Okay, so I haven’t seem very many 2012 films yet, so the
rankings for the few I have seem are a bit clumped right now. However, The Lorax’s third place
ranking (at the time of this post... which was more accurately known as LAST PLACE) is merited, at least in the
company of the other two films I have seen this year. That said, I am pretty sure Salmon
Fishing in The Yemen and The Hunger Games will maintain
fairly high rankings, probably Top 25 or so…while I am confident The
Lorax will fall like a brink.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I don’t think The Lorax will stay in
last place… however by December, I am sure it will have a nice home in the mid
to low range of my dynamic list for 2012.
I just don’t know where to begin. It’s not a horrible movie. It’s a perfectly fine children’s movie. However… I just… erg… sigh.
Listen folks. The
problem with adapting Dr. Seuss is that there just isn’t enough source material
to fill a feature length film, forcing filmmakers to stretch and add
filler. Sometimes the filler works. Sometimes
it doesn't.
In Ron Howard’s version of How the Grinch Stole Christmas,
the filler, in the form of the Grinch’s back-story and Jim Carrey antics,
worked. It totally worked. And the reason it worked is that it stayed
true to the endearing story and complimented the source material.
However… The Cat in the Hat did not
work. Sorry, Mike Myers, but it didn’t. Honestly, there is no excuse for this movie
because The Cat appears in so many of Dr. Seuss’ books and there is PLENTY of
source material. However, this film
seemed to rely solely on potty humor and Alec Baldwin’s bizarre side plot. There is nothing sweet or redeeming about
this film.
On the other hand, Horton Hears a Who!, the third full
length adaptation of a Dr. Seuss book totally worked and it is by far the best feature
length version of Seuss. Honestly, I
know there is filler in this film, however it is so subtle and so perfectly
meshed with the original story that it is almost impossible to see where the
filmmakers departed from the source material.
I could be wrong, but I don’t even think they added anything. I think the merely expanded what the book
already offered without making too many radical thematic shifts. And they didn’t even borrow from Horton
Hatches the Egg like Broadway did with Suessical, The Musical in
an effort to expand the tale of Horton.
And now we have the fourth full length Suess adaptation: The
Lorax. Made by the same
animation studio that made Horton… however they missed the mark
by neglecting to compliment the source material. Sure, the basic story of The Lorax existed…
reimagined quite a bit, but it existed. However,
the source material played a very minor role in the overall movie. And while I understand what the filmmakers
were trying to accomplish by centering the story around the boy who wants to
hear the story of what happened to the trees, rather than the Onceler or The
Lorax… it didn’t work for me. It could
have… but it didn’t. Mainly because the
futuristic plastic city where the boy lives felt more like a poorly made
version of Meet the Robinsons and Robots. It didn’t feel original. And like the mistake made by The
Cat in the Hat, this adaptation of The Lorax seemed to put more focus
on plot points of its own invention rather than the beauty of the book that
inspired it. As I said before, I
understand what the filmmakers were trying to accomplish, it just didn’t work.
I guess my point is this.
I have all of the Dr. Seuss animated television specials produced by
MGM. And when it comes to watching The
Lorax I think we’re going to stick with the 1966 television
version.
No comments:
Post a Comment