‘Dr. Seuss’ The Lorax’ Movie Review

Jordan Magrath

Jordan, who currently resides in Seattle, WA, has slowly become a film fanatic over the past couple of years. He attributes his love for film to the smash hit THE DARK KNIGHT which has created an (un)healthy obsession with both Christopher Nolan and the Batman franchise. Although he appreciates all genres of film, his favorite movies are typically psychological thrillers, with an emphasis on non-traditional narratives.

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Kat says:

    — With the *exception* of “Horton Hears a Who?” Horton was easily one of the worst Seuss adaptations I’ve ever seen, second only to the awful live-action “Cat in the Hat.” It’s a pretty impressive accomplishment to develop a script so bad that even the combined efforts of Jim Carey and Steve Carell can’t salvage it.
    — The Lorax was always less of an actual character and more of a metaphor. As such, he was never really meant to play a major role in the story and, in fact, never really did. The Onceler is and always has been the main character in the story because, as you admitted yourself, it’s his story that matters the most. He’s the character who learns the most important lesson in the story and also the one who finds himself responsible for teaching it to others.
    — Audrey’s character isn’t fleshed out because she’s part of a secondary plotline.

  2. Anonymous says:

    For “Horton Hears a Who” I was speaking in terms of critical acclaim, like it or not, it is the most liked by critics.

    The marketing for the film made the Lorax seem like he’d do more is all I was saying.  I like the Once-lers character the most anyways, which it sounds like you did, too!

    I agree that Audrey is a secondary plotline, but her underdeveloped character made it hard to root for Ted, if that makes sense?

    Thank you for the comment!