IGX

Sucked lorax dung. Wished I were somewhere else the whole time. Bad music numbers, recycled cliches from all the other animated movies, and the irony of Big Hollywood putting out a heavily marketed movie against The Man was too much.

I loved the book as a kid. Even remember a cartoon version that I haven't seen in at least 30 years.

Heard they were making a feature length animated movie. Then heard that they pretty much gutted the message from the book to stretch the plot out to feature length.

No thanks.

Just got back. The kids loved it. I don't go to kid's movies expecting to be riveted, so I wasn't let down.
All and all it's about what you'd expect....Despicable Me meets Dr. Seuss.

...and the "message" was there, I thought. "Don't fuck over your friends/the enviornment for money".

It wasn't bad. It wasn't great. Like Nafod said, the musical numbers were very mediocre.

I appreciated that the message wasn't completely over the top pounded down your throat, but it was there. Corporations are evil and greedy.

I concur with Shaf's assessment. We saw it in 3D and while the 3D was entirely superfluous to the movie, as it all too often is, from a technical standpoint the visuals were some of the best I've seen so far, in terms of having real depth-of-field where the objects look 3D rather than 2D cutouts at different depths from each other, and while there was still some blurring to edges on the peripheral areas, there was none of the hyper-annoying red-blue shifting at the edges of objects.

3D, yeah. I'm really fucking sick of it and don't think it adds much. Conversely, I'm kind of praying that the John Carter movie lives up to some of the promise of the books.

Shafpocalypse Now wrote:3D, yeah. I'm really fucking sick of it and don't think it adds much. Conversely, I'm kind of praying that the John Carter movie lives up to some of the promise of the books.

I'm just so blown away that they'd make a movie about a scifi hero that, AFAIK, kids today have never even heard of that it makes me think it will be a labor of love that has real potential to not suck.

I've come to really dislike movies where they take a story appropriate for 25-30 minutes and stretch it to 1+30. The Grinch being a good example. And now this one. Insert obligatory scene involving bed flowing down stream toward waterfall here as filler and chance to show off computer graphics (a back-to-nature movie done all in 1s and 0s). Insert chase through Shneedville there. My daughter and I kept leaning over and telling each other what was going to happen next. Just plant the #$%-ing tree already! We know you're gonna do it! Just stick the #$%-ing seed into the ground! Take that backhoe and run over the little samurai dude. And nobody laughed at the Lorax's, "That's a women?" line since they'd seen it in 100 trailers already.

What they should do, is do a Dr. Seuss movie where they take 3 books of his that have some sort of thread running through them, whether a character or a theme, and make all three of them into a single movie. Maybe get three different directors but one producer.

nafod wrote:I've come to really dislike movies where they take a story appropriate for 25-30 minutes and stretch it to 1+30.

That's what happens when Hollywood is all out of ideas and needs to crank out retreads. I can think of a handful of recent SciFi movies that fit the bill: Priest, Daybreakers, and a couple of other forgettable ones that slip my mind right now would have been great 20 minute long Twilight Zone episodes but don't have the legs to carry themselves for 90 minutes.

Do you think I'd find a lot of kids at the theatre alone if I went to see this on a Tuesday afternoon?

protobuilder wrote:Do you think I'd find a lot of kids at the theatre alone if I went to see this on a Tuesday afternoon?

hahaha!