Dr. Seuss' The Lorax

User Score
6.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 199 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 48 out of 199

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Mar 6, 2012
    4
    The story of The Lorax by self-proclaimed author Dr. Seuss falls a little short this time. I walked into the theater with no expectations what so ever and I am happy for that because if I did I would've been majorly disappointed. I would suggest maybe renting it for a day because if I were you I would rather save $15 and watch it when it comes out to rent
  2. Apr 19, 2012
    5
    Another Dr. Suess adaption. I say this without enthusiasm or disappointment. Dr. Suess films are usually just mediocre, nothing to get excited over. However, they make a lot of money. Thus, we get the movie adaption of "The Lorax." I won't lie, I've never read The Lorax, nor do I know anything about it, aside from it's environmental message. But I can tell this film really stretched theAnother Dr. Suess adaption. I say this without enthusiasm or disappointment. Dr. Suess films are usually just mediocre, nothing to get excited over. However, they make a lot of money. Thus, we get the movie adaption of "The Lorax." I won't lie, I've never read The Lorax, nor do I know anything about it, aside from it's environmental message. But I can tell this film really stretched the source material. Even with the extensive (and uninteresting) chase scene, even with the half-dozen of musical numbers (only one of which I really enjoyed), and even with the additional characters added, the film has a relatively modest running time. The Lorax isn't that good, unfortunately. It has strengths, but it also has a lot of weaknesses. For one, it seems The Lorax has no imagination for itself. At least half of the material of the film has been borrowed from other films. The "adorable" brown bears that wander around speaking in gibberish are obviously a rip off of the minions in Despicable Me. The prank that the Lorax plays on the Once-ler, by putting his bed in the river is a rip off from Parent Trap. And speaking of the "bed-in-the-river" prank, I must ask how it's physically possible for a bed, frame and all, to float in the water. There is nothing unique about the characters. We've seen them all in other movies. O' Hare is the generic, evil, power-hungry villain. Audrey is the generic, tom-boy, girl that the main character falls in love with. There are even characters in this movie that seem to appear in different forms. The Lorax just can't run by itself. It has to take ideas from elsewhere. The voice cast is average, but the voice of the main character, Ted, just doesn't work. He's supposed to sound like he's 10. Don't have Zac Efron voice him, get a little boy! But I digress. On the flipside, the animation is gorgeous. It can't match the detail of Rango or Tintin, but it makes up for it with vibrant colors that really bring the world of Dr. Suess to life. Also, the musical score by John Powell is very good, though it doesn't really break any new ground. And to be honest, I really didn't like the choir bits. And did I mention my feelings about the songs in the movies? Aside from the one at the beginning, they were all very uninspired, and usually dull. Some of the gags are quite good, but there were too many stale ones to make humor the strength of the film. There are also attempts of "cuteness" that over stays it's welcome. There are, however, some surprisingly touching moments, and there are times where you might just sit back and think for a moment (heaven forbid, you may actually think during a movie). There's certainly a curious amount of food for thought on display. The one thing I like most about the film, is also the film's main problem: The singing fish. There are three fish that looks like that of Cat and the Hat, that sing, not words, but notes. This is all performed in barbershop-quartet form, and is very amusing (there's one moment in particular when they hum the Mission Impossible theme). The reason this is the film's biggest problem, is because they're the best part. If the strongest thing about a movie is a recurring gag, you've got a problem. And that's the problem with The Lorax. It's not good enough to remember outside of a couple good gags. The rest is fluff. The target audience, however, (kids between 2 and 10) will love this film, I guarantee it. The auditorium I saw the movie in had not a single spare seat, and every kid in the room was laughing their heads off. I heard very few parents laugh. This isn't a bad movie. It's just a kid's movie, and it's somewhat painful to say that. Expand
  3. Mar 13, 2014
    4
    The overly-preachy attitude of The Lorax overshadows any actual storyline, leaving you with a good message but no entertainment. They didn't even try to hide the message they are trying to get across with a believable plot and cute characters, instead they created an excessively bland quest with annoying characters riddled with atrocious dialogue. The only good aspects of this butcheringThe overly-preachy attitude of The Lorax overshadows any actual storyline, leaving you with a good message but no entertainment. They didn't even try to hide the message they are trying to get across with a believable plot and cute characters, instead they created an excessively bland quest with annoying characters riddled with atrocious dialogue. The only good aspects of this butchering of a classic is the art and animation, which is superbly done. But it looks so nice I kind of feel bad for the 3D modelers and animators since the writers and directors destroyed their hard work. I can't even imagine a kid enjoying this, unless they really only do want bright colors, because The Lorax certainly succeeds in that field, a little too much I might add. The jokes aren't really jokes at all, they just consist of supposedly funny dialogue that in reality is just awkward and usually doesn't even make sense. I honestly think the writers of this movie either have never talked to an actual person before, or just plain don't care. When it's all said and done, we walk away from The Lorax with two things: The blatantly obvious message of saving the environment, and the fact that to make a lot of money, you really do only need to have nice graphics. Expand
  4. Jan 30, 2013
    4
    As a movie considered strictly on its own merits, The Lorax is passable but unmemorable, except for its catchy music. The movie maintains a mostly very Seussian art style, much to its credit, which offers a better sense for the whimsy of the thing. As an adaptation, however, The Lorax is almost insulting, misinterpreting the original work's moral of "overconsumption is bad and destroys theAs a movie considered strictly on its own merits, The Lorax is passable but unmemorable, except for its catchy music. The movie maintains a mostly very Seussian art style, much to its credit, which offers a better sense for the whimsy of the thing. As an adaptation, however, The Lorax is almost insulting, misinterpreting the original work's moral of "overconsumption is bad and destroys the environment, which is also in itself bad" into "trees are awesome and corporations are evil". One of the most important elements of any adaptation is the feel of the adaptation versus the feel of the original, and when your adaptation doesn't play fast and loose with the source material there's a need to adhere very closely with your feel, but this movie doesn't even try to succeed at that. It's a very cynical movie, with a cynical sense of humor that is admittedly quite funny when considered on its own merits, but feels mean in context, and with an almost sarcastically naive moral, and yet I feel like all of this was done as a means of playing it safe on the studio's part, which is ironic when you think about it because cynical approaches to childhood classics seem like they would be the opposite of safe. The movie feels like an underachieving teenager, deliberately withholding effort because it's easier to excuse a flop as "I wasn't trying anyway" than to face the possibility that someone might not like your best work. The movie's crippling fear of rejection causes it to lose the earnestness that could have served it so well as a Dr. Seuss adaptation, instead choosing to constantly act like it's too cool for itself. It's a rare thing when all of a movie's flaws proceed so cleanly from a single source, but this really is the wellspring that it all pours from: the Lorax was too afraid you wouldn't like it if it gave 100%, so it decided to only give something like 70%. If you want to see some great art design and hear some fun songs, by all means rent/borrow it, but if you actually want to get the story, read the book or watch the old half-hour cartoon special. Expand
  5. Jul 4, 2013
    4
    "The Lorax" from Illumination Studio doesn't really provide much, and just turns an old Dr. Suess book into an animated movie. While there is no depth and no care towards the book, it's okay. The characters in the movie did however anger me, as they added the main character Ted, who is just selfish due to the fact that he just does what he does to impress a girl. In the end, while he saves"The Lorax" from Illumination Studio doesn't really provide much, and just turns an old Dr. Suess book into an animated movie. While there is no depth and no care towards the book, it's okay. The characters in the movie did however anger me, as they added the main character Ted, who is just selfish due to the fact that he just does what he does to impress a girl. In the end, while he saves his town, Ted is truly just any other annoying kid who wants to flirt with a girl. The side romance is somewhat irritating, but bearable. The story with the Lorax is okay, but nothing great. The environmental messages barely get through, and after watching it, when I was watching television, I saw a commercial of Illuminations advertising the movie with a car and immediately gawked. While this will not affect the films score, I thought that was totally unnecessary considering that this film is trying to tell an environmental message. Nice going Illuminations. Expand
  6. Mar 4, 2012
    6
    While a well-animated movie and modern interpretation of the Dr. Seuss classic, unfortunately it didn't impact me the way the book did when I was a kid. The Lorax is my favorite Dr. Seuss book. It always seemed like the most serious. And when I saw the first animated interpretation of the book as a child, the story flat-out depressed me. This one, not so much. It wasn't a bad movie,While a well-animated movie and modern interpretation of the Dr. Seuss classic, unfortunately it didn't impact me the way the book did when I was a kid. The Lorax is my favorite Dr. Seuss book. It always seemed like the most serious. And when I saw the first animated interpretation of the book as a child, the story flat-out depressed me. This one, not so much. It wasn't a bad movie, but the Lorax him(it)self was not as prominent in this movie as I would have expected him to be. There is a time during the movie where he is, but other than that 20 minute piece, he is almost an afterthought. And because of that, the message wasn't as impactful. Expand
  7. Mar 12, 2012
    5
    The Lorax doesn't hold up pretty well for me and my biggest issue is that the movie is reaching way too hard for the audience that we want to know about the environment. The story is closely to the book, but it has too many details that they want to focus even more. The characters are forgettable, but the two characters are not bad like Danny DeVito voice as The Lorax and Betty White voiceThe Lorax doesn't hold up pretty well for me and my biggest issue is that the movie is reaching way too hard for the audience that we want to know about the environment. The story is closely to the book, but it has too many details that they want to focus even more. The characters are forgettable, but the two characters are not bad like Danny DeVito voice as The Lorax and Betty White voice as The Grandma. The animation looks nice and it's been colorful to the background. Between the animation and background, the songs are stupid, the characters are cutesy ways, and the story is like I said is too much. Expand
  8. May 15, 2013
    4
    The Lorax is a film that would have worked great as twenty-thirty minute cartoon but instead is forced into a half and hour flick. The added characters and story are not that interesting and are only there to stretch out the plot. Also, by doing this the film takes focus away from the real story. The film is further hurt by the replacement of rhyming with poor dialogue that sounds moreThe Lorax is a film that would have worked great as twenty-thirty minute cartoon but instead is forced into a half and hour flick. The added characters and story are not that interesting and are only there to stretch out the plot. Also, by doing this the film takes focus away from the real story. The film is further hurt by the replacement of rhyming with poor dialogue that sounds more modern than something from a Dr. Suess world. Plus, the songs in the film are lame and forgettable. If the film had focused on the story of the book and kept things in rhyme and closer to the actual story I would have liked it ok. However, the lack of focus on what made the book such a classic, pointless additions, and lame dialogue create a film whose only saving graces are its animation and the fact that this is meant for little kids. Unless, you’re an adult with little kids who want to see the film than I would say this is a definite skip. And if you have not read The Lorax to them yet than please do that before they see the movie because it is a messy adaptation of a Dr. Suess classic. Expand
  9. Aug 23, 2013
    4
    CGI is a wonderful thing in cinema. If only "the Lorax" could do it justice. But with ludicrous songs, childish tones, and a jumbled plot, it's only justice is Danny DeVito's Lorax. Everything else is utter
  10. Mar 7, 2012
    4
    Its all just about what I expected, Except for a movie whos focus was the enviorment, I was suprised by,how one-sided it could be, telling us we should hate industry,all together like its evil, coupled with the fact it tries to hard to shove the message down our throat, its just more worth skipping this one
  11. Mar 2, 2012
    5
    Flagrantly inferior to its literary predecessor, 'The Lorax' sends a skewed message to its viewers, one that is less timely and memorable, and more puffed with crass one-liners and subtle condescension; an utter denigration to one of the greatest children's authors to ever live. However, more maddening of all is the lack of regard and reverence to Geisel's words, mellifluously melodicFlagrantly inferior to its literary predecessor, 'The Lorax' sends a skewed message to its viewers, one that is less timely and memorable, and more puffed with crass one-liners and subtle condescension; an utter denigration to one of the greatest children's authors to ever live. However, more maddening of all is the lack of regard and reverence to Geisel's words, mellifluously melodic syllables accompanied by sticking alliteration and rhythmic patterns; they are defecated on. Much to the viewer's chagrin, the film does not include a narration: how does a 'Seuss' adaptation not have a narration? Only in one instance are words from the book uttered, albeit words offensively disparaged. Early on in the film, Audrey (voiced by Swift), a character nowhere to be found in the book, quotes Geisel in regard to the truffula trees: "The touch of their tufts was much softer than silk, and they had the sweet smell of fresh butterfly milk." This is relieving to hear and see. However, such memorable quote is replied by Ted (voiced by Efron) with "Wow, what does that even mean?" And, Audrey says, "I know, right?" So, what we have here is a character who was not even in the book, now in the film, belittling the very words which the film, itself, was shaped. This example, ultimately sums up the direction of the film; changing what wasn't already broken, and breaking it. Don't become too skeptical, 'Lorax' does contain rich, diaphanous colors that bring to life some of what Geisel's book intended to show through words, however, the film's attempts to put a new spin on things, especially by adding characters not found in the book, creates a blurred focus and disconnect, which results in a story that looks more like something you've seen before as opposed to the original, timeless literary version. Much of this is emanated by the title character, who voiced by DeVito, becomes too-well-overdone, and eventually becomes irksome and forced; he appears much more in the film than the book. I understand the film's casting of DeVito," again, to "spin things up," however, his 'Lorax' character doesn't match the same prominence as the book, rather, DeVito comes across as too imperiously assuming; an unpleasant, discordant "Jor-zey" inflection that becomes old, very quickly. I can't imagine the filmmakers wanting that. As a whole, 'Lorax' is a propaganda filled, "green-pushing" adult-first animation film that looks impressive, but inevitably sends a twisted message to kids that "it's great to help the environment, but only to further oneself in the process." Moreover, the film is, for the greater portion of an hour, 'Lorax' is partially fulfilling, mostly to do with the visuals, however, the most compelling sequence lies in the last 20-25 minutes, once the garrulous 'Lorax' and dainty animals are finally exited from view. Having said such, only ephemerally does the film endow the same sense of loss and somberness found in the book. Lastly, the underlying theme and parable of the film is not so hidden, as even the kids will, atleast minimally, capture what it's aiming to say. However, the guise with which it sticks with throughout (large smiles, balmy jokes, and fuzzy "fluff"), is more than enough to divert the kid's thought-provaction. In 3-D, though, the action doesn't quite match the subject material. For most adults, the slapstick won't fly very far; it's a "T-I-M-B-E-R" kind of spectacle; falling before your eyes. Expand
  12. Mar 3, 2012
    5
    The 3D IMAX part was awesome ... kinda hard to mess that up (i think). I brought my son who will be 4 this summer he liked the visuals as well, but about half way through he fell asleep and I promise all of you, it was not b/c he was tired. Don't anyone dare go to see this w/o 3D, the IMAX you could probably take or leave. But anyone who pays top dollar to watch that movie in 2d you willThe 3D IMAX part was awesome ... kinda hard to mess that up (i think). I brought my son who will be 4 this summer he liked the visuals as well, but about half way through he fell asleep and I promise all of you, it was not b/c he was tired. Don't anyone dare go to see this w/o 3D, the IMAX you could probably take or leave. But anyone who pays top dollar to watch that movie in 2d you will surely regret it! Expand
  13. Apr 15, 2014
    6
    The Lorax is only slightly over a marginal adaptation of the book, as some of the magic and messages about wasting non-renewable resources that Dr. Seuss so neatly wrapped up in the book are lost in the film.
  14. Jun 9, 2016
    6
    The Lorax may have an interesting story-telling, with unforgettable characters and a good message to offer, but only for young viewers; so teen viewers or adults would consider this film as just one other of Dr. Seuss, but nothing special...
Metascore
46

Mixed or average reviews - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 13 out of 30
  2. Negative: 6 out of 30
  1. Reviewed by: Olly Richards
    Jul 23, 2012
    60
    Lovely to look at and with some fun material not of Seuss' invention, but it's too hectoring, like reading an environmental textbook with jolly pictures.
  2. Reviewed by: Jonathan Crocker
    Jul 19, 2012
    40
    Fake plastic trees, fake plastic entertainment? The Lorax is immensely colourful, catchy and cheery. Then again, it's also gaudy, bland and recycled. You can do better.
  3. Reviewed by: Nick Pinkerton
    Mar 3, 2012
    40
    Par for the course in blowout CGI adaptations, a great deal of detail and bustle is gained at the expense of charm - for all the miracles these armies of animators can achieve, they have yet to successfully reproduce a humble artist's line.