Anyone can be anything

"Zootopia: A place where anyone can be anything" to start off, is by itself a very powerful quote - targetted towards the real world, where there are multitudes of constraints and restriction for a person to be whatever they want to be. It is thought of as a Utopia in various lights - it envisions a place where predators and prey live in harmony - a place where there are virtually a huge number of opportunities available to anyone regardless of who they are - it is a place that is welcoming to any species of animals; and has eco-systems to account for the 'home-like' feel that it can provide - thus symbolising unity in diversity. To what is thought of as such a Utopia, however, there is a dystopic side.  This dystopia stems from the fact that, Utopias are extremely subjective. What for one may be a Utopia, needn't necessarily be so for another. This is what we see, scattered throughout the movie. Say for example, even though the Utopia is a place where predators and prey live in harmony, and that there is an opportunity everywhere for everyone - it did not stop the predators from stereotyping the prey in certain aspects - attributing their mockery towards the DNA of the prey. The same works the other way too. Some instances from the movie would be 

"The bunny is going to get eaten alive" (Calwhauser, when Judy goes to work for her first day) "Didn't forget. Just don't care" (Chief Bogo, on Judy's first day of work)
and so much more. We could see the same sterio-typing happening the other way around too
"We reserve the right to reserve service to anyone" (The elephant at the ice cream store denying the request of a fox, just because he is, a fox.) 
(paraphrased) "It is a trait in their DNA, to go savage.." (Judy Hopps at the press conference).
It is this Stereotypical issues that arose from Subjectivity - that then led the Utopia to crumble into a dystopia that went against everything that Zootopia once stood for. (Asst.) Mayor Bellweather was not ready to accept the existing definition of the Utopia - she wanted her own version of the Utopia to be practiced - Zootopia as a place where the prey rose over the predators, and then ruled them (in contrast to the world before Zootopia, where the prey lived in constant fear of the predator) Even though this is indeed a Utopia for all the prey, it became a dystopia for the predators - a place where they can no longer act freely, or even move around in public freely - living in the constant fear of going savage. It also became a dystopia to Judy Hopps (a meek prey), because it went against everything she has ever thought of about Zootopia as a kid - the dreams that actually made her come to Zootopia in the first place. 
Thus, in essence, we can, in some sense establish that there are good and bad versions of Utopia, but only in a comparative sense. In our case as compared to a Utopia where prey ruled over the predators,  the Utopia where predators and prey live together in harmony (which by extension can encapsulate a huge variety of species, living together without dispute - Where there is no one to rule others. Every species is treated as equal) seems really better. All of this, However, allude to the fact that good and bad utopias are only comparative in nature, because to a lamb, born seven generations later, if Bellweather had had her way, a place where the prey ruled over the predators would seem like a really good Utopia because they did not have to live in constant fear of the predators anymore (Like their ancestors once did).