I thought the Lorax was very entertaining. I thought it was a fast paced movie a kid of just about any age could enjoy. I think my 8-year-old was easily entertained by the movie. I actually think if I had taken my 3-year-old she would have been fine too. As far as me, well, I was entertained too, but....
As Pee-Pee Herman once said in one of his Big Adventure Movies (I think it was Pee-Wee's Big Adventure), "Everyone has a big But." As an adult, I see more than just the cartoon and the humor. I saw in the Lorax more than just the message, "Don't waste natural resources." I saw an anti capitalist film. I saw a moral that was not at all what Dr. Seuss had intended in his book, "The Lorax."
After watching the movie I surfed the net to see if I was alone in thinking this, and I was not. The Wall Street Journal wrote a good article, and Lou Dobbs chanted about how the movie was both anti capitalist and pro environment.
In a sense, the movie seemed like an attempt to brainwash kids into believing capitalsim was bad and that no tree should ever be chopped down for the good of anyone, even to feed the poor.
Now I'm not going to tell people not to watch this movie, in fact, just the opposite. It's not like Ron Howard's version of "The Cat in the Hat," which was full of sexual innuendos that were inappropriate for children. I would never recommend the Cat in the Hat movie to anyone.
The Lorax was a good movie with good graphics and... well, it was simply good. I can see how it made so much money on its opening. Yet Lou Dobbs is right that the message was definitely a socialist message, and an attempt by Hollywood to indoctrinate our children.
Go ahead and see it with your kids, just make sure to prepare yourself for a good discussion after the movie.
2 comments:
the film presented an argument that is correct, look at what has happened to our economic system from people using the exact rationalle the film is arguing against. Its a shame a kids film has to put the argument out their because mainstream media is so anti it wont even allow free discussion for those for and against to create a forum for people to think about.
The movie establishes a direct link between business corporations and those "bad people" who want all trees to be cut down. This is simply not the case. So I would have to say that you, anonymous sr., are wrong. If we did not have capitalism, there would be no economy, and there would be starvation and disease. There would be no money to donate, and no way to purchase food or clothing or the seeds to grow the materials required. While the communist utopia may seem pleasant, it can't happen. Not everyone will be equal (cough Lenin Marxism cough) and everyone else will suffer. For example, Russia in 1910-1930 was turning into a capitalism-free state, but even Lenin realised that Russia was suffering, the people were not willing to work for a small ration of food taken from peasants that grew it for subsistence reasons, and as a result everyone was starving, and Lenin himself eased back his policies, creating the NEP and allowing capitalism in the economy. And bam. Success. Although, Russia was still communistic in politics, so there were still several issues. History repeats itself, so learn from the past.
Post a Comment