RSS
Showing posts with label devito. Show all posts
Showing posts with label devito. Show all posts

THE SHOWBUZZDAILY REVIEW: "The Lorax"




THE LORAX:  Not Even For Free - A Seussian Mess

It may not be pretty, but surely it's true--Credit must go where credit is due.  In this case, that means the Universal Pictures Marketing Department, which as it turns out has done a splendid job these last few weeks of hiding just how thoroughly terrible the new movie of Dr. Seuss' THE LORAX really is.  


Considering how cinematic the works of Dr. Seuss seem to be, the films based on his work have a surprisingly bad track record.  Horton Hears A Who! managed to be mediocre, but How the Grinch Stole Christmas and The Cat In the Hat were two of the most painful family movies of recent years.  Part of the problem is undoubtedly that Seuss' picture books don't have enough story for a full-length feature, and thus have to be "opened up," usually badly.  (The 1966 TV Grinch was and is a short classic, but Ron Howard's movie is a bloated disaster.)  There's also something about Seuss' extravagant, anarchic imagery that seems to give filmmakers (and sometimes actors) the sense that they're free to indulge themselves, and that only too much can be enough.

The Lorax was produced by Illumination Entertainment, which gave Universal its big hit Despicable Me, with Illumination honcho Christopher Meledandri serving as producer, over director Chris Renaud (also a director of Despicable).  As written for the screen by Cinco Paul (another Despicable vet) and Paul Daurio, Lorax is badly constructed, overly blunt and emotionally unsatisfying.  The first hour of the story is mostly a series of flashbacks:  young Ted (Zac Efron), on a mission to please Audrey, the girl of his dreams (Taylor Swift--who doesn't sing, even though the movie features several ghastly songs by Cinco Paul and composer John Powell), sets off to find her a real living tree.  This is a challenge, because Ted and Audrey live in Thneedville, a completely artificial town where the "soil" is painted concrete and the "trees" are inflatable.  Thneedville is run by O'Hare (Rob Riggle), who's gotten rich by selling the inhabitants bottled air less poisonous than the polluted stuff around them.

Ted is advised to seek out The Once-ler (Ed Helms) for tree-related wisdom, and finds him walled up in the only structure standing amid the wasteland outside Thneedville's city limits.  Once-ler, at great length, tells Ted the story of how he became the victim of his own ambition and greed, breaking his promises to the forest creatures and to the mystical Lorax (Danny DeVito), who speaks "for the trees," chopping all the trees down in order to build an industrial empire producing unnecessary Thneeds.  (This will not be Mitt Romney's favorite movie of the year.)    Eventually, Once-ler gives Ted the last remaining tree seed, and that leads to a final half-hour of chase scenes and supposedly heartwarming conclusion.

We know for a fact that it's possible to tell a whimsical animated fantasy about the dangers of corporate greed and human indolence, because it was called WALL-E and it was a masterpiece.  Rango, too, had a not dissimilar plot (evil industrialist villain, water instead of trees being withheld from the town) and melded its message with weirdness to brilliant effect.  The Lorax makers, however, don't evidence a fraction of the artistry that went into those films.  Even if one applauds Lorax's environmental message, the singleminded way it beats that drum becomes wearying, and the characters are all exceedingly flat.  That even includes DeVito's Lorax, beyond the couple of decent lines that are already in all the trailers and ads.  

The look of the animation (which, by the way, makes almost zero use of the 3D imposed on it) is reasonably colorful and Seussian in a general way, but for a story that hinges so much on the preciousness of nature, there's almost no memorable imagery here, not a single moment that brings home the message the picture is trying so desperately to send.  

The Lorax is dreary, a bore despite its brief running time.  These multimillionaire purportedly anti-corporate moviemakers have done nothing but grind a small, charming piece of literature into an outsized corporate product.  It's a Thneed.


  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

The Sked: Thou Shalt Not Appeal Directly to Nielsen Homes

Oprah Winfrey broke a cardinal rule of the Nielsen ratings game by appealing directly to Nielsen sample members to watch her struggling network.  As reported in the New York Times and elsewhere, Oprah tweeted Sunday night "Every 1 who can please turn to OWN especially if u have a Neilsen box" as she wrote about her interview program Oprah's Next Chapter.  Oprah promptly apologized and removed the offending tweet (presumably after a flurry of phone calls and emails from upset lawyers, executives and media relations professionals).  Nielsen has threatened to put an asterisk next to any rating for the telecast, notifying any advertiser or client of the circumstances.  The problem is the asterisk might fight for attention next to the "hash mark" that OWN receives in many time periods (a "<<" symbol Nielsen publishes when ratings fall below a 0.10 and are deemed statistically unreliable).   


Nielsen and other ratings measurement companies such as radio's Arbitron have longstanding policies against broadcasters directly addressing members of their research samples.  A network or program can advertise, promote and market all they want to a general audience, but a message targeted to sample members is strictly forbidden because it might distort normal behavior.  Some TV stations in small markets still measured by paper diaries go right up to the line by running announcements such as "You are watching WXYZ...write it down."  Even occasional local TV news stories about the ratings process raise concerns by Nielsen.   

At the extreme, "sample tampering" could occur if a broadcaster somehow identified Nielsen homes and communicated directly with them.  For that reason, the sample's identity (names, addresses, phone numbers, emails) is one of the best kept secrets in the world.  A fictional scheme to tamper with the ratings sample was the subject of Danny DeVito's directorial debut in The Ratings Game, a 1984 comedy produced for Showtime/ The Movie Channel and also starring Devito and Rhea Perlman.  (In the film, a disgruntled researcher at the ratings company falls in love with a schlocky producer, and she provides him with a list of people in the sample.  He gives away trips to a number of these families, moves his friends into their homes, and have them watch the stunningly bad and ethnically-stereotyped situation comedy The Goombas, making it a massive overnight hit.  Any parallels to the success of 2 Broke Girls is strictly coincidental.)


So what happened to Sunday's ratings for Oprah's Next Chapter?  The telecast at 9 pm did not crack the top 100 cable program list for the night on tvbythenumbers.com (generally a 0.3 rating or higher with Adults 18-49).  (When the actual rating, asterisk and all, is available, we will report it.)  But in the fourth quarter of 2011 in prime time, the struggling OWN channel averaged a lowly 0.07 rating with young adults (representing about 85,000 Adults 18-49 in an average minute), meriting the dreaded hash mark.  In its target sales demographic of Women 18-49, OWN averaged a 0.10 rating and 63,000 young women, about the same delivery as the National Geographic Channel (and just above the hash mark line).  That means in a typical moment in prime time, approximately five (yes, 5) women aged 18-49 in the Nielsen sample are watching OWN (5 out of the roughly 5,500 women 18-49 with Nielsen PeopleMeters in their home).  What are the odds that even one of the other 5,495 young women in the sample were following Oprah on Twitter at exactly the right moment (sometime around 9 pm Sunday when the tweet was posted) and then felt compelled to turn on the TV or change the channel to OWN (assuming they can find it)?  Those odds are for another post.  The point is, a broadcaster simply can't do something like that, even if the action had little to no chance actually lifting the ratings.  

###

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS