The Lorax is one of my favorite books: I actually have a copy signed by Dr. Seuss. So I am generally inclined to be in favor of any movie versions of it, because I apparently do not learn from experience that the only consequence of adapting Seuss books is sadness and pain.
The most obvious thing that makes me lose hope is the last joke of the trailer. A fat woman who is clearly drawn to be unattractive is insulting the Lorax, who threatens to hit her; when the Onceler says “you wouldn’t hit a woman,” the Lorax says “that’s a woman?” Holy shit that is a fucking terrible joke. I mean, even beyond all the ways it’s problematic, it’s just not that funny. I mean, maybe you would have a case for a fatphobic, cissexist, gender-policing, Myth-Of-Men-Not-Being-Hot joke if it was hella hilarious, but this was old material fifty years ago. (I think that’s often a problem with kyriarchal humor in general– even beyond the problematic aspects, “I said rape! Isn’t that hilarious?” and “women are Venusians and men are Martians!” just suck as jokes.)
However, the thing that fills me the most with fan-hatred is how they expanded the character of the Boy. Admittedly, the Boy doesn’t have much of a plot to begin with: he shows up, talks to the Onceler and gets some seeds which he will probably end up planting. This isn’t Hamlet levels of character development, folks. I can see where they’d want to give him a plot, given that he’s the audience-identification character and all. So I’m inclined to be generous.
But how they expanded it is, well, can you say “success object”, ladies and gentlemen and miscellaneous? You see, the Boy is in love with Taylor Swift, because Hollywood just can’t think of a meaningful relationship that is entirely unrelated to someone wanting to slobber all over someone else’s face. In fact, Boy flies model planes and throws balls into Taylor Swift’s backyard, enough times that she remarks on it, so she will talk to him. This is clearly romantic and not stalkerish in the slightest.
It turns out Taylor Swift really likes Truffula trees! There are no trees where she lives, because they all got cut down. So Boy decides to earn her love via bringing her a Truffula seed so she can see a tree. Because “I want to get in your pants, Taylor Swift” is clearly a much better motivation than curiosity and ENVIRONMENTALISM! for seeking out the Onceler.
There is exactly one time I’ve found this whole “dude fetches thing to get in girl’s pants” plotline non-obnoxious. It is in Neil Gaiman’s Stardust, in which (highlight for spoilers) the boy falls in love with the star he was fetching for the girl, because the boy and the star actually have things in common, and the girl is kind of a jerk.
Everyone else, fuck off with this damn plotline and stop treating your characters as success objects and sex objects. Particularly in stories in which no one was falling in love in the first place.
The Onceler does have a very badass vest-and-hat combo going on, though. You are a sexy cartoon, sir. A sexy, sexy cartoon.
Also I add, it’s true the boy seemed superficial himself, and I did think for a moment “He only wants to impress a girl…” and it didn’t stir anything in me at all. But the movie indicated that he didn’t know any different and so he wouldn’t understand the importance as much as his older neighbor/crush. I liked that Taylor Swift’s had the ability to think outside unlike most of the characters, but then I am surprised they didn’t give her a larger role. Perhaps they thought it was interesting to make the boy change and learn a lesson himself.… Read more »
I laugh at the fact that I found this blog while searching “The Onceler is sexy” because I thought so too. His song about him being “not so bad” was the only song I remembered…Until now I somewhat forgot how it goes. But I loved their interpretation of him. I didn’t notice the sexism though. But I agree, the whole superficial side-story puppy-love formula has been played so often I mentally glaze over it these days. I consider the kids in the audience who haven’t seen as many cliches and will like it and maybe it’s not such a bother.… Read more »
It doesn’t surprise me at all. There was a truly homophobic spot in Horton where the mayor was showing his son past mayors calling all of them great, until he comes to an effeminate one in a tutu, and snidely remark, “not so great.” Why the have to instill this blatant ignorance into kids psyche at such an early age is disgusting.
I know they were different companies, but it’s still the same Hollywood schmuck.
It repeats the line I have said before so many times, How many ways can they do the straight love story.
So if a guy does something to make a girl he likes happy, he clearly only doing it because he wants to tap that.
Got it.
I thought this blog was against stereotyping men’s sexuality.
“In fact, Boy flies model planes and throws balls into Taylor Swift’s backyard, enough times that she remarks on it, so she will talk to him. This is clearly romantic and not stalkerish in the slightest.” The boy also appears to be about 10. But yeah, let’s just go ahead and arrest all those little boys who’s version of flirting on the playground is to hit a girl on the arm and run away giggling. CLEARLY THEY ARE THE PROBLEM! THIS IS VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN! I thought it was endearingly awkward, the kind of thing you could sit back and… Read more »
Or failing that, hire the woman writer based on credentials, not sexist notions of women.
I can dig that. However, I really hated the comment he made during the inception of the movie. When he discovered that the directors, who were having a hand in writing it as well, resume only included gangster films he wanted a woman to help with the writing process since women are experts at romance. I found that little comment of his sexist because, yes you can hire a woman writer, but not because she’s a woman and that automatically makes her an expert on romance. Why not teach the directors about it since it’s your source material. My respect… Read more »
Gaiman isn’t playing the gender blame game — it’s debatable whether Tristan is naive or Victoria is manipulative, or both; but ultimately that’s not the point. The point is that the chivalric ideal is bogus, and hurts men. That’s exactly the sort of masculist insight that would have been so useful to a younger me.
“Stardust is wonderful, and I wish I’d read/seen it five years earlier, when I was still single.”
I don’t know. It seems like Neil Gaiman is blaming only men for notions of chilveray and only gives the women a light slap on the wrist.
I suspect the “token of love” plotline is a Romantic-era narrative balance for the concept of dowries, particularly as it wasn’t uncommon for the -father- to set the quest; we’ve lost half the equation, but the other half has continued to have a basic emotional appeal. And I can think of more subversions of the trope than cases of it played straight (the 80’s turned the subversion into its own trope, really); heck, The Mask included a subversion of a subversion, when the good girl you expect him to realize is more deserving of his attempted affections turns out to… Read more »
Hm. I think I’m gonna add Stardust to my reading list. I loved American Gods but then never read another one of his books. I’ve always thought that certain feminist circles had an odd habit of demonizing “tokens of love” as “payments for love.” I think it’s important to remember that Hollywood Marketers tend to have a very narrow view of people. Basically, just think of the worst but simultaneously polite misogyny or misandry and you can almost be certain a Hollywood Marketer is espousing it through their work. I’m willing to give the movie a fair shake, if only… Read more »
I saw that hitting a man is apparently ok but hitting a woman is not.
@monkey: there are some pretty ungrateful people out there, though. I don’t think it’s wrong to tell kids “some people aren’t worth your time”. In fact, I think it’s more responsible than insisting to them that virtue and hard work are always rewarded, despite all evidence!
The Paper Bag Princess is not my favorite book, but I don’t find the prince’s behavior somehow out of character or unreasonable. It’s certainly unjust and ungrateful and stupid, but it’s not like there aren’t plenty of people walking around in reality who will think considerably less of you if you don’t fit their preconceived ideas, usually related to kyriarchical norms. Whether you want to be exposing your kids to that idea at any given age is a different story…I like it because it calls out “normal” cultural assumptions. These days we don’t tend to mind if girls kick some… Read more »
Reading about the plot of Stardust sounds like it’s almost a reverse of The Paper Bag Princess. I’ve never liked that book, and I recently realized why. It’s not that the Prince is a jerk that bothers me, but that the Prince is a jerk merely to suit the plot. Any real person, even in a kid’s book, would be grateful that the Princess sacrificed so much to save him, but Munsch keeps him a jerk just so he can have the punchline of “you’re a bum.” Yeah, I know. It’s a tiny book for young kids. But even books… Read more »
Gender police ’em young, that’s what I always say. *Sad head shake*
Stardust is wonderful, and I wish I’d read/seen it five years earlier, when I was still single. That conversation between the boy and the star was such an eye-opener: “Hang on! This wasn’t about me buying her love. This was a way for me to prove to her how I felt.” “Ah… And what’s she doing to prove how she feels about you?”
Sadly, it would appear that the movie adaptation of The Lorax is destined to succumb to mediocre themes of ‘success object’ and ‘object of (hetero-normative) desire’. Unless…
That part of Stardust is even better in book form. I’ll try and not give any spoilers either, but in it the girl is not actually a jerk, she just tries to make a point to an unwanted suitor who acts like she should be impressed by his promising her “all the tea in china, all the gold in america… ect”
I agree on most sexist jokes. “Hey Folks did you ever notice then men an women are different? (ba-dum-tss). I’ll be here all night?” I try not too judge a movie too harshly from it’s trailer. The trailer was put together marketing folks, and tend to take everything out of context. I can think of contexts that would make the “That’s a woman?!” joke much more palatable. If, for instance, it had come among a stream of That’s a man?!”, That’s a kid?!”, That’s a dog?!” lines. Which seems entirely in character. I won’t argue with you that it certainly… Read more »
It’s also sad that Zac Efron has to be caught up in this.
Part of the reason I love Zac Efron is that he dispels the myth that men can’t be cute and wholesome. I love the way he wears makeup and eyeliner. And I love how he refused to go “darker and edgier” when he outgrew Disney. I really hope he’ll take on less stereotypically male roles in the future.