What about it is low effort or "churned out"? It's not cynical and has an upbeat message. Incoherent? it has a clear story that is able to be figured out like YOU said yourself.
I have seen 0 evidence of it being AI as well. Everyone just says everything they don't like is AI. Another meaningless buzzword that doesn't actually address the real problem of AI and how its a genuine threat to creativity but just diminishing that because a lyric didn't sound good for you.
It's extremely low effort in a multitude of ways.
For starters, it makes zero sense to put this in the Tree of Life Theater. They are humanoid animals living in human-like cities, why would they have a theater under a giant tree? It made sense for insects, because they live there. You were actually supposed to be bug-sized and in the root system of the Tree of Life. So, right off the bat, you have an attraction that is completely out of place for its location and the structure it is within.
It's low effort because they didn't make any sort of attempt to make it fit with Animal Kingdom. This has been said ad nauseam, but I guess I'll repeat it again. Animal Kingdom is a park about real animals and the locations they inhabit. Yes, sometimes they talk, but they're still real animals and living adjacent to how real animals live. Zootopia is a movie about humanoid animals living like humans, as a stand-in for humans, to discuss human social issues. The movie actively wants you to mock and laugh at animal traits, and the show itself does this too. Anyone who has thought about DAK beyond the absolute surface level ("Animals!!!!!! DUH!!!") can see that it is inappropriate for the park.
But beyond that, it's low effort because even if they're humanoid animals, they could have talked about something related to the park, perhaps the differences in the ecosystems and habitats of the districts the different animals live in. But instead they focused on inclusion, which is fine, but better suited for other parks. It's also a bit lazy because it's a rehash of the message of the first film's message.
It's low effort because it doesn't do anything to justify being a theme park attraction. This could just as easily be a Disney+ short, whereas It's Tough to Be a Bug only works in a special effects theater setting. You're not experiencing a recreation of a live experience, you're basically just watching a short. If that makes sense? ITTBAB was a "live" stage performance and it made every effort to feel like one, while Better Zoogether is also supposed to be "live" but makes no attempt to seem like it's actually a live thing we are experiencing in real time. More on that later.
So to recap, before we even get to the content within, you have an attraction that made no real attempt to fit the location its in, the theme of the park, the message of the park, or justify its existence as a theme park attraction.
Now, the content. It's low effort because there is no logical sense of time. Judy and Nick are somehow able to get all across Zootopia within seconds. It plays out like a cartoon short where a cut to a new location would suggest a gap in time, but Better Zoogether is supposed to all be being presented "live" and in "real time".
It's low effort because it immediately discards the premise and setup. We're at a watch party, watching a livestream of drone and camera footage at the various celebrations across Zootopia. We're wearing Carrot-Vision goggles so we can see, hear, smell, and feel what the drones and cameras are picking up. Okay, fine. But that premise is almost immediately abandoned. The "camera" immediately just cuts around like any other cartoon short and is clearly not something that drones or cameras on the scene could be capturing. Judy and Nick are somehow able to see into our audience and communicate back. How? Through the drone? Why don't they at least look at the camera and not directly at Clawhauser?
It's low effort because the entire thing is just constant chaos, noise, screaming, no sense of pacing, no moments to breathe, characters talking over each other, constant camera cuts and zooms. Cut to new location, instant chaos, race to the next, instant chaos. They arrive at the concert and instantly know exactly what the danger is? I don't know, there's so much to pick apart here but it's too exhausting to watch again and comb through it. While I acknowledge that there are individual moments in the show that could have been funny and entertaining if they were given some room to breathe, those moments end up buried in the chaos.
....
I don't think I even covered all the ways it is low effort, but that's a start. Now on to why it's "cynical". It's cynical in the sense that it is was "churned out", made apparent by the reasons I just mentioned. It wasn't created because anyone actually thought this was a great attraction idea, a great fit for the park, and was inspired to make something great. No, it was created because Disney exec's wanted to push synergy and market Zootopia in the parks in the easiest, most low effort way possible.
(Let me take a moment to clarify that I know that a lot of talented people actually had to do things like art design, animation, voice acting, etc etc for the attraction and I'm not talking about them. They worked with what they had to and were required to do. I'm talking purely about the executives and whatever high-up decision makers that mandated that this attraction be made at all.)
It's cynical because the "upbeat message" is cloying, pandering, and spoon-fed to the audience. They outright state what you're supposed to take away from it. It comes off as Disney caring more about focus groups and PR than actually delivering a resonating message in a meaningful way, or having something interesting to say. The original Zootopia film didn't do it so ham-fisted, but it is here.
It's cynical because after all of that, they then try so hard to convince everyone that "no, this totally fits DAK. See?" Like sullying the meaning of the beautiful Tree of Life structure. The citizens of Zootopia carved it? Why would they carve real animals when they are humanoid animals? Not to mention that instead of it being a magical tree, it's now a defaced tree?
...
And, okay, I'm tired of typing. But that's.... that's a lot of reasons why it sucks!
