulcans are depicted with pointy ears. Is Pan a furry too? He is an anthropomorphic animal.
Ugh, I hate the idea of furries. Stop it, io9. Bad enough I have to stomach furry porn when I search any kind of fan art, but now it goes mainstream? I'm sorry, but the whole furry genre is just disgusting, period.And Avatar's stupid creatures count. They look like anorexic versions of X-Men's Beast.
@kasviel: Get over it. Furry-bashing was hip a few years ago, until people realized that maybe Something Awful's obsession with finding people to mock said more about how sad SA was than how sad furries were.
Seriously, the idea that stories with anthropomorphic animal people in them are automatically trashy and terrible is kinda like, well, the idea that stories with rockets and space aliens are automatically trashy and terrible. A lot of people still believe that, but it always wryly amuses me to see sci-fi fans trot that out with no apparent sense of irony.
And yes, I'll note for the record that I'm a furry -- in fact, I was a guest of honor at Eurofurence 2008. As shocking as you may find this, I'm not interested in "Avatar" because it's got sexy blue cat people in it, but because it's a James Friggin' Cameron movie. That it's a James Friggin' Cameron movie that does have sexy blue cat people is a good thing -- but put them in a Michael Bay movie, not so much interest.
@RomanNation: I saw the preview for the first time before 9 and laughed my head off. I love Roald Dahl's work and this looks like a promising adaption. I'm very excited. Plus it comes out around Christmas time and I love seeing kids movies at Christmas (getting old sucks).
@RomanNation: Are you kidding? The animation is painful to look at. Especially when the trailers are run alongside the Wild Things movie trailers. My take on the flick is it's *only* going to appeal to furries, who will love the suave fox as a main character. Everyone else expects seamless special effects by now, and won't put up with it. I'm genuinely baffled that someone greenlit a movie with bad-B-movie-quality stop-motion in this day and age. Aardman's one thing -- they have a distinct look and an animation quality which stands up to anything else -- but this looks like someone's junior-high film class experiment with thrift-store taxidermy finds.
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
Of course, I haven't seen Hank & Mike yet:
[www.imdb.com]
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/08/09
10/09/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
Seriously. This is a post meant to be funny, not turn you on.
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/09/09
That makes me a sad panda...
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/08/09
I almost thought the teaser image was for a forthcoming StarFox movie.
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
XKCD did a strip along similar lines:
10/08/09
10/09/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/09/09
Seriously, the idea that stories with anthropomorphic animal people in them are automatically trashy and terrible is kinda like, well, the idea that stories with rockets and space aliens are automatically trashy and terrible. A lot of people still believe that, but it always wryly amuses me to see sci-fi fans trot that out with no apparent sense of irony.
And yes, I'll note for the record that I'm a furry -- in fact, I was a guest of honor at Eurofurence 2008. As shocking as you may find this, I'm not interested in "Avatar" because it's got sexy blue cat people in it, but because it's a James Friggin' Cameron movie. That it's a James Friggin' Cameron movie that does have sexy blue cat people is a good thing -- but put them in a Michael Bay movie, not so much interest.
10/08/09
But I did read it.
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/09/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
You RUINED IT!
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/08/09
10/09/09
10/09/09
10/09/09