While the film’s marketing makes it look like a feel-good parable teaching responsible environmental stewardship, the reality is quite different. This isn’t a gentle sendup in which conservation triumphs over avarice and individual profit. It’s not George Bailey versus Mr. Potter in “It’s a Wonderful Life.”
Instead, “The Lorax” presents a radical critique of the idea that humans have a claim to build wealth out of natural resources.
Thneed-Ville is hopelessly polluted, thanks to an industrialist called the Once-Ler (Ed Helms), who marketed a utility-garment product woven from the silk-soft threads of the Truffula tree. This product, called the Thneed, proved so popular that its inventor resorted to a scorched-earth policy to keep up with demand, eventually denuding the region of trees, turning a bucolic vale into a postapocalyptic nightmare.
The movie concerns itself with the efforts of young Ted (Zac Efron) to sneak past Thneed-Ville’s surveillance apparatus to meet secretly with the Once-Ler (now living in poverty and exile outside of town) to learn the secret history of Thneed-Ville and, if possible, find a way to revive the extinct Truffula species.
Ted isn’t motivated by ideology — he’s trying to impress a cute older girl named Audrey (Taylor Swift) who wants a real tree more than anything. Ironically, those parents loopy enough to want their kids to be indoctrinated with the wing-nut message of “The Lorax” might find this plot point to be a bit sexist and even “heteronormative.”
It’s the quintessence of limousine liberalism, with the studio looking to squeeze a few bucks out of the righteous indignation of moviegoers.
One wonders: If the filmmakers are serious about this message, why they are charging admission? And if they’re not serious, what is the point of this cuddly piece of cartoon agitprop?
No comments:
Post a Comment