This week on the podcast, the Now Conspiring team reviews The Jungle Book, Disney’s remake of the 1967 animated classic (depending on who you ask). We also talk in length about the Doctor Strange trailer, the future of superheroes in film, and a lot more.
Also, we are now on Facebook! Be sure to check out our new page so you can subscribe and leave feedback whenever your heart desires.
QUESTION OF THE WEEK: Which upcoming Disney live-action remake are you most looking forward to?
It’s no secret that Disney has had tremendous success with its live action cartoon remakes, even if they usually come at the expense of better storytelling than what’s appropriated for new takes on Alice in Wonderland, Sleeping Beauty, and Cinderella.
But The Jungle Book, a remake of the 1967 animated classic (well, classic soundtrack at least), is the first of these live-action films to rise above what came before it. It solves many of the issues fans have had with the original for years, even if it does stumble from time to time due to its own limitations.
Directed by Iron Man and Chef‘s Jon Favreau, The Jungle Book is among the most gorgeous movies in recent years, discounting computer and hand drawn animation. But it’s strength really is in how immersive its jungle is without having to computer animate the characters. Granted, the majority of The Jungle Book was made on a computer, and it was filmed thousands of miles away from any real jungle.
Based on Rudyard Kipling’s series of tales set in India (mostly Mowgli’s Brothers like the rest of these adaptations), The Jungle Book is a coming of age story about a boy named Mowgli (Neel Sethi), who was raised in the jungle by wolves and overseen by a stern, but loving, panther named Bagheera (Ben Kingsley).
Unlike past iterations, The Jungle Book fully explores the role of a “man cub” living amongst animals, as he has to familiarize himself with the politics of said society and decide once and for all where he truly belongs. At times, Mowgli is given opportunities to set himself apart for the good of the animals around him, while at other times, his mere presence causes disaster, brought on in large part by this film’s excellent new rendition of Shere Khan (Idris Elba), who will do whatever it takes to kill Mowgli before he becomes a true threat.
Like the “red flower” that defines human dominion, Mowgli has the potential for both life and destruction in this world. It’s a simplistic story, but not a thin one, in that Mowgli’s agency as a character provides ample motivation and purpose for the various creatures he meets throughout the film. Making their believability as characters (both visually and narratively) all the more impressive.
The vast majority of audiences will be enamored by the surprising depth of The Jungle Book, but it’s not a perfect film that will convert everyone. There are several scenes that feel aped (no pun intended) from other Disney stories like The Lion King. This film crosses the line from homage to ripoff by the third act.
There is also an inconsistency with how this film deals with the popular song numbers from the animated classic, which were critical to its lasting memory. Only two of them make it into the film, and only one comes off as a harmless tribute. The other is quite out of place and nearly ruins a fantastic scene featuring the well-realized King Louie as an extinct giant ape (Christopher Walken).
Thankfully, nearly everything else in The Jungle Book is extremely solid and even brilliant at times. You’ve probably never seen talking animals appear so convincing and true to life on the big screen, yet so mystical at the same time. And they’re balanced nicely by a set of valid themes that raise great questions for children, such as man’s place in nature and what it means to respect the environment, without putting them to sleep with a preachy message.
Grade: B+
Extra Credits:
I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni
Snark + Sarcasm = what you’re about to read.
I think it’s important for people to remember that Rotten Tomatoes is just one of many useful metrics for evaluating a film you want to see. When we take it too seriously, we end up arguing over arbitrary numbers and percentages, rather than the details within a movie that actually matter.
Then someone writes a terrible review for Zootopia for the sole purpose of getting some attention.
“But Jon,” you say softly, “this reviewer in question might hate Zootopia for good reasons. What’s wrong with an opinion?”
“Nothing,” I respond to you with comforting glee. In fact, there are some great pieces out there already showcasing reasonable criticisms for Zootopia that other critics (even me) have glossed over. That said, there’s one other “bad” review for this movie that makes some decent points, though it’s written by a film critic who gave Annie (2014) 3.5 stars out of 4. So, yeah, I’d take that review with a speck of a grain of salt.
The review we’re going to Snarcasm today goes beyond some of the worst reviews I’ve ever attempted to share with you all. Everything, down to even the headline, is layered in nonsense, and we’re talking Gods of Egypt-level nonsense.
And it’s probably not a coincidence that this review came several days after all of the positive write-ups for Zootopia. But that’s none of my business.
Writing for The Globe and Mail, film critic Kate Taylor writes:
Zootopia: Fun for kids, but adults may think twice about movie’s message
That’s right! Instead of being blindly accepted without a second thought, adults are actually questioning important subject matter after watching a childrens’ film! The horror!
In Disney’s new animated feature Zootopia all the animals wear clothes and walk on their hind legs.
There’s nothing to complain about here, but I do want to point out how much I miss that comma after “Zootopia.”
That makes the gazelle a particularly tall and lanky creature. A minor character, she’s a pop singer voiced by Shakira;
You’re going to kick things off with a barely tertiary character? Um, OK. That seems odd, but I guess it’s just a sentence. She’s probably about to move on to what the film’s actually about—
she sports gracefully tapering antlers with a tousled blond mane nesting fetchingly between them; she wears a miniskirt and a spangly red crop top.
Uh.
OK.
Are we done throwing adjectives at an unimportant character? It’s not like we can actually make a deranged conclusion about the film based on “tapering antlers.”
Yes, the elegant gazelle has been sexualized.
Wow. That’s…wow.
So Kate Taylor has a weird problem with animals looking like humans. Good thing she was chosen to review this movie.
Anthropomorphization is tricky territory although, God knows, Disney has lots of anodyne experience going all the way back to that cheery little mouse who first appeared in Steamboat Willie in 1928.
Kate, what are you even talking about right now? Anthropomorphization stopped being “tricky territory” at least 50 years ago. How is this your version of a hot button issue in a film about racism?!
Still, Zootopia takes the cultural practice of posing animals as human characters to queasy new heights.
So Kate is apparently uncomfortable seeing animals act like humans. I’m guessing she doesn’t have an Instagram account. Or neighbors. Or a sidewalk. Or Animal Planet. Or YouTube.
Perhaps I’m being ignorant, but it’s just bizarre to me that anyone would feel “queasy” watching something so established in our culture of entertainment. Sure, it may not be your favorite trope, but why on earth does such sanitized fiction make you uncomfortable at all?
Apparently, in the countryside, animals live in their original habitats surrounded by their own species and familiar neighbours:
That’s not “apparent.” It’s just what is.
Judy, a character cloyingly drawn with Kewpie doll eyes by the animators but firmly voiced by Ginnifer Goodwin, aspires to be a police officer and moves to Zootopia, where she is hired onto a force staffed by elephants, wolves and bears under a “mammal inclusion initiative.” In other words, she’s a girl in a man’s world.
OK, gender dynamics are somewhat parallel to what’s going on in Zootopia, but it’s strange that Kate brings this issue up instead of the obvious elephant in the room (who was a girl).
Judy is directly held back because she’s a bunny, not because she’s a woman. While it’s fair to bring up how gender discrimination is similar to what we see in Zootopia, it’s certainly not the intended focus.
The chief (a water buffalo impressively created by Idris Elba) promptly assigns her to parking duty, but she soon breaks out and teams up with a wily fox (an irrepressible performance from Jason Bateman)
Idris Elba voiced the character. He didn’t “create” it. And if you’re just saying he brought the character to life, then you should just say that. Also, I don’t think you understand what irrepressible means, because Jason Bateman’s performance here is anything but.
I don’t imagine environmentalists would approve of a movie that suggests wild animals are at their best when tamed,
This is nonsense. The animals aren’t being tamed. They tame themselves in the same way humans do in order to cultivate society. How moronic do you think environmentalists are that they wouldn’t get the difference?
The premise of Zootopia is that these creatures have evolved past the point where they need to kill each other for survival, which is a great metaphor for how human civilization has been developed. Of course animals are at their best when they’re not at each other’s throats!
but it’s the social anxieties behind Zootopia’s message of animal harmony that make me uneasy.
Good! The best movies challenge and convict us. Do you only care for movies that cater directly to your sentimentalities?
But as Zootopia busily tells the kids not to stereotype different groups and to love everybody, it creates a city in which some creatures fear that others are inherently savage.
Is this really happening? Kate, that’s the entire point of the movie. Zootopia is teaching these lessons within the context of a city where racism exists. If the city itself was perfect and free of conflict, then the message would ring completely hollow.
That’s a pretty close match for both America’s historic racism and its new Islamophobia.
Yeah, Kate. Again, that was kind of the point, but you’re phrasing it as if this is somehow a flaw, instead of just an obvious fact.
And, leaving aside amusing jokes about the wolves trying desperately to contain a group howl or sloths working as bureaucrats, animal behaviour is a troubling metaphor for cultural diversity.
So far, everything you’ve said to build up to this point runs contrary to the idea that animal behavior is a troubling metaphor for anything. You’ve specifically said not even a sentence ago that it matches American society closely. Does that mean the problem is that it’s too good of a metaphor? Because if so, your vague issue with this film doesn’t have much to do with the actual film.
Especially that weird thing about the gazelles. Are you just never going to get to that?
After all, preying on smaller or slower creatures is how many real animals eat; wolves are potentially savage and mice can’t really live happily with them.
And this is the part where everyone reading this review realizes that the critic has absolutely no interest in actually reviewing the movie. The crux of Taylor’s “uneasiness” boils down to minutiae: a barely explored aspect of the world building that has absolutely nothing to do with the actual story.
In fact, it makes more sense than not that Kate Taylor fell asleep in the first ten seconds and then woke up once in the middle and nodded off again. Because the entire first scene explains how animals evolved to the point where they didn’t need to make distinctions between prey and predator. They could just find alternate means of living in order to have harmony.
But because Kate can’t use her imagination and think of what these creatures could do otherwise, there’s something wrong with the film. Let me try to imagine how Kate could have such a bizarre understanding of this movie….Nope, nothing.
And how much animal harmony does the sprawling Zootopia team of multiple directors and writers really envisage?
Really? You couldn’t just say “envision?”
Oh, and to answer your question, a lot. Like that’s the entire point of that 5 minute opening sequence where we watch how all of these animals live in disparate sectors of the city, along with pretty much everything else from that point forward.
In fact, it’s clear to everyone but those of you who were sleeping that the directors and writers spent countless hours making this world come to life in a way that represents a united city of animals that was made by animals.
It was only when the sexy gazelle appeared in a final image of the animal kingdom united in song that I noted the very few couples in the film – Judy’s bunny parents and an otter whose husband has gone missing – and began to wonder about the deepening friendship between Judy the female bunny and Nick the male fox. But let’s not go there.
Yeah, what a terrible movie! Instead of needlessly focusing on a forced romance, it gave us a story that was good enough to stand on its own with characters who had enough believable chemistry to sidestep a boring love dynamic!
What a nightmare!
To be fair, I’m not entirely sure that’s what Kate is getting at, but at this point, I have no idea what she’s even rambling about.
Highly familiar with the pluralist message that Zootopia delivers, the children for whom the film is largely intended are unlikely to be troubled by anything they see here.
Those pedestrian children are so pedestrian, you see.
Thinking parents, however, may think twice.
In other words, “Only smart people like me understand how “bad” this movie is. And if you don’t agree, you’re a CHILD!”
Guys, this has to be the worst professional film review I’ve read since…perhaps ever. There’s no real analysis here, just a few lopsided assertions that don’t even strengthen her premise. She ignores the visuals, the characters, the writing, and pretty much anything about this movie that would inform her readers whether or not it’s worth their time.
She talks more about the gazelle with two lines of dialogue than the main characters. And when she does bring up the main characters, she complains (I guess?) that they aren’t in a relationship.
Instead of actually reviewing Zootopia, she digs on one bizarre hangup she has that doesn’t even slight the movie, mostly because she barely explains why anything she mentions is a real flaw. She just cites another example that reads more like an adjective-filled soundbite and then moves on.
This is not a review. It’s barely even a rant. It’s just a lazy, incoherent opinion with a grade at the bottom.
In last week’s podcast, my cohosts and I discussed which recent Disney movie is the best, and I’ve gotten a lot of questions about my decision, Wreck-It Ralph, since. In an effort to make my case, here’s why the movie transcends many of its peers by the same studio.
Legendary animator Glen Keane was the original mind behind the story of Tangled, about 14 years before it was actually released.
At this point, it was still called Rapunzel, and what was about to be Disney’s first computer animated fairy tale was shut down before being rebirthed by Disney’s new hire, John Lasseter, who triumphantly returned as their chief creative officer after being fired decades earlier. The rest, including Tangled‘s massive success despite being the most expensive animated film ever made, is history.
With Tangled, Disney learned that a big gamble could pay off as long as the right creative minds were in charge of the vision. And that’s probably why they went ahead with their next risky release, Wreck-It Ralph, an animated video game movie that Disney had been trying to get off the ground since the late 80s (it was originally called Joe Jump, and then Reboot Ralph).
In fact, if any comparisons are to be made between Wreck-It Ralph and Toy Story, one can reasonably argue that this is because the concept for both films was being formulated at around the same time. It just took Wreck-It Ralph, a film about what video game characters in an arcade are doing when humans aren’t around, well over a decade to be released.
The comparisons between Wreck-It Ralph and Pixar don’t end there, as it is certainly the closest Walt Disney Animation (the studio) has ever come to delivering a computer animated movie that rivals its most prestigious studio. In fact, it’s not outrageous to say that Wreck-It Ralph surpasses some of the best animated movies in all of Disney’s pantheon.
There’s a lot to be said about how enticing the idea is that our video games (much like our toys) have worlds of their own, the way we like to imagine them. What Wreck-It Ralph does with this concept is dense, as it focuses on the inner turmoil and outer exploits of a villain programmed to be a villain, rather than the flawed hero archetype Pixar has done so well exploring with their Toy Story franchise.
Warning: spoilers for Wreck-It Ralph follow.
In a way, Ralph himself is not a villain, really. He’s nothing more than code, and the film goes out of its way to promote the concept of a “Code” that dictates much of what is out of our control. In Ralph’s case, he’s a video game villain who gets no respect (or love for that matter) from the denizens within his very own game. It’s only when he attempts a pilgrimage outside of his narrow limitations that he’s able to find a kindred spirit in a “glitch” character named Vanellope, who is also ostracized for reasons beyond her own actions.
The two of them eventually learn to live with their inherent burdens without having to escape their responsibilities, a very practical lesson for children and especially young adults confused by the collateral damage that comes with wanderlust. Rather than abandon the people who rely on you, Disney propositions that maturity and respect come from a healthy understanding of who you are in the world.
That doesn’t mean you can’t change your circumstances — Ralph certainly does this in the end by fulfilling his duties without being hated by everyone. But it does mean that your preconceived solution to problems like discontentment and loneliness may be terribly incorrect.
For Ralph, the solution to his problem wasn’t to earn someone else’s medal, it was to understand that being a villain doesn’t have to mean that people will hate him for doing his job. Vanellope assumed that winning the race would solve her problems, but it was revealed that she was, in fact, a victim of a much larger threat. Disney’s parallels here illustrate how some people are “losers” (which I don’t mean in a nerdy connotation), while others have more liberty to change their life for the better as winners. There’s no easy solution to fractured environments, but more often than not, it comes down to liking who you are in spite of how others see you
This is a tricky message, and one of Disney’s boldest, simply because it’s easy to misread the message as approval in the idea that people are free to do what they want recklessly, despite how this behavior turns out badly for Ralph. At the same time, everything works out for Ralph and his friends because he initially made mistakes, putting forth another message that bad things with good intentions can sometimes have good consequences (a clever parallel for the movie’s plot).
All of this gets to the heart of why Wreck-It Ralph is one of Disney’s most powerful films yet, but it’s accompanied by the same masterful production value that comes with the brand. It’s visually gorgeous. The action is quick and memorable. But its most impressive feat might be how well every subplot is tied together with the main story without losing the viewer’s attention. When everything comes together in Wreck-It Ralph, not a single character, detail, or even joke seems wasted.
And of course the movie is a treasure trove for video game lovers, years before Pixels would attempt the same nostalgia trick. Wreck-It Ralph graciously keeps the attention off of these jokes and references, however, in order to preserve the strength of the core characters.
Little touches throughout the movie contribute even more to the overall quality of the film. It’s amusing (and welcome) to see a young girl playing the violent Hero’s Duty while two boys aggressively fight over playing Sugar Rush. It’s a subtle reminder that some stereotypes certainly exist, and others exist to be defied. There’s nothing wrong with a young girl wearing pink, and the same goes for that girl also wanting to play a first person shooter. It coincides nicely with Vanellope stating she’d rather be a president than a princess.
Wouldn’t we all?
Grade: A
Wreck-It Ralph is one of my favorite Disney movies, and I enjoy how its spiritual successor, Zootopia, pushes this type of meaningful storytelling forward with similar thoughts on racism and bigotry. Frozen, too, upends a lot of superficial tropes, though that movie’s true strength comes in the trappings, not the actual gift.
For that reason, Wreck-It Ralph is Disney’s best computer animated film yet, and that probably won’t change anytime soon. Unless the upcoming sequel is somehow even better.
Do you have an unpopular opinion you want challenged? Let me know and I’ll take it on in a future Unopinionated article.
I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni
This week on the Now Conspiring podcast, we review Zootopia and chat about our favorite modern Disney movies. We also dish on the new Ghostbusters trailer, the new Finding Dory trailer, and how film critics get a bad rap.
QUESTION OF THE WEEK: What is the best recent Disney movie (starting with Meet the Robinsons)?
Unlike the scores of other animated movies starring talking animals with clothes, Zootopia opens with a lengthy explanation for why the creatures of their world are “evolved” enough to stand upright and build cities. And it’s at this point that the predator vs. prey racial dynamics are introduced, setting the tone for what is mostly a two-note movie about how bigotry and tribalism can manifest when we work to “be anything we want.”
The hero for this adventure is Judy Hopps (voiced perfectly by Ginnifer Goodwin), a small bunny from the boroughs who dares to have a job mostly held by larger mammals and predators (for the sake of keeping things simple, the movie only features mammals).
That job is being a police officer in Zootopia, which is this world’s “big city” filled with hopes and dreams for animals of all shapes and sizes, or so it’s advertised. One of the unique flavors of this animated movie about culture relations is how these animals actually live amongst each other. Each part of the city is geared toward a different environment suited for different species, and we observe the implications of each location throughout the running time.
Often, these shared spaces bring about their own baggage for the creatures of Zootopia, and it’s no different for the first bunny to become a police officer. Judy Hopps passes at the top of her class, yet her family still worries she won’t be able to coexist with predators in such a dangerous environment.
For the first half of Zootopia, subtle details like Judy’s unwillingness then willingness to carry around fox-repellent to protect herself illuminate some of the subtle prejudice sprinkled throughout. Only to come about in an unexpected twist that says something meaningful about the very tropes Disney has championed for decades.
Much of the movie centers around Judy’s reluctant friendship with a hustling fox (voiced by Jason Bateman) who helps her track down creatures going missing throughout Zootopia. Their teamwork is probably the most genuine chemistry we get in the first half of Zootopia, as their values are mismatched — though not exaggerated — enough to provide some bits for clever comedy. And ultimately, their relationship is what elevates the movie to being a must-see.
That said, the film suffers a few lingering flaws, such as a simplified resolution to the disappearing cases and some worn gags and dialogue that borrow a little too liberally from buddy copy movies, Chinatown, and The Godfather. But for the first time in years, it seems Disney is comfortable creating inside jokes for its movies, poking fun at Frozen on multiple occasions, as well as some of its other movies dressed up as animals.
Further, Zootopia has more of an imagination than any of the other recent Disney computer animated movies, even Big Hero 6. This is one of Disney’s most carefully considered and beautifully detailed worlds ever, as Zootopia itself actually feels like a world designed by animals.
Despite some of its weak points, Zootopia delivers a solid punch in the final act that will resonate with both adults and children. It will undoubtedly start helpful conversations among families concerning the prejudice and bigotry that coincidentally occurs between the police and civilians of America, for instance. But beyond all the messages and preachiness of Zootopia, there’s a sincere cast of characters who make these challenging themes come to life in the best way possible.
Grade: A-
Extra Credits
I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni
Welcome to No More Questions, where I ask the stars you know and love everything you want to know and love.
This week, Ginnifer Goodwin was kind enough to forget to fire her publicist for letting me get her personal phone number in order to mass text her enough times to land this interview.
Lending her vocal talents to the upcoming Disney animated movie, Zootopia, Ginnifer spills the beans on bunnies, rabbits, hares, and the differences between them that shape our existential moralities.
Just kidding! We talk about Josh Dallas a lot.
*Note: No More Questions is satire. It does not reflect the actual views of Ginnifer Goodwin, Jon Negroni, or anyone else mentioned in this interview. Some of the content in this interview comes from actual quotes by Ginnifer in other interviews. Seriously.
JN: Hi Ginevra. How do you react when people confuse you with Bonnie Wright, the actress who played Ginny Weasly in the Harry Potter films?
GG: Well, I don’t go by Ginny, so that’s an odd question. And her name is Ginevra, but mine’s Ginnifer (laughs, sort of). What’s going on right now?
JN: I can’t speak for readers at home, but we’re all sort of wondering why you changed your name from “Jennifer.”
GG: (squints) It’s not a secret. I changed it to match the dialect of “Ginnifer.” Anyway, I’d love to talk about my character in Zootopia—
JN: (SINGS) this is utooooopia, let’s make a brand new start.
GG: Is…is that the theme song from that reality show, Utopia?
JN: You play a bunny police officer with hundreds of brothers and sisters. Yet you’re the center of your parents’ attention to the point where they leave them unattended during the entirety of your school play. Do you feel guilty for this level of narcissism?
GG: Who, me? Or the character?
JN: Let’s say both.
GG: Judy’s parents love all their children equally, first of all. And it’s funny you bring up Judy being the main character, because not many people realize that originally, Nick the fox was the protagonist while I played more of a sidekick.
JN: Until you pushed him aside so you could wax your ego.
GG: No! Disney realized that this version of the movie was too bleak, so they repurposed the story.
JN: OK, but what did you do to Jason Bateman that nearly got him fired from the gig?
GG: I really shouldn’t say.
JN: You can just whisper it to me, and I won’t put it in.
GG: (thinks for a second) No…no, let’s not do that.
JN: How do you respond to the people who think Zootopia is the worst movie of all time?
GG: Well, I haven’t heard anyone say that. What’s great about the movie is how it has so many themes. And some of these themes contradict each other in amazing ways.
JN: Sort of how you’ve been contradicting yourself during this entire interview.
GG: Just like that! (Laughs and tries to get me to laugh as well, but I don’t) And I can’t wait for a sequel.
JN: Sure, lots of people are engaging in sequel talk, only for a different Ginnifer Goodwin movie.
GG: What?
JN: Sure, yeah. The He’s Just Not That Into You follow up where you’re the one the dude just isn’t that into. Well, I guess that means it’s about the same as the last one.
GG: (glances at publicist) You didn’t tell him to avoid a bringing that up?!
(Indiscernible dialogue)
GG: You’re fired again.
JN: Do you think people like you more now that you have blonde hair?
GG: (Eyes bulge and roll around) I think Judy is like a half-glass-full kind of bunny. Sort of like me.
JN: But the dye you used wasn’t half-full, for sure.
GG: It’s all about teamwork. Judy learns this lesson throughout Zootopia.
JN: You’re ignoring me more than your daughter in Once Upon a Time.
GG: Look, it’s not my fault that the evil queen forced Emma away from me and—
JN: Ginny…
GG: What.
JN: You’re ginsplaining again.
GG: What.
JN: It’s how we refer to your personality on social media platforms. When you start going off on fictional tangents, we say you’re ginsplaining. It used to be called jensplaining, but…
GG: Anyway, Zootopia is great because it’s as much of an adventure film as it is a comedy, and at the same time I cried when I read the script.
JN: So Zootopia has no focus? Why would you say something negative about the movie you’re promoting?
GG: I’m not—
JN: Ginsplaining?
GG: (silence)
JN: Why don’t we see any reptiles or birds in Zootopia, a movie about diversity?
GG: Well, maybe in a future film—
JN: You’ll kick the can down the road Oscars-style, huh?
GG: There’s a lot of opportunity in how—
JN: And what about bugs?
GG: I don’t—
JN: What will these animals eat if they can’t eat each other? Or bugs?
GG: I think A Bug’s Life paints a good picture of how—
JN: What’s it like dating a co-star on set?
GG: Oh, thank goodness, a real question. Josh and I fell in love in 2011.
JN: Before you changed your name…
GG: No, I was Ginnifer at this point.
JN: Does Josh know…
GG: Well, it’s not that important.
JN: How would you feel if you found out he was Josh Peck this entire time?
GG: I’d be horrified.
JN: Look, as an extra on Full House, I know something about dating your co-star.
GG: You dated one of the Olsen twins?
JN: Well, not one of them. Who’s conducting this interview?
GG: This isn’t an interview.
JN: That’s the most honest thing you’ve said all day. Well, that’s all the time we have with Jennifer Goodwin. Thank you so much for being on the show, and don’t forget to watch Zootopia at some point!
GG: Who are you talking to?
Zootopia opens worldwide on March 4, 2016.
I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni