The problem is that the stereotype is so ingrained, just saying "I don't fursuit" isn't enough. To non-furries, a furry saying "I don't fursuit" doesn't mean "I don't fursuit", it means "I'm not fursuiting NOW."
That's what the guy in your review is saying; he sees a bunch of furries in suits, then the same furries out, and when the only guy who doesn't have a suit shows up, he just assumes he's not in his suit at the moment. Now, this is an older belief instilled in this reviewer long before he saw this documentary, but the documentary did nothing to dissuade him, and also reinforced his belief.
There's nothing wrong with fursuiting; but when it's a non-furries' baseline idea for what furries do and I'm trying to explain my idea for a furry movie to a non-furry, I don't appreciate having to explain that over and over and over and over that it doesn't involve fursuiting and yet another documentary obsessing with fursuits isn't helping me, okay?
Now, Patch, on top of that, asking anyone to pitch another furry documentary as the only valid response to this documentary is unfair; first of all, as I've already pointed out, I (and most other furries) can't afford that. On top of that, we haven't gone to film school, so, even if we could afford to shoot our movie, it would suck, because we don't know what we're doing. So, to make my documentary, I would first have to go into debt to attend film school to gain the training required to come to the level of this film, followed by going into debt to get my film made, and, oh, by the way, I will actually not be able to recoup that expense using the actual documentary I made, because, you may have noticed, Patch, but there's already a furry documentary out there, and I don't think the market on furry documentaries is so huge that it can afford two competing documentaries, and the buyers have already got the one. Maybe by the time I finish film school, a spot'll open up, but by then, will anyone actually care about a response to a years old direct-to-VOD documentary?
I guess I'll finally get around to answering which is more worthy of a documentary; you asked me earlier which is more worthy of celebration, the furry fandom or people who like Disney movies, in connection with Zootopia. And here's the funny part, Patch, is that the answer is, of course, neither! I want to see how the movie got made, and guess what, I was in luck! That documentary also got made, and I happily watched it (it's been made private on YouTube, so you're screwed, though), because it was about a group of people doing something. And I'd like to point out this is how I presented it in the Newsbytes for April:
See, I'm an "anthropomorphic animal" fan. So that's my movie pitch; not a documentary about a group of not-anthropomorphic animals. Not a movie about fictionalized versions of those same not-anthropomorphic animals. But a movie about anthropomorphic animals. If I had the money and the training, I still wouldn't make a documentary explaining what "furry" is to me; I'd make furry and when people asked me what "furry" was, I'd point to it and say that.
The problem is that the stereotype is so ingrained, just saying "I don't fursuit" isn't enough. To non-furries, a furry saying "I don't fursuit" doesn't mean "I don't fursuit", it means "I'm not fursuiting NOW."
That's what the guy in your review is saying; he sees a bunch of furries in suits, then the same furries out, and when the only guy who doesn't have a suit shows up, he just assumes he's not in his suit at the moment. Now, this is an older belief instilled in this reviewer long before he saw this documentary, but the documentary did nothing to dissuade him, and also reinforced his belief.
There's nothing wrong with fursuiting; but when it's a non-furries' baseline idea for what furries do and I'm trying to explain my idea for a furry movie to a non-furry, I don't appreciate having to explain that over and over and over and over that it doesn't involve fursuiting and yet another documentary obsessing with fursuits isn't helping me, okay?
Now, Patch, on top of that, asking anyone to pitch another furry documentary as the only valid response to this documentary is unfair; first of all, as I've already pointed out, I (and most other furries) can't afford that. On top of that, we haven't gone to film school, so, even if we could afford to shoot our movie, it would suck, because we don't know what we're doing. So, to make my documentary, I would first have to go into debt to attend film school to gain the training required to come to the level of this film, followed by going into debt to get my film made, and, oh, by the way, I will actually not be able to recoup that expense using the actual documentary I made, because, you may have noticed, Patch, but there's already a furry documentary out there, and I don't think the market on furry documentaries is so huge that it can afford two competing documentaries, and the buyers have already got the one. Maybe by the time I finish film school, a spot'll open up, but by then, will anyone actually care about a response to a years old direct-to-VOD documentary?
I guess I'll finally get around to answering which is more worthy of a documentary; you asked me earlier which is more worthy of celebration, the furry fandom or people who like Disney movies, in connection with Zootopia. And here's the funny part, Patch, is that the answer is, of course, neither! I want to see how the movie got made, and guess what, I was in luck! That documentary also got made, and I happily watched it (it's been made private on YouTube, so you're screwed, though), because it was about a group of people doing something. And I'd like to point out this is how I presented it in the Newsbytes for April:
Wow! Just straight reporting the facts! No "one of the top furry news stories of the year." No "Making of Zootopia documentary beats Fursonas as most important furry documentary." And don't think I wasn't tempted. I never even gave it its own story. Because it was fun to see "how" Zootopia got made, but you know what, it was funner to see Zootopia.
See, I'm an "anthropomorphic animal" fan. So that's my movie pitch; not a documentary about a group of not-anthropomorphic animals. Not a movie about fictionalized versions of those same not-anthropomorphic animals. But a movie about anthropomorphic animals. If I had the money and the training, I still wouldn't make a documentary explaining what "furry" is to me; I'd make furry and when people asked me what "furry" was, I'd point to it and say that.