Advertisers Co-Opting The Lorax With Half-Truths About Conservation 265
pigrabbitbear writes with an interesting opinion on the "green" marketing surrounding The Lorax movie adaptation. From the article: "There may be all kinds of reasons to defend the Lorax — Dr. Seuss's wondrous children's fable that's also a seminal book about conservation — from the wrath of Lou Dobbs and Fox News and others to whom the children's book-turned-Disney film is little more than liberal propaganda. ... For adults dealing with the real world of compromise, the Lorax is loved and hated for being such a ridiculously staunch environmentalist. Dude refuses to give an inch, which isn’t realistic, but certainly makes him a compelling character. That character is now being used as a shill for the CX-5, a small SUV that’s being billed as fuel-efficient and eco-friendly. What has the poor Lorax become?"
Tragedy (Score:5, Funny)
That character is now being used as a shill for the CX-5, a small SUV that’s being billed as fuel-efficient and eco-friendly.
I'm more concerned about lightning mcqueen from cars and cars2 being used to sell my kid a lunch box and thermos (true story!)
Come on... slow news day?
Re: (Score:2)
No it's not. I see those commercials as the new CX-5 is GREEN because it runs on the little furry creatures instead of oil.
Why use oil when we can breed these furry things as a renewable fuel source?
Re: (Score:3)
They need something that runs on stuffed animals. I have thrown away many garbage bags of them and my kids keep getting more somehow. It is quite miraculous how they keep coming into the house.
Re: (Score:2)
It is quite miraculous how they keep coming into the house.
The same way empty clothes hangers seemingly spontaneously come into being in the closet -- it's the missing socks. Socks are the larvae of coathangers and stuffed animals.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it ran from the oil squeezed out of little furry creatures. My bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Come on... slow news day?
Must be, I didn't see many stories posted yet this morning. But what I thought was more interesting was something I saw on TV news a few days ago. It seems that some grade school kids took on the studios for their lack of environmentalism in the movie's web site, and THE KIDS BEAT HOLLYWOOD!
I wish I had a link, but it was TV.
Re: (Score:3)
the Fix-It-Up-Chappie packed up and he went.
And he laughed as he drove in his car up the beach,
“They never will learn; no, you can’t teach a Sneetch!”
Re: (Score:2)
"Come on... slow news day?"
Hey, it was on The Colbert Show last night, so it *must* be relevant, or at least trending, or something.
I'm not an eco-nut, but I did grow up with the original Lorax (which bears little resemblence to the previews of this movie) and I do think the marketing department went off the rails a bit with the Mazda endorsement and tie-in.
Mind you, I'd probably have to think the same about -any- vehicle tie in that doesn't run on a sustainably grown quantity of truffala fruit.
It's just th
Re:Tragedy (Score:5, Funny)
No--there using this story as a metric of how many /. readers are sympathetic to OWS and similar political agendas. With all the changes since Taco left (flags?), this subtle quantification and increase in slashvertisements has made it ever more clear how /. will sell its users as product. Damn it. My post is self-fulfilling prophecy.
No, you post is unreadable due to the font.
Re:Tragedy (Score:5, Funny)
Also unreadable due to poor grammar and an almost total lack of sense.
I cringed when I saw the trailers (Score:5, Insightful)
The Lorax was was of my favorite books by Dr. Seuss. I was a regular participant in "Read Aloud" days at our local elementary school, and when I had a choice of the book this is the one I selected to read. It was a simple story, well illustrated, and enjoyable.
Obviously to stretch the story to a feature length film the writers had to include additional story elements, but it just looks SO busy. I wish they would stop destroying these classics, but I guess Hollywood is grasping for ideas and hoped to trade off nostalgia for this story and lure parents to the theater with their children. Pick up the book instead, read it to your kids, and discuss.
Re: (Score:2)
It looks like they changed the Lorax' character. The previews show him acting more like the Cat in the Hat.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I am really not certain at all whether there's a misspelling in your post or not...
Re: (Score:2)
Prevert.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I always liked "If I Ran the Zoo," even though I have no clue who "Gerold" is.
Re: (Score:2)
I've recently found the Cat in the Hat to be far more entertaining if I read it as if the protagonist were being driven slowly insane.
My son seems to like that rendition better too ;)
Re: (Score:2)
As do I. I even have a first printing.
Earlier Suess (Score:5, Interesting)
Early in his career, Geisel drew copy for FLIT (a particularly noxious insect spray) advertising; I wonder if that is what drove him to create such an uncompromising Lorax.
Re:Earlier Suess (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry about it (Score:5, Insightful)
This movie will be forgotten in five years, whereas the book will remain. Just keep your damn kids away from the movie.
So... (Score:5, Funny)
Advertisers Co-Opting The Lorax With Half-Truths About Conservation
So about 50% more truth than usual then?
Re: (Score:2)
Not a Disney film! (Score:5, Informative)
Disney has nothing to do with The Lorax. Like How the Grinch Stole Christmas and The Cat in the Hat, this is a Universal Pictures film. It is being produced by Universal's Illumination Entertainment, the same studio that did Despicable Me and Hop.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You've managed to bring an Apple jab into a non tech story. You have been awarded 4000 forever-alone-bitter-internet-troll points!
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Not a Disney film! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
We present to you this marvelous award:
For trolling on Apple and Anti Disney gibe
You have earned the right to buy a Mazda CX-5
A "half-truth" is a whole lie. (Score:3, Insightful)
When any version of a truth is used to deceive it is nothing more than a lie.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't mind, I'd like to use that line as my signature.
Adults need to grow up (Score:2)
"Compromise" cannot be a mode of thinking or you never end up with a bottom line. Some things, like nuclear war and avoiding environmental catastrophe, are optional decisions. We need to get them right because the consequences are real and will be absolute. If we define maturity as an intention to "compromise" on important issues, I want no part of maturity.
Re: (Score:3)
"Compromise" cannot be a mode of thinking or you never end up with a bottom line. Some things, like nuclear war and avoiding environmental catastrophe, are optional decisions. We need to get them right because the consequences are real and will be absolute. If we define maturity as an intention to "compromise" on important issues, I want no part of maturity.
Spoken like one of our politicians (it matters not which party). Never compromise with the enemy, we are against everything they say! Filibuster, blockade, shut down the government! We can never even hint that the other side might have a valid point in this argument!
Now lets try it with compromise:
You are right, some things can never be compromised on. But to say you must never compromise, or that every belief you hold is paramount is too extreme. Adults need to learn that they are not little children that
Lou Dobbs and Fox News (Score:5, Informative)
Fuck those people. You have a propaganda film out now that every conservative dickweed should be able to enjoy. Act of Valor, the one starring real soldiers, using live ammunition, and overseen by the Pentagon. Stop bitching that other people have what you also have.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Support your troops is not the same thing as using propaganda to increase enlistment numbers.
IT's not the same thing as supporting the idea of sending them to war.
The same assholes who have changed 'suppot you troops' to be 'Support whatever decision the government has decided to do you the troops, or else you are a terrorist.'
I support the troops. Use diplomacy to prevent combat, give them all the best possible gear, use them sparingly, don't use them to settle internal conflicts in other nations.
What has the poor Lorax become? (Score:4, Informative)
A corporate sellout....
Re: (Score:2)
And there we have the crux of the matter.
Someone's estate sold the rights to make the film. They also sold the rights to use the character for advertising products.
Put the blame where it belongs: on the people who did the selling out.
Furor about the conservation... not the co-opt (Score:3, Insightful)
Advertisers Co-opting The Lorax
No shit? Beloved character reduced to shill by Hollywood?? You don't say? That really would be news. NOT.
With Half-truths
[clutches heart] Ohmygod. I'm going to faint. Advertisers stretching the truth to market their product. The horror! [beat] This is news?
About Conservation
[pause]
[pause]
I see what you did there.
Tell me, if Mr. Lorax had been shanghai'ed into being a spokesman for toothpaste, toys, or floor wax, would this be a story? No. This story just fans the flames of the culture wars. Whoever started this meme knew that the word "Conservation" and the phrase "liberal propaganda" would propagate the meme with his target audience, who likes to get all a-quiver and indignant and victimized when mass media propagate memes they disagree with.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just about a character being used to shill for a product. That's not news, that's been going on for decades (centuries?)
It's a thneed! (Score:2)
My problem with extremist environmentalists (Score:3, Insightful)
I know this is probably going to get me flamed, but my biggest problem with the more extremist environmentalists out there (aside for their propensity for wild-eyed, quasi-religious Chicken Little alarmism) is that they often jump up to protest without any real answer to the question "Well, what's a reasonable alternative?" Most of the alternatives that they do have seem more like pipe dreams to me (at least for now). Sure it would be nice to have giant solar and wind farms that could supply all our energy needs. But those things are, even in the best case scenario, decades away. The idea that we're just going to run out and start shutting down coal and nuclear plants now, with no real replacement save some *hope* for a future of wind and solar is just nuts.
If you're going to advocate something radical, you had damn well have a pretty good answer on *how* where going to do it without throwing society into chaos. It's nice to save the environment, but we humans are part of that environment too.
Re:My problem with extremist environmentalists (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're going to advocate something radical, you had damn well have a pretty good answer on *how* where going to do it without throwing society into chaos. It's nice to save the environment, but we humans are part of that environment too.
If you're going to advocate something environmentally harmful, you had damn well better have a pretty good answer on how we're going to live that way without destroying our ecosystem. It's nice to have shiny things, but we humans can't live without the environment.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
So, yes, the wild eyed quasi religious environmentalists DO sound like Chicken Little to a lot of us. So now they don't like CO2, great. We've managed to address a lot of other problems pretty successfully, so we're not gonna panic. Other than throwing all of civilization into chaos, what do they suggest?
I'll take this one, even though I don't know the name of the logical fallacy that you're perpetrating, and you're just an anonymous, cowardly troll. Pointing out a problem is a perfectly valid thing to do even if you don't have the solution. The forests are not coming back, although tree farms with dramatically reduced biodiversity have taken their place. Wolves are returning because of the efforts of conservationists. Acid rain has been decreased because of the efforts of conservationists. The brazilian ra
Re: (Score:2)
Wolves are returning because of the efforts of conservationists.
I really wish they wouldn't
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why? What on earth could you have against wolves? We have millions of stupid humans infesting the place and you're worried about a few more wolves?
Sheep don't like wolves, as a rule.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the thing. The extreme environmentalists are now claiming that CO2 is a pollutant [1] (nevermind that plants consume it while producing oxygen). That means the very act of breathing is now considered polluting the environment. So according to your statement I now have to have a damn good reason as to why I breath?
Paracelsus (1493-1531, old news)
"All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous."
Yes, high concentrations of CO2 (or N2 or O2 or NOx or whatever) can be a pollutant - an undesirable chemical in an ecology. So stop breathing if you like, no skin off my nose, but if you're planning on staying alive, please, put the Wall Street Journal back under the parakeet where it belongs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OH NOES TYRANNY. Aaaand we've got another Internet Libertarian, folks. Don't try to reason with him; his mind's made up that anything the government does is EVIL.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say that I should have seen the WSJ link and should have r
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
STRAWMAN SPOTTED.
Look, "environmentalists" are on a pretty wide spectrum. You've got your nuts, and then you've got the people who think "you know, it's probably bad that we pollute so much, let's look for cleaner and more efficient alternatives".
Your post sounds like you fixate on the nuts so you can ignore the sane people.
Re: (Score:2)
...and this explains Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, yes?
And... (Score:3)
And normal environmental messages are not coopted by money? Of course they are. Is shilling a fuel-friendly vehicle that much worse than shilling a Prius or carbon credits?
Re: (Score:2)
The most "eco-friendly" (as in less environmentally damaging, of course no car actually *improves* the environment) car is a used one that gets good MPG. The Prius can't touch a CRX Si, used VW Golf, '90s Civic, '90s Corolla or '90s Suzuki Swift (latter two also branded as Geo Metro in the US).
Re: (Score:2)
Certain models of the VW Golf can do that easily, and the CRX Si and Swifts (especially with the 600cc or 1L engines) should be able to do it if they're well-maintained and you don't mash the gas. All those cars can do over 40MPG if driven carefully. The CRX Si is to hypermilers as the AE86 is to drifters, they love that car and mod them to do 3-digit MPG.
But the point is that by buying a used car you aren't spending the massive amount of energy and resources required to make a new car.
Re: (Score:2)
D'oh brainfart, CRX HF is the economy model hypermilers love, CRX Si is the sporty model autocrossers love.
I apologize for this in advance, soon to be on Fox (Score:2)
Clue: Hollywood is commercial (Score:2)
To be in a feature film is to volunteer for commercial use. Don't expect Hollywood to change its stripes to save the purity of the Lorax.
What "The Lorax" Shared With His WW2 Cartooning (Score:2)
Theodor Seuss Geisel was good at condensing something to a caricature of reality, and environmentalism was no exception. Like his World War 2 cartoons [ucsd.edu], which in the case of the Japanese were unremittingly racist, the Lorax's enemy became unrecognizable. Who, really, needs a "thneed"? This was obvious to me even as a child. I knew that people built houses and published newspapers from forest products. By eliding those things, Seuss managed to condense an entire string of arguments down to one easy-to-digest
Simple answer. (Score:3)
This is Hollywood, why is anyone surprised that a beloved character would be whore'd out? This movie wasn't produced to teach environmentalism, this movie was produced to capitalize on a timely theme and the popularity of Dr. Seuss.
But then, the answer here is simple. If you take issue with what they've done don't watch the movie. Don't go to the theater and definitely don't buy or rent the DVD. Once you hand your money over you've effectively told the movie company that they've made the right decision.
It would have been more appropriate to use the Once-Ler to peddle the SUV.
Capitalism (Score:2)
...doesn't understand "classy" or "tactful." If you're a celebrity your digitally reanimated self will be used to sell shit long after you're dead, and who knows what else. I fully expect to see Marilyn Monroe in a commercially released porno before I have any trouble getting a hardon.
Sad (Score:2)
I was already put off by the previews, which make it seem likely they intend to throw out the ending of the original (things are bad, but maybe, just maybe, they can get better) to replace it with a traditional happy ending.
I love my Mazda, but I'm almost ashamed of that commercial. Sure a hybrid is "better" than a traditional car of the same size (depending on construction and disposal of the battery...), but I still doubt the Lorax would "speak for the trees" and advocate cars of any kind.
Nicely done Mazda! (Score:2)
brainwashing my kid to want to drive your CX-5. unfortunately by the time he's old enough to drive, it will probably be out of production.
Re: (Score:3)
liberal propaganda (Score:5, Insightful)
"Dude refuses to give an inch"
Then he's no liberal. If you look around the stubborn ones are the "my way or no way" republicans. The liberals and the centrists are the ones that have been giving ground the last 18 years. That's why the country is so fucked up with a constitution that's a joke and a dysfunctional regulatory system allowing public to be raped by corporations.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you misunderstand. The ones who constantly give ground to the extreme right are no liberals at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Calvin and Hobbes (Score:2)
Bill: We thank you for your epic struggle to keep you characters true to your vision. We also hope you've made arrangements to keep that vision intact after your passing.
How to totally screw up somebody's character (Score:2)
Re:News for Nerds (Score:5, Funny)
"To whom."
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Calm down my little pedantic nerd
His question was addressed to that which Horton heard.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, pollution is the cause of a lot of chronic ailments, so to answer your question I would say that this certainly matters to the World Health Organization..
Re: (Score:3)
The link isn't even a legitimate link. It just takes the reader to some idiot's blog. "Lou Dobbs?" "Fox News?" Is there a citation for any of that, or do we now just invoke these boogeymen on sheer pretense and for effect?
Re:No surprise (Score:5, Funny)
Me too. I am so looking forward to Mickey Mouse as a drug-addicted former child star who beats Minnie Mouse, makes a pornographic movie and ends up choking in his own vomit.
I've been working on the screenplay since 1996. Miramax keeps turning me down for some reason. But as soon as the Mouse is out of copyright, I'm going straight to Searchlight.
Meet the Feebles (Score:2)
You might like "Meet the Feebles" then. It is a New Zealand made parody based on a very disfunctional muppet-like group.
Your above comment sounds like a story-line from something in Meet the Feebles.
Incidentally- the producer was... ahem... Peter Jackson, the guy behind the Lord Of The Rings film adaptations, The Hobbit, King Kong, The Frighteners, etc. Before he became famous he had some really strange, bizarre and humorous productions. "Dead Alive" is one of my all-time favourite movies.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Make sure to consult your sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_the_Cat_(film) [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
So, the Bobby Brown story then?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I look forward to Mickey Mouse coming out of copyright protection myself.
Mickey Mouse is NEVER coming out of copyright protection. Every time that event has gotten close Disney simply has their shills in the government extend the copyright term. According to the Supreme Court [wikipedia.org], as long as the term is "forever minus 1 day" it fits the constitutional requirement for copyright terms of a limited duration.
Re: (Score:2)
According to the Supreme Court [wikipedia.org], as long as the term is "forever minus 1 day" it fits the constitutional requirement for copyright terms of a limited duration.
All right, how about we just stop this charade and end copyright at 'heat death of the universe' and quit all of this shilly-shallying?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What's the deal with prawns and shrimps? (Score:5, Interesting)
Kinda... and kinda not.
The difference is like the difference between butterflies and moths; frogs and toads. Sometimes it is easy to tell the difference- sometimes it isn't- and sometimes the common name "shrimp" or "prawn" for a species is technically incorrect.
Frequently people call larger species "prawn" and smaller species "shrimp". This isn't always true.
Also, shape of gills is sometimes used- but this isn't always accurate. Sometimes which leg has the dominant pinchers is used- again this isn't always accurate.
The only truly accurate way to determine if a species is shrimp or prawn is to look at it's DNA. They are both decapods, (like lobster, crayfish, etc), but they diverged a way back.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is like the difference between butterflies and moths; frogs and toads. Sometimes it is easy to tell the difference- sometimes it isn't
The rules of thumb I've learned are pretty easy. If it holds its wings vertically at rest, and has smooth antennae, it's a butterfly. If it holds its wings flat at rest, and has furry antennae, it's a moth.
Frogs are smooth and slimey, live in water, and have protruding eyes on the top of their head to see from under the water. Toads have dry warty skin, can
Re: (Score:2)
You systematic biologists make everything too complicated:
1. Animal
2. Plant
3. Tissue Culture
Much easier.
from your friends in the lab.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah usually moths are said to be nocturnal, have clubbed antennae and dull colours. I couldn't remember the exceptions to the rules- but wikipedia comes to the rescue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differences_between_butterflies_and_moths [wikipedia.org]
Explains exceptions to all the rules.
Regarding frogs- and toads- no I don't remember the specifics- although I do recall reading that there is no rule which was 100% unviolate between them that says this is a frog and this is a toad. Toads technically are a subset of fro
Re: (Score:3)
My commuter van does 15 adults w/ work gear @ 13.2 MPG (and doesn't change much depending on load, lights, A/C, or traffic speed; probably unlike the CX-5). That works out to 192 person-miles per gallon (0.005 gallons per person-mile) at full person load. It's also much closer to passenger capacity than any SUV (or hybrid, electric, or alternate fuel vehicle) than I see on the road during commute or non-commuter times.
35 MPG is pretty awesome for a SUV, but the simple fact is that most purchases of this v
Re:Define fuel efficient. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the main advantages of SUVs are that they allow you to buy a station wagon without getting the "I'm a suburban drone" vibe that goes with a station wagon, and that they are classified as light trucks by the federal government, enabling them to bypass many of the environmental regulations imposed on cars.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem, obviously, is that 99.9997% of SUV's / 4WD pickups never make it further off road than an occasional curb or mailbox. They are wonderful and impressive tools if you actually need to do something off a developed road, but for most folks, it's just a bizarre status symbol.
Oh, and if you don't have a Warn winch, you're just posing....
Re: (Score:2)
At least for me, buying a SUV means that I can pull a 1300lbs boat, haul gear inside without it getting wet, throw a spare tire up on the roof for when I do go off road (camp road is a dirt track through the woods), and have a safe vehicle with AWD in the snow, sleet, etc. that we get in the Northeast. I can only afford one vehicle and, since it's just me, I only need one vehicle. Granted, I use it for commuting 95% of the time, but for the other 5% other vehicle types just wont do. I get about 23MPG for
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't let reality get in the way of his narrative that conservatives are victims.
Re: (Score:2)
I always wanted to know why the Once-ler didn't *shave* the trees for thneeds, instead of cutting them down. But then again, as a child at the time I was reading this book for the first time, I was also raising sheep in 4-H.