Horton Hears a Who

[dan]

I've seen a few commercials for this, and I haven't seen anything less Dr. Seuss-like in my life. Once again, Seuss's name is sullied by what looks like another shitty movie.

[actsnoblemartin]

really why?

I've seen a few commercials for this, and I haven't seen anything less Dr. Seuss-like in my life. Once again, Seuss's name is sullied by what looks like another shitty movie.

[dan]

really why?

Dr. Seuss's books have a very unique feel: between the words and the pictures, there was no doubt that you're reading a Dr. Seuss book.

Every preview I've seen for the movie has had some combination of animals getting hit in the nuts and/or head, and animals being smartasses. Just like, oh, let's see, every kids' movie that's come out in the past seven or eight years or so. If you're not going to stick to the source material (which has been beloved by children for generations), why bother doing it? See also the Jim Carrey version of The Grinch and the Michael Meyers version of Cat in the Hat.

[actsnoblemartin]

were those other two movies bad as well? I never saw them

Dr. Seuss's books have a very unique feel: between the words and the pictures, there was no doubt that you're reading a Dr. Seuss book.

Every preview I've seen for the movie has had some combination of animals getting hit in the nuts and/or head, and animals being smartasses. Just like, oh, let's see, every kids' movie that's come out in the past seven or eight years or so. If you're not going to stick to the source material (which has been beloved by children for generations), why bother doing it? See also the Jim Carrey version of The Grinch and the Michael Meyers version of Cat in the Hat.

[jackass]

Dr. Seuss's books have a very unique feel: between the words and the pictures, there was no doubt that you're reading a Dr. Seuss book.

Every preview I've seen for the movie has had some combination of animals getting hit in the nuts and/or head, and animals being smartasses. Just like, oh, let's see, every kids' movie that's come out in the past seven or eight years or so. If you're not going to stick to the source material (which has been beloved by children for generations), why bother doing it? See also the Jim Carrey version of The Grinch and the Michael Meyers version of Cat in the Hat.

HEy Dan!! We agree on something in the movie field!!

[hjmick]

Dr. Seuss is not meant for 90 minute features. They are better suited for 22 minute animated television programs.

[Hagbard Celine]

It's funny when things get hit in the nuts.

[dan]

were those other two movies bad as well? I never saw them

Well, it's not necessarily that they were bad, they were just outrageously different from the original books which were, in my opinion (and, if I may, in the general population's opinion), perfect.

The Grinch was scary, and not in a fun-scary kind of way. He ate broken glass and looked like an R-Rated movie monster.

Cat in the Hat went from being a fun, g-rated wacky thing to a very inappropriate mess with lots of borderline dirty stuff. Why ruin the original plot? Why have the Cat in the Hat leering over a picture of the kids' mom? Does this seem like Seuss-ian dialogue?....

The Cat: [showing his car] Here she is, the Super Luxurious Omnidirectional Whatchamajigger, or S-L-O-W for short.
Sally: S-L-O-W?
The Cat: Yeah, S.L.O.W. It's better than the last thing we had: Super Hydraulic Instantaneous Transporter.
Conrad: Oh, you mean...
The Cat: NO! Quick! To the S.L.O.W.!

I mean, I get wanting to make money. I get that my generation was the last one to have a wealth of good kids' movies to enjoy. But, stuff like this makes it seem like they're purposely going out of their way to S.H.I.T. all over the legacy of Seuss.

Then again, those WWII propaganda drawings didn't help his legacy much, either.

[dan]

HEy Dan!! We agree on something in the movie field!!

I've suddenly had a change of heart. I can't wait to see Horton!