The Lorax

THE LORAX

Director : Chris Renauld

Year : 2012

Genre : Animation

Rating : **

 

In 1971, Theodor Geisel (better known as Dr. Seuss) wrote 'The Lorax', a short story about a small furry creature called the Lorax who is the guardian of the forest who 'speaks for the trees', protesting against logging and protecting the environment from evil land developers. Many of Dr. Suess' stories had a political subtext, but none showed it so overtly as 'The Lorax', which proudly showed Geisel's thoughts and feelings about the state of America and the wanton destruction of the planet. Using a memorable and child - friendly central character as well utilising a viewpoint that was at the heart of a nation, 'The Lorax' became a huge success and went on to become one of  Geisel's most successful stories. However, just like other Seuss classics such as 'How The Grinch Stole Christmas', 'The Cat In The Hat' and 'Horton Hears A Who', 'The Lorax' has now been made into a commercial Hollywood movie and in the process, all of the subtext and political message of the book has been extinguished to make way for juvenile humour, boring animation conventions and tedious stereotypes that have now unfortunately become the norm for standard children's entertainment.  

'The Lorax' tells the story of a young boy who lives in the town of Thneedville, in which everything is plastic and not a hint of greenery exists: trees are inflatable and flowers are illuminated with LED lights. One day, he discovers a door out of Thneedville and ventures into the 'real' world, from which all trees are gone and not a hint of natures beauty exists. On his travels, he meets a mysterious figure called the 'Once - ler' who tells the story of why and how the world was harvested of all plant life. We then follow the story that he tells and the subsequent endeavours of this inquisitive young boy to bring back plants and trees to Thneedville.

I am a huge fan of Dr. Seuss' literary work and therefore I am opposed to any adaptations that destroys or does not acknowledge the deep and profound messages that he was trying to convey in his work. The genius of Theodor Geisel was that he was able to make his work both entertaining and educational to both children and adults simultaneously while at the same time, telling stories that had a meaningful and thought - provoking subtext. 'How The Grinch Stole Christmas!' is possibly Seuss's best known work; exploring the world of consumerism and commercialisation through the use of a mean - spirited, green monster who falls in love with the holiday upon learning that owning things and buying expensive goods is not the true meaning of Christmas.

In 1966, Chuck Jones directed an animated adaptation of 'How The Grinch Stole Christmas' to wide critical acclaim. With Boris Karloff as the narrator and the voice of the Grinch and with Jones' trademark animation style, the film has now become a firm festive favourite which is watched every year by millions (including myself). In 2000, Ron Howard directed a live - action adaptation of the same book. Starring Jim Carrey and narrated by Anthony Hopkins, 'How The Grinch Stole Christmas!' threw all of the political subtext out of the window, to make way for surreal imagery, pointless toilet humour and lengthy scenes of irrelevant narrative. While critically derided, the movie became a box office smash and became the biggest grossing Christmas movie ever released. Unlike the 1966 adaptation, the film does not explore the commercialism of the season in any way, giving the Grinch a stupid backstory (which is not mentioned in the book) to explain his mean behaviour and to pad out a 15 minute long story to an hour and a half movie. Though 'How The Grinch Stole Christmas' was not praised by critics, producers saw an easy formula that could be repeated over and over again; take a great Seuss story, grab a famous comedian who hasn't worked in a while and throw random images at the screen for 90 minutes. Thus was born 'The Cat In The Hat', one of the worst movies my eyes have had to endure. Starring Mike Myers and directed by visual designer Bo Welch, 'The Cat In The Hat' takes Dr. Seuss' most beloved character and dilutes it with crazy surrealistic and pointless images, low level humour and bizarre plot developments. While it may have worked for 'How The Grinch Stole Christmas!', the formula most certainly didn't work for 'The Cat In The Hat' and as a result took a hit both critically and at the box office.

Realising that live action was not the way to adequately film the stories of Dr. Seuss, directors soon turned to the art of animation and in 2007 'Horton Hears A Who' was released. With the voice talents of Jim Carrey and Steve Carell, the movie fared well at the box office and soon talk of an adaptation of 'The Lorax' was commissioned. Word got out that Danny DeVito was onboard to voice the eponymous Lorax and my hopes were set high for this adaptation of the Seuss classic. Maybe Hollywood had learnt the error of it's ways and would bring the subtext back to forefront, rather than lobotomising the material to make way for surreal and psychedelic imagery. However soon enough,  a trailer followed and the same random nature that made other Seuss adaptations such as 'Horton Hears A Who' or 'The Cat In The Hat' such headache inducing experiences became apparent once again. My hopes were dashed and my high expectations were soon turned diminished to a nub. Sadly, the movie failed to reach even the tip of this tiny nub at all and while my head and eyes survived the ordeal, I'm not sure that my sanity did.

While the animation is perfectly fine and standard, the visual aesthetics are nothing special. 2012 didn't prove to be a particularly remarkable year for animation, with such disappointments as 'Brave', 'Ice Age 4 : The Meltdown' and 'Madagascar 3 : Europe's Most Wanted'. Stop motion proved to be the pinnacle of the animation format with films such as 'The Pirates In An Adventure With Scientists', 'Paranorman' and 'Frankenweenie' blowing all CGI competition out of the water in terms of both narrative and originality. 'The Lorax' uses the illustrations from the story as a blueprint for the visuals of the film and many of the main set pieces do resemble the pages of the book. The annoyance comes in the use of typical animation tropes that have made watching CGI animations so painfully dull. The use of over animation on characters, singing anthropomorphic animals and a soundtrack full of recent pop hits add up to a very conventional, boring affair with no depth, character development or drive.

The voice cast is nothing special with Danny DeVito being the stand out. The rest of the cast include Zac Efron, Ed Helms, Taylor Swift, Rob Riggle and Betty White; voices which are not recognisable or captivating and as a result, 'The Lorax' has no characters which are memorable or interesting in the slightest. When a movie has no characters to identify or connect with, something is really wrong. I can't imagine children are going to find the characters interesting either, possibly explaining the directors insistense on the overuse of bizarre animation and random imagery to keep the kids' attention.

While the movie isn't god awful like 'The Cat In The Hat', 'The Lorax' is very unremarkable. Nothing remotely stands out or even captivates. Maybe the stories of Dr. Suess should just stay on the page rather than the silver screen. The government is saying that kids should be reading more, but why when classics are going to be made into second rate movies? If we want our children to be more literate, we should avoid these movie adaptations that have none of the power or majesty of the original books. Only then can children truly appreciate literature and good story telling.

You will enjoy this if you liked : How The Grinch Stole Christmas & Despicable Me