Dr. Suess' "How The Grinch Stole Christmas"
Christmas is that one time of year where everyone, regardless of their age, becomes a little kid. You get caught up in the excitement of it all - the decorations, the music, the get-togethers and of course the presents. Christmas stories usually work the same way so whether you've seen something for the second or one hundred and second time you can still enjoy it, but that is unlikely to be the case for you with this year's spin on Dr. Suess's "How The Grinch Stole Christmas." It's a live-action version of the classic children's book and cartoon show, but something's missing. It's only half as funny as it should be and the Christmas spirit it's supposed to radiate comes off as more of an advertisement to a theme park.
The only reason this "Grinch" movie was made is because of its star: Jim Carey as the infamous spoiler of Christmas. If Carey hadn't signed on to this movie would it have been made? I doubt it considering 95 percent of the film's gags, jokes and one-liners are directly attributed to Carey's zaniness, goofiness and unflinching love of potty jokes. Director Ron Howard and his Imagine Entertainment production company do their best to synchronize the outrageous antics of Carey with the children's story and the result is a bit of a mixed bag.
The basic story of "The Grinch" is about a mean green monster-looking guy who lives alone in a cave in the mountain overlooking Whoville. The village below is inhabited by human-like, cartoony characters with big noses, buck teeth, crazy hair styles and a mindset that rivals the Munchkins from "The Wizard of Oz." For some reason the Grinch hates Christmas while the Who's love it and he attempts to sabotage their holiday to crush their spirits but his plan backfires when the Who's carry on with their holiday as if nothing happened.
Stretching this premise out to a full-length feature film seems like a difficult task and at times Howard and Co. do struggle to get as many of Carey's antics on screen as possible while still sticking to the main story. They introduce several sub-plots such as little Cindy Lou Who's (Taylor Momsen) constant inquiring about who the Grinch really is and her wondering if Christmas has gotten too commercial. Momsen is absolutely adorable as the little innocent girl and of course her questions are reflective of how our own society has made the holiday into more of an economic indicator than a joyous occasion for all mankind. The problem is this theme is simply plugged in where necessary and never really leaves much impact with you, especially at the end.
The screenplay's story is a bit different from author Theodore Geisel's original. This time the Who's aren't so innocent, they've made Christmas into a cutthroat competition and even a sleazy mayor character is thrown in. This makes Cindy Lou's cuteness all that much more so - but only in a technical sense. She's fascinated with the Grinch, she wants to meet him and befriend him and try to change his mind about Christmas. There's a scene where this actually happens and the Grinch tries to scare her away like a monster would to Shaggy and Scooby Doo but she doesn't buy it. Cindy Lou's affection for the Grinch is so bizarre it's almost sick in a pedophile way.
Along those lines there's also a sub-plot about Martha May Whovier (Christine Baranski) who had a crush on the Grinch as a child and still has feelings for him now. Since Whovier's supposed to be the bombshell character Baranski has the least makeup on and looks about 99% human compared to the other Who's.
This is a problem with this film: it's inconsistent. After meeting the Grinch in person you'd think Cindy Lou would know all his tricks. During that famous scene where the Grinch, "disguised" as Santa Claus, breaks into her house and she catches him stealing the Christmas tree she actually doesn't recognize him! This is totally unbelievable and comes off as very trite. Even the 3-year-old boy sitting in front of me at the cinema tugged on his dad's shirt and wondered aloud why Cindy Lou didn't realize Santa Claus was actually the Grinch (the father's answer: "shhh!").
But I digress, I've come all this way and haven't mentioned much about Carey. Is he funny? Is he outrageous? Is he a convincing Grinch? I guess the answer to all three would be yes, but with reservations. Carey is basically playing his "Ace Ventura" character but toned down for children, this is a PG movie after all. Thus, to be outrageous he has to do a lot of yelling and spout of lines that are really only funny on a Saturday morning cartoon. He gets to say a lot lines that are in synch with pop culture now, but 5 or 10 years from now will be dated and that does not a classic make. It's funny on paper, but as an adult watching this you're just thinking: "yeah that's funny, but why aren't I laughing?"
The answer might be because it's familiar and comes off as contained. C'mon Carey, go wild! But that would mean we'd get a PG-13 movie and Geisel's widow, who had the final decision over almost all aspects of this film, wouldn 't have liked that. I can understand her logic and I agree with it, which means Imagine Entertainment should have taken a different approach to "The Grinch" altogether.
GRADE: B-
You can also read this review at: http://www.epinions.com/mvie-review-4B46-386CBEF-3A241B75-prod1 And other reviews on the same topic at: http://www.epinions.com/mvie Check out my profile page at: http://www.epinions.com/user-chad9976
***** Chad'z Movie Page is back! In-depth reviews of nearly all mainstream films playing at your local cineplex. There's also reviews of a few classic films and some of your personal favorites.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews