Wow this isn’t for me and I’m pretty glad I don’t have little kids so I can ignore it. The trailer is sarcastic and cynical and formulaic and super annoying to me. I’m just wondering why they keep...
Wow this isn’t for me and I’m pretty glad I don’t have little kids so I can ignore it. The trailer is sarcastic and cynical and formulaic and super annoying to me.
I’m just wondering why they keep rehashing these ancient properties. Do they really do good business or are they just completely out of ideas?
The only thing I liked about that was the Looney Tunes gag in the intro. That and the general art style. That makes sense, given the era Dr. Seuss's works began in. The color palette also makes...
The only thing I liked about that was the Looney Tunes gag in the intro. That and the general art style.
That makes sense, given the era Dr. Seuss's works began in. The color palette also makes sense, visually the whimsy matches Dr. Seuss's art style. The animations also fit the whimsy.
Hader's voice absolutely does not fit the visual whimsy, however. Neither does that simulated "cameraman being knocked around by a mob" camera effect. Neither does mace and cell phones and "stranger danger" and, frankly, anything introduced after the 1970s.
Wild to think that the Jim Carrey Grinch can't be topped by anything else from the Seuss Pantheon in the course of 25 years.
Also, I am 1000% sure Warner Bros is wanting to position the "Things" to be the next minion craze, so.... Brace yourselves, I guess.
Amen. The thing 1 and 3 gag wasn't too awful. The general formulaic vibe of the trailer does not leave me with much hope, which is a shame because the animation is stellar and the obviously they...
The only thing I liked about that was the Looney Tunes gag in the intro. That and the general art style.
Amen. The thing 1 and 3 gag wasn't too awful. The general formulaic vibe of the trailer does not leave me with much hope, which is a shame because the animation is stellar and the obviously they get some of the humor.
Like many of these things feels like focus groups mattered more than making something entertaining. I often wonder how many of these things will be the next generations cornerstones of culture. They just don't feel like they have much appeal beyond marketing and current trends.
Fully agree with the last paragraph. My mom and I caught the end of the 2018 Grinch movie while channel surfing, and we agreed that one probably won't stand the test of time. It was too firmly...
Fully agree with the last paragraph. My mom and I caught the end of the 2018 Grinch movie while channel surfing, and we agreed that one probably won't stand the test of time. It was too firmly entrenched in modern humor and trends, and had this frantic energy to it, like something always had to be happening on screen so kids wouldn't get bored. This one doesn't look like it will be better.
It's short-sighted since they could potentially milk a film for years if they make it right. People like showing their childhood films to kids, so that opens up opportunity for waves of merchandise and movie sales as new kids get introduced to it and older fans get fond nostalgia. But that long-term success depends on it aging well, or at least enough that original fans don't cringe when they look back on it.
Watching this, I remember that the 2003 movie had the estate ban any live-action adaptations. Now I wonder if maybe The Cat in the Hat is specifically cursed though. Hated how grand the trailer...
Watching this, I remember that the 2003 movie had the estate ban any live-action adaptations. Now I wonder if maybe The Cat in the Hat is specifically cursed though.
Hated how grand the trailer was from the start, that just tells me it's going to be a lot of formulaic plot points and cheap jokes. I actually had to force myself to finish it after they showed the... factory setting? Whatever that place is? Also, a fart joke in the trailer?? REALLY??
I mentioned this to my mom and she made an interesting point that a lot of modern films seem to need a moral and message these days. It's always been a thing in kids' films, but it's especially...
I mentioned this to my mom and she made an interesting point that a lot of modern films seem to need a moral and message these days. It's always been a thing in kids' films, but it's especially heavy-handed now.
The standard formula for kids' movies is the main character having some big flaw or misdeed that slowly builds up before causing a big issue, and has them ostracized by others who are very disappointed. Everyone is sad, and the protagonist reflects and realizes some big, important life lesson, which motivates them to go save the day in an exciting climax. This formula has always been around, but it's really in-your-face now.
Thing is, that formula doesn't really fit with the Cat in the Hat—the story and the character. He's the title character, but he's not the one in need of learning some life lesson. If anything he's closer to an antagonist with how he brings a whirlwind of chaos before cleaning it all up and going on his way. The original story doesn't have a clear-cut, heavy-handed moral that modern films seem to demand, either.
And I think that's a big part of why this trailer turns me off so badly. That character isn't the Cat in the Hat, he's some random joe with his skin.
The original Cat seemed super composed for most of the book and very aware of the trouble he caused in the name of fun, it was part of what frustrated everyone. This character meanwhile seems to be a silly, good-natured underdog who's low on the totem pole of some Seuss-type imagination corporation. I can already tell the formula is setting up a confrontation between him and the top dogs, and I get the sense his character was written for that express purpose.
Pretty much the only similarities I can see to the original book and character are his face, and that he's visiting a couple of kids with a pet fish. Even with the expanded characterization in mind, this feels less like an expansion and more just a totally different character.
Weirdly, I think even the underdog position they chose to give him in this bad attempt to expand the world feels out-of-character. The original character oozed confidence up until he was told off for causing a mess, and it doesn't feel like it matches with the "lowly peon" image in the trailer to me. I'd expect him to be either a solo act competing against the major corporation on his own, or at the top of the corporation as one of its best employees/agents.
Also: on further investigation, they're using this to make an extended Seussiverse. There's apparently a movie about Thing One and Thing Two in the works, and also an adaptation of Oh, The Places You'll Go!, which... I don't think is really a story based one? Not sure if that makes it a better or worse choice for an adaptation.
I think there is. Which is to have fun but be responsible about it. This is actually what the Meyers film was attempting at least. With the children having differing personalities where one is too...
The original story doesn't have a clear-cut, heavy-handed moral that modern films seem to demand, either.
I think there is. Which is to have fun but be responsible about it. This is actually what the Meyers film was attempting at least. With the children having differing personalities where one is too rigid and the other is too loose and they learn that they need a balance of both to live life.
Perhaps it’s not as deep or as emotional as the messages in Grinch, Horton, or Lorax. But there’s something there.
There are definitely a few morals. Be responsible, clean up messes, be willing to to call someone out when they go too far, don't let rainy days get in the way of having fun (admittedly not as...
There are definitely a few morals. Be responsible, clean up messes, be willing to to call someone out when they go too far, don't let rainy days get in the way of having fun (admittedly not as relevant these days sadly, but the general theme still applies), don't invite strangers into your house... Lots of good themes for kids. They're subtle though compared to, say, The Lorax.
Based on the trailer I think the filmmakers decided to explore some new moral lesson(s) since... Well, the Cat didn't need to learn those particular lessons in the book. It might still explore responsibility since it seems like he's a bit of a screwup, but I really don't like the Cat learning it instead of the kids.
I guess Cat in the Hat is cursed since it’s also the weakest of the Chuck Jones cartoons. Though I grew up watching the 03 film so I can’t really be unbiased with that
I guess Cat in the Hat is cursed since it’s also the weakest of the Chuck Jones cartoons. Though I grew up watching the 03 film so I can’t really be unbiased with that
Meta question - what is the obsession with Dr Seuss, and Cat in the Hat in particular? I know it's all subjective but even as a kid I found his books peurile and flat. None ever held much...
Meta question - what is the obsession with Dr Seuss, and Cat in the Hat in particular? I know it's all subjective but even as a kid I found his books peurile and flat. None ever held much interest. As an adult and a prek teacher, I've read my fare share of his books with an adults perspective and even then they just don't hold up, even the better ones.
I just don't understand why it continues to be popular.
It's likely a combination of nostalgia with their whimsical and simple nature. I feel like other children's books I've read tend to follow some sort of "rules" about what can happen, but anything...
It's likely a combination of nostalgia with their whimsical and simple nature. I feel like other children's books I've read tend to follow some sort of "rules" about what can happen, but anything is possible in Seuss books. He doesn't even need to stick to actual words, he makes up fun-sounding words as needed to emphasize the silly nature of the characters and worlds he depicts.
And his distinct art style links all his books together without reusing the same characters, so there's a lot of variety in the stories compared to proper series. Since most people grew up reading his books, Dr. Seuss becomes a safe bet after they become parents even if it's a book they never read themselves. There's enough nostalgia and childhood fondness that it probably won't be annoying to read the same book 200 times.
Also, the rhymes are fun. There's a rhythm to them that not all books achieve, so reading them out loud is even more fun.
Come to think of it, all that's also probably why feature film-length movie adaptations of his books tend to be... Less than stellar. The stories are a bit too simple for extended runtimes, so they have to pad it out and tend to lose sight of the original one's morals/messages in the process.
This is what really gets me. The stories are simple and short, on purpose. Adapting them into 10-20min animated shorts would be a far more appropriate format IMO.
This is what really gets me. The stories are simple and short, on purpose. Adapting them into 10-20min animated shorts would be a far more appropriate format IMO.
While there is a definite amount of nostalgia attached, I do think they hold up. The art and writing style is simple and whimsical, and each has a moral lesson embedded in it. Which is perfectly...
While there is a definite amount of nostalgia attached, I do think they hold up. The art and writing style is simple and whimsical, and each has a moral lesson embedded in it. Which is perfectly appropriate for the target age group. Those lessons still hold up today, even if the particular style seems outdated.
They now exist in a world with an insane amount of other things competing for kids attention. It's probably why this trailer feels icky to me. It's a ham fisted attempt to "modernize" something that is a product of its time.
An example of something from the 70s that was modernized better: Muppet movies.
I do not like it, Sam-I-Am. I do not like movies from a can.
This single comment has more Seuss in it than the entire trailer.
Wow this isn’t for me and I’m pretty glad I don’t have little kids so I can ignore it. The trailer is sarcastic and cynical and formulaic and super annoying to me.
I’m just wondering why they keep rehashing these ancient properties. Do they really do good business or are they just completely out of ideas?
They keep doing what makes money. If something is slay popular, surely a new movie about that thing will also be popular and therefore make money.
Audiences have shown more often than not that they only care about IP.
The only thing I liked about that was the Looney Tunes gag in the intro. That and the general art style.
That makes sense, given the era Dr. Seuss's works began in. The color palette also makes sense, visually the whimsy matches Dr. Seuss's art style. The animations also fit the whimsy.
Hader's voice absolutely does not fit the visual whimsy, however. Neither does that simulated "cameraman being knocked around by a mob" camera effect. Neither does mace and cell phones and "stranger danger" and, frankly, anything introduced after the 1970s.
Wild to think that the Jim Carrey Grinch can't be topped by anything else from the Seuss Pantheon in the course of 25 years.
Also, I am 1000% sure Warner Bros is wanting to position the "Things" to be the next minion craze, so.... Brace yourselves, I guess.
Amen. The thing 1 and 3 gag wasn't too awful. The general formulaic vibe of the trailer does not leave me with much hope, which is a shame because the animation is stellar and the obviously they get some of the humor.
Like many of these things feels like focus groups mattered more than making something entertaining. I often wonder how many of these things will be the next generations cornerstones of culture. They just don't feel like they have much appeal beyond marketing and current trends.
Fully agree with the last paragraph. My mom and I caught the end of the 2018 Grinch movie while channel surfing, and we agreed that one probably won't stand the test of time. It was too firmly entrenched in modern humor and trends, and had this frantic energy to it, like something always had to be happening on screen so kids wouldn't get bored. This one doesn't look like it will be better.
It's short-sighted since they could potentially milk a film for years if they make it right. People like showing their childhood films to kids, so that opens up opportunity for waves of merchandise and movie sales as new kids get introduced to it and older fans get fond nostalgia. But that long-term success depends on it aging well, or at least enough that original fans don't cringe when they look back on it.
Watching this, I remember that the 2003 movie had the estate ban any live-action adaptations. Now I wonder if maybe The Cat in the Hat is specifically cursed though.
Hated how grand the trailer was from the start, that just tells me it's going to be a lot of formulaic plot points and cheap jokes. I actually had to force myself to finish it after they showed the... factory setting? Whatever that place is? Also, a fart joke in the trailer?? REALLY??
I mentioned this to my mom and she made an interesting point that a lot of modern films seem to need a moral and message these days. It's always been a thing in kids' films, but it's especially heavy-handed now.
The standard formula for kids' movies is the main character having some big flaw or misdeed that slowly builds up before causing a big issue, and has them ostracized by others who are very disappointed. Everyone is sad, and the protagonist reflects and realizes some big, important life lesson, which motivates them to go save the day in an exciting climax. This formula has always been around, but it's really in-your-face now.
Thing is, that formula doesn't really fit with the Cat in the Hat—the story and the character. He's the title character, but he's not the one in need of learning some life lesson. If anything he's closer to an antagonist with how he brings a whirlwind of chaos before cleaning it all up and going on his way. The original story doesn't have a clear-cut, heavy-handed moral that modern films seem to demand, either.
And I think that's a big part of why this trailer turns me off so badly. That character isn't the Cat in the Hat, he's some random joe with his skin.
The original Cat seemed super composed for most of the book and very aware of the trouble he caused in the name of fun, it was part of what frustrated everyone. This character meanwhile seems to be a silly, good-natured underdog who's low on the totem pole of some Seuss-type imagination corporation. I can already tell the formula is setting up a confrontation between him and the top dogs, and I get the sense his character was written for that express purpose.
Pretty much the only similarities I can see to the original book and character are his face, and that he's visiting a couple of kids with a pet fish. Even with the expanded characterization in mind, this feels less like an expansion and more just a totally different character.
Weirdly, I think even the underdog position they chose to give him in this bad attempt to expand the world feels out-of-character. The original character oozed confidence up until he was told off for causing a mess, and it doesn't feel like it matches with the "lowly peon" image in the trailer to me. I'd expect him to be either a solo act competing against the major corporation on his own, or at the top of the corporation as one of its best employees/agents.
Also: on further investigation, they're using this to make an extended Seussiverse. There's apparently a movie about Thing One and Thing Two in the works, and also an adaptation of Oh, The Places You'll Go!, which... I don't think is really a story based one? Not sure if that makes it a better or worse choice for an adaptation.
I think there is. Which is to have fun but be responsible about it. This is actually what the Meyers film was attempting at least. With the children having differing personalities where one is too rigid and the other is too loose and they learn that they need a balance of both to live life.
Perhaps it’s not as deep or as emotional as the messages in Grinch, Horton, or Lorax. But there’s something there.
There are definitely a few morals. Be responsible, clean up messes, be willing to to call someone out when they go too far, don't let rainy days get in the way of having fun (admittedly not as relevant these days sadly, but the general theme still applies), don't invite strangers into your house... Lots of good themes for kids. They're subtle though compared to, say, The Lorax.
Based on the trailer I think the filmmakers decided to explore some new moral lesson(s) since... Well, the Cat didn't need to learn those particular lessons in the book. It might still explore responsibility since it seems like he's a bit of a screwup, but I really don't like the Cat learning it instead of the kids.
I guess Cat in the Hat is cursed since it’s also the weakest of the Chuck Jones cartoons. Though I grew up watching the 03 film so I can’t really be unbiased with that
Meta question - what is the obsession with Dr Seuss, and Cat in the Hat in particular? I know it's all subjective but even as a kid I found his books peurile and flat. None ever held much interest. As an adult and a prek teacher, I've read my fare share of his books with an adults perspective and even then they just don't hold up, even the better ones.
I just don't understand why it continues to be popular.
It's likely a combination of nostalgia with their whimsical and simple nature. I feel like other children's books I've read tend to follow some sort of "rules" about what can happen, but anything is possible in Seuss books. He doesn't even need to stick to actual words, he makes up fun-sounding words as needed to emphasize the silly nature of the characters and worlds he depicts.
And his distinct art style links all his books together without reusing the same characters, so there's a lot of variety in the stories compared to proper series. Since most people grew up reading his books, Dr. Seuss becomes a safe bet after they become parents even if it's a book they never read themselves. There's enough nostalgia and childhood fondness that it probably won't be annoying to read the same book 200 times.
Also, the rhymes are fun. There's a rhythm to them that not all books achieve, so reading them out loud is even more fun.
Come to think of it, all that's also probably why feature film-length movie adaptations of his books tend to be... Less than stellar. The stories are a bit too simple for extended runtimes, so they have to pad it out and tend to lose sight of the original one's morals/messages in the process.
This is what really gets me. The stories are simple and short, on purpose. Adapting them into 10-20min animated shorts would be a far more appropriate format IMO.
Which is part of why the original Grinch animation has held up reasonably well even as the longer movies have been so poor.
While there is a definite amount of nostalgia attached, I do think they hold up. The art and writing style is simple and whimsical, and each has a moral lesson embedded in it. Which is perfectly appropriate for the target age group. Those lessons still hold up today, even if the particular style seems outdated.
They now exist in a world with an insane amount of other things competing for kids attention. It's probably why this trailer feels icky to me. It's a ham fisted attempt to "modernize" something that is a product of its time.
An example of something from the 70s that was modernized better: Muppet movies.
I agree, with the exception of Oh Say Can You Say?. That one is a fun challenge for me to read to my kids as fast as possible.
(Spider-Verse + Deadpool) - (all of the lessons the industry was supposed to have learned about what made those good)
I’m surprised the movie isn’t about him earning his hat until the last 5min of the movie where he’d get all his magical powers.
Funny how hard studios will work to make Cat in the Hat (2003) look better.
Not good, mind you, but better.