>>89005786The message of the film is don't base an assumption as your main perspective on a certain type of person. Example, predators have a predisposition to violence based on ancient history and their biological nature.
The problems I have are two mainly:
1) The flora they used, the blue stuff, it did cause a reaction, so there is the possibility of the predators reverting to be more animal. Did they turn prey into animals as well? Regardless of the answer, yes/no, they have this nature in them that can be brought out
2) Bellwether is shown as a cute sheep that is revealed to be the villain. This is meant to be a pull under the rugs, but they cheated in this moral message. The other girl goat, the girl in the beginning in the play, looks just like Bellwether, but the male sheep, the ones preparing the blue flora have those fucked up sideways eyes that are not cute at all. The cute girl sheep wasn't suppose to be cute looking, but if they didn't cheat to make her relate able and likable, she would have immediately been see as ugly, untrustworthy. Her revelation as the villain would have solidified any predispositions we may have had.
So the movie should have been the opposite to what is set out to be: Be cautious around people, because they may be dangerous and don't seem like what they look like.
