Eric D. Snider

The Lorax

Movie Review

The Lorax

by Eric D. Snider

Grade: C+

Released: March 2, 2012


Directed by:


It was only after seeing the new animated version of "The Lorax," and being disappointed by it, that I went back and re-read the Dr. Seuss book it's based on. I think my disappointment would have been greater if the book had been fresh in my mind when I saw the film. Having only dim memories of it prevented me from realizing, in the moment, just how untrue to its spirit the movie really is.

The good doctor's 1971 original, while peppered with Seussian language and told in rhyme, is bleak. The world is gray and deforested, choking to death on smog, all the animals gone. The brief story doesn't end with someone fixing things and everyone living happily ever after: it ends with the hope that renewed efforts will one day make things right again. There's no assurance it will actually happen. Simple and unadorned, the story has a haunting, somber effect.

Compare that to the movie -- a merry, song-filled, candy-colored thing that's as hollow as a cheap chocolate bunny. Writers Ken Daurio and Cinco Paul (who did a much better job with "Horton Hears a Who") got rid of 99 percent of the rhyming and every Seussian word other than "Lorax," "Once-ler," "Truffula," and "Thneed," yet somehow rendered the story less serious, not more. What was once a straightforward and uncluttered narrative is now padded with backstory, subplots, and diversions, all necessitated by the desire to stretch an 1800-word story into a feature-length movie. The book left no doubt that Dr. Seuss took the message seriously. The film leaves no doubt that the principal motivating factor was a desire to convert Seuss' books into money, and that "The Lorax" just happened to be next on the list.

We open in Thneedville, a synthetic metropolis where only the oldest citizens can recall a time when trees existed. The absence of plant life seems to have had no ill effect on the city; indeed, everyone is healthy and happy. A boy named Ted (voice of Zac Efron), desiring to woo the lovely Audrey (Taylor Swift), who has an affinity for extinct flora, sets out to learn what happened to the trees -- and, if possible, to get one. So that Audrey will like him. Yes, the chain of events that brings plant life back to the world is set in motion not because the world needs plants, but because a boy wants to impress a girl. Better to do the right thing for the wrong reason than not to do it at all, I guess.

Ted's grandma (Betty White, obviously) tells him to venture outside the city to the wastelands and ask the Once-ler where the trees went. The Once-ler (Ed Helms), a shack-dwelling hermit, reveals all in the form of flashbacks that basically follow the tale you're familiar with. He set out as a young man to make his fortune, chopped down trees to make a product called Thneeds, sold a zillion of them, and in the process used up every last tree in the country, the fool. He did all of this despite warnings from the Lorax (Danny DeVito), a potato-shaped sprite who speaks for the trees and other voiceless creatures.

In filling out the details of the story, the writers and director Chris Renaud ("Despicable Me") inject a lot of forced whimsy. When the Lorax and some animals sneak into the Once-ler's house late at night, we hear the "Mission: Impossible" music. There's some glib satire about a greedy industrialist (Rob Riggle) selling air to the citizens of Thneedville. Meanwhile, the film eliminates most of the whimsy that was already there, discarding fanciful animal names like Bar-ba-loots and Swomee-Swans and calling them plain old bears and birds.

All of that being said: yeah, the movie is cute. It has a few laughs and is not generally annoying. It's only disappointing in comparison to its source material, and in comparison to what it could have been; by itself, it's worthy of a shrug and a pat on the head, no more, no less.

Grade: C+

Rated PG, mild rude humor

1 hr., 26 min.

Stumble It!

This item has 6 comments

  1. Rebecca says:

    This is exactly what I expected when I saw the preview. :(

  2. Shelly says:

    I can't wait to see it, but it bums me out that they took away the actual names given to the animals by Dr. Seuss. That is a big part of what makes the book memorable to kids. Thanks for the review.

  3. Carrie says:

    Just a comment, since I took my little sister to see this movie yesterday afternoon: "Bar-ba-loot" is used once in the film by the Lorax. I believe that "Stupid bar-ba-loots!" is the exact quote, but please don't flame me if I'm wrong. :P

    I've always loved the book, and the movie was definitely more cheerful than the book is, but this movie bothered me in that it seemed to be preachy about certain things, i.e., bottled water and vehicles with large tires, while missing the entire point about what the world would actually be like if all of the trees were gone.

  4. Jennifer says:

    As someone who has the book memorized, I was prepared to be really disappointed. After all, the book only takes 30 minutes to recite, and I cannot bring myself to believe Seuss's works were not perfect enough as they were. And after reading this review, I braced myself for a letdown. Instead, I was pleasantly surprised by how much of the book showed through in the movie. I took my son to see it, recited the book to him on the drive to the theater. I felt that the extra storyline helped accentuate the book's message that greed, left unchecked, will destroy the world, and the world is worth saving. And in fact, the movie used quite a few pages straight from the book. More importanly, the animation brought a life to the words that is hard to acheive without the imagination of a child. My son has been singing the soundtrack all day. I will admit it's kind of ironic paying so much to see a movie about the dangers of capitalism, but I'm glad I didn't leave the theater furious over the mutilation of another one of Seuss's books.

  5. Clumpy says:

    General Electric, the fourth-largest corporate polluter in the United States, designer of the Fukushima reactor, serial toxic polluter, and historical manufacturer of gorram NUCLEAR WEAPONS made this movie, and nobody sees the irony. "I am the Lorax, I speak for Febreezeā„¢. Buy three aerosol air fresheners and a Mazda, get the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh free! So says the Lorax! Drill, baby, drill!"

  6. Tom says:

    Speaking of Seussian rip-offs, Eric, can you write some kind of scathing something against the assaults of Random House on Dr Seuss? I suppose they probably facilitated initially the popularity of his books, but they are seemingly shameless in milking his dead name for all it's worth. Everything from re-printing his "Theo Lesieg" books as "Dr Seuss" to printing half-done works illustrated by someone else to printing board-book versions with pages removed ("Mr Brown can moo") to making completely new books under his name with different authors and illustrators mimicking his style. That and they use the cat in the hat inordinately in their marketing.

    So maybe this is because I'm a dad now and while reading even more picture books than when I was childless I'm realizing they are not all created equal. Some are downright poo, but some classics like Dr Seuss clearly hold up over time. Really, someone should call Random House out on this. If not Eric D Snider, than who?

Subscription Center

Eric D. Snider's "Snide Remarks"

This is to join the mailing list for Eric's weekly humor column, "Snide Remarks." For more information, go here.


Eric D. Snider's "In the Dark"

This is to join the mailing list for Eric's weekly movie-review e-zine. For more information on it, go here.

This site created and maintained by Jeff J. Snider | Diamond Clarity Chart