Snarky new "Horton Hears a Who" Movie

[*anj*]

Have any of you seen this yet?
I just got an email through a homeschool loop and it says that the wackos in the movie are homeschoolers.
Crosswalk (http://www.crosswalk.com/movies/11570710/)liked the movie, but the reviewer said that she was annoyed about the anti-homeschool bias, so I guess there are world-view issues. It's okay to have stereotypical homeschoolers in a movie because any other kinds of stereotypes are socially unacceptable. I guess the thing that irks me about this is not that they're poking fun at the HS community (which I can handle) but that there are still so many people out there who are very ignorant of hsers and the broad range of people who embrace this lifestyle, and the myth of the xenophobic, clutching, antisocial homeschooler will continue to be perpetuated.

Here's a clip:

Meanwhile, Horton’s protection of the flower is slipping. Mrs. Kangaroo (Carol Burnett), a scary, controlling, fearful, suspicious mother who “pouch schools” her boy has gotten wind of Horton’s wild tale about a world on a speck, and she’s determined to squelch the nonsense. After all, it’s dangerous to get kids imagining things because “imagination leads to rebellion against authority, and rebellion leads to anarchy!”
Mrs. Kangaroo makes it her quest to destroy the wildflower, and she even riles up the monkeys and a horrible vulture (Will Arnett) to fight on her team. Horton’s mouse friend warns him that he has many enemies on his trail and must hurry to the high mountain. Horton tells the mayor the dire news. The mayor goes home to his wife and 96 children, spends a little time with each, and tries to come up with a plan. The only way that the micro-world will be saved is for the teeny little Who’s to find a way to work together with the largest creature of the “real world’s” jungle. As the clock ticks, Mrs. Kangaroo’s rage rises and her evil plans escalate.

[Valerie in Chicago]

Now I know to blow off that movie. Will it matter if that don't get my humble dollars? Probably not to them. But it will to me.

[GothicGyrl]

I work at a drive-in, I saw the movie last night.. What a way to totally misinterpret a movie and not "get it". The whole "pouch schooling" thing is irrelvant to the plot, she mentions it once and it's never mentioned again.

How sad that this movie won't be patronized over some false reporting.

[PrairieAir]

Oh, I don't know how many people actually believe all homeschoolers are like that. There are probably a lot of people who just find it really funny--like me. I think it's pretty funny when Carlos Mencia makes fun of Hispanics or Dave Chapell makes fun of black people, too. The only difference is that usually someone who is not a minority can't get away with those same jokes. That shocks people and makes them wonder if the person is a racist. Homeschoolers must be fair game for anyone:)

[Trivium Academy]

The original movie is for sale. I'll have to think about this more and read more reviews.

[Crissy]

It's okay to have stereotypical homeschoolers in a movie because any other kinds of stereotypes are socially unacceptable.

I have to disagree with your statement, anj. There are all sorts of stereotypes around that we let slide when they don't personally apply.

What about clueless, uninvolved fathers? Attractive women who are stupid?
Teenagers as delinquents? Public school teachers who care nothing for their students?

Maybe we simply have a tendency to notice a stereotype when it applies to a group of which we are a part?

[*anj*]

I work at a drive-in, I saw the movie last night.. What a way to totally misinterpret a movie and not "get it". The whole "pouch schooling" thing is irrelevant to the plot, she mentions it once and it's never mentioned again.

How sad that this movie won't be patronized over some false reporting.

Yes, the reviewer did say
Thankfully, that’s not a pervasive theme, and the other elements of the movie are quite inspirational.

But I don't think that the pervasiveness or lack thereof is the point at all. I think that the reviewer mentioned it because she thought it was too bad they had to take an otherwise good movie and use it as an opportunity to subtly bash hsers. If it was irrelevant, why was it there? You just have to wonder.

When you say "false reporting" are you talking about my comments or the reviewer's comments?

I didn't share this in order to influence people one way or the other. I just thought that some people might want to know before they plunk down their $$$ to see the movie.

[WTMindy]

I have to disagree with your statement, anj. There are all sorts of stereotypes around that we let slide when they don't personally apply.

What about clueless, uninvolved fathers? Attractive women who are stupid?
Teenagers as delinquents? Public school teachers who care nothing for their students?

Maybe we simply have a tendency to notice a stereotype when it applies to a group of which we are a part?

I agree with you, Crissy. We need to keep a good sense of humor about ourselves and not take those types of stereotypes too seriously. (I haven't seen the movie or read any reviews, but what I have read in the post doesn't sound too bad....I think pouch schooling sounds kinda funny!)

[*anj*]

I have to disagree with your statement, anj. There are all sorts of stereotypes around that we let slide when they don't personally apply.

What about clueless, uninvolved fathers? Attractive women who are stupid?
Teenagers as delinquents? Public school teachers who care nothing for their students?

Maybe we simply have a tendency to notice a stereotype when it applies to a group of which we are a part?

Good point. We as a society do allow other kinds of stereotypes slide. But I personally don't like any of them, I really don't. I hate it when they portray fathers as uninvolved and stupid, needing to be "taught" by their kids. All of the other things you mentioned are frustrating to me as well.

On the other hand, I'm as much of a hypocrite as the next person because I love "Napoleon Dynamite" and it is one big stereotype, isn't it? I don't know. I guess that when it feels like we're all in on the joke and we're laughing at ourselves it's fine. It's kind of the Archie Bunker thing. I know people of several ethnicities who said that they loved that character because he reminded them of their uncle or their dad. I don't know that the characterization in the new Horton movie is a "let's laugh at ourselves" type thing or a "look at those fools" type thing.

Again, it's all learning. I'm open to dialog, that's why I brought it up. I didn't mean to have a "Let's boycott this movie thread" but rather a "Hmmm...what do you think about this?" kind of thread. :)

[Elaine]

I agree with you, Crissy. We need to keep a good sense of humor about ourselves and not take those types of stereotypes too seriously. (I haven't seen the movie or read any reviews, but what I have read in the post doesn't sound too bad....I think pouch schooling sounds kinda funny!)


:D That does sound funny.

[Cornerstone Classical]

Dh said he heard on the radio that it had a "Pro-life" message. Horton was G-d, Kangaroo was a "pro-choice" liberal, the bad bird (vulture) was the abortionist.... and so on.

This is NOT my opinion of the characters.....just what dh heard on the radio.

Aside from what people want to read into it....We enjoyed it and then went to IHOP for the Who pancakes and drink. Then jetted over to Barnes and Noble to buy the book! It was a great family night! DC enjoyed it emensely!:001_smile:

[Crissy]

All of the other things you mentioned are frustrating to me as well.
:)
Me, too. Especially dad=doofus. http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/sad/no.gif (http://www.thesmilies.com)

[WTMindy]

Me, too. Especially dad=doofus. http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/sad/no.gif (http://www.thesmilies.com)
Amen!! I hate that one!! Or the ones where the grown-ups are all idiots and the kids have to solve all the problems.

[Whisperlily]

I haven't seen the movie, or read the reviews because I can't stand Jim Carrey.

I have seen a lot of his movies and they *were* hilarious. After seeing him in interviews, I can't stand him as a person.

One particular interview they had set up in a hotel room, with props to make it look like it was someplace else. After answering a few questions about his family (talking about how horrible they were.) He started running around the room tearing things down (literally ripping and destroying them) and completely being disrespectful and downright awful to the interviewer. He was making very rude personal comments about the guy's appearance "to be funny" But it wasn't funny. It was pretty obvious that it was not planned, and the crew was trying to make the best of the situation. He was downright horrible.

It has colored my view of his acting/characters ever since.

[GothicGyrl]

Let's see if I can articulate this:

Firstly, this thought, that Holly posted, comes to mind:
All homeschoolers are above reproach
Anything above approach must not be questioned
Therefore all homeschoolers must not be questioned.

I think, in this case, I agree with her and it applies. Do I take exception to YOUR (anj) statements? No, not at all. I didn't post that to get another neg rep for being " combative and offensive." I posted because I wanted to say "I've seen this, I work at a drive in showing it and I can say I disagree with her/his review".

But I don't think that the pervasiveness or lack thereof is the point at all. I think that the reviewer mentioned it because she thought it was too bad they had to take an otherwise good movie and use it as an opportunity to subtly bash hsers. If it was irrelevant, why was it there? You just have to wonder

It was there because it made sense to make an antagonist of a movie do something that some find offensive, and let's face it--some do find homeschoolers offensive. When I say "she mentions it once and it is never mentioned again" that is the sum of the whole. It was said out of the corner of her mouth, as a side comment, not even as a "I AM POUCH SCHOOLER HEAR ME THUMP!" (GRIN).. it was just "we pouchschool" and that's it.

"false-reporting" might be a bad choice of words. I think I could have chosen "knee-jerk reaction" instead--because it is inconsequential to the movie.

Dh said he heard on the radio that it had a "Pro-life" message. Horton was G-d, Kangaroo was a "pro-choice" liberal, the bad bird (vulture) was the abortionist.... and so on.

And Dr. Seus's widow is TICKED OFF at this. Both her and Dr. Seuss are vehemently pro-choice and loathe the anti-abortion activists using that line. In fact, she is in a court battle right now with one of those groups to stop them from not only using the line, but an image from the movie where the line is said.

Now if you don't want to see the movie because you disagree with their pro-choice stance, that's one thing entirely--and I won't begrudge you that!.

But to not see the movie based on one person's knee-jerk reaction and total misinterpretation of what really happens, well--the Harry Potter fiasco is a perfect example of why this is ridiculous.

And believe me, I am with you on the whole stereotyping thing. I am. But this movie is not doing that. I am not saying you were trying to start a boycott thread, but there are a few who now refuse to see it(and make their own decisions) based on what this one reviewer said about the movie--without realizing that what they said is a complete misinterpretation of the movie and in fact, is just not the point of the movie--eg: the reviewer makes it sound like that's all the movie is about, especially since she mentioned the Mayors 96 girls (which is an integral plot point, actually).

I just think what Holly said above applies. The reviewer is making it sound like homeschoolers are above reproach and perfect (and we all know that to not be true) and is inserting her own "offensive tone" into what should have been an unbiased review.

Oh and I wanted to add this about my drive-in: We've got the proof that we are the LAST and ONLY family friendly drive-in left in the USA. We play ONLY G, PG, and very few PG-13 movies(it has to be GOOD, like Indiana Jones), we do NOT serve any alcohol and do not allow smoking outside of your car (which they don't truly enforce because they can't, but they do make you pick up your butts if they catch you tossing them).. We still run our movies on a machine from 1964 and Ted, the owner, allows children to come into his "cave" and start the movie (they turn the equipment on) after Ted makes his announcement (the rules--1950's rules, no cussing, no sex, no alcohol. You WILL BE banned). So when I say what I do about this movie, I say it because my drive in would NOT show it if any of the reviewer's opinions were true. Ted is in his 70's and he was homeschooled himself (farm boy). He would not have allowed it.

[mom42terrificgirls]

actually, we have a family-run, family friendly drive in right down the road from us.

[GothicGyrl]

actually, we have a family-run, family friendly drive in right down the road from us.
Does it serve alcohol? If it does (any kind) or play anything above PG13, it won't get classified as "family friendly".

He's got the cert. on his wall.. There are only 3 drive ins in this state ( 3 or 4) and he's the only FF one. I'm just telling you what the cert. says.

[LadyAberlin]

I saw the pouch schooled comment on the previews. I laughed, but in the back of my mind wondered if that was a far as it went. I thought it was pretty clever, so long as the whole movie wasn't about her pouch schooling and always negative.

[Virginia Dawn]

The reason I will not watch this movie, or the new Grinch one: I like the books. I love the books. The original stories in all their simplicity are enough for me. I refuse to ruin that by watching these movies. If my kids eventually want to watch them somewhere else, so be it. Just don't ask me to. :-)

Oh yeah, Jim Carrey sure doesn't help.

[GothicGyrl]

The reason I will not watch this movie, or the new Grinch one: I like the books. I love the books. The original stories in all their simplicity are enough for me. I refuse to ruin that by watching these movies. If my kids eventually want to watch them somewhere else, so be it. Just don't ask me to. :-)

Oh yeah, Jim Carrey sure doesn't help.
I understand that. ;) The original Grinch with Boris Karloff narrating cannot be beat. But the Jim Carey one is not bad at all and Audrey Giselle(uhh, Suess, I can't spell their real name) approved of it and was their the whole time they made it. ;)

She also approved of this version of Horton. It's in CGI format, still cartoon, but you know--modern and it really is good. Very much to the book.

And the pouch schooling really is an after thought. ;)

[Kelli in TN]

The reason I will not watch this movie, or the new Grinch one: I like the books. I love the books. The original stories in all their simplicity are enough for me. I refuse to ruin that by watching these movies. If my kids eventually want to watch them somewhere else, so be it. Just don't ask me to. :-)

Oh yeah, Jim Carrey sure doesn't help.

I feel the same way, on both counts. Jim Carrey is so obnoxious. And the books stand on their own just beautifully.

[GothicGyrl]

I have to leave for work, but I do wonder what this "positive Christian message" I keep hearing about, is?

The Seuss's were staunchly pro-choice(among other things), is that one line spoken getting taken out of context and used for some purpose other than what it really means?

(A person is a person no matter how small--- aka, horton speaks this to his naysayers when they deny the existence of the Who's on the spore, it has nothing to do with babies or abortion)

I keep seeing this all over today--that the movie has a "positive Christian message" and I don't get that?

AHA!! And according to IMDB, Audrey Geisel was Producer of Horton! Cool..

[Mama Bear]

Horton was G-d, Kangaroo was a "pro-choice" liberal, the bad bird (vulture) was the abortionist.... and so on.

This is NOT my opinion of the characters.....just what dh heard on the radio.




I totally get that this is what your hubby heard, not your opinion. To whomever it was who was saying this on the radio: What the heck???

Maybe I'm just not "appropriately" into the whole representative imagery thing. When I saw the ad with the pouchschooling I thought, "Shoot. One more thing to have to interpret with my kids before some ninny gets a hold of it and says, 'See? This is what your mother is trying to do to you.' "

[Staci in MO]

I completely missed the "pouch school" line. It must have occurred while I was distracted by one of my kids.

It seemed to me to be a faithful adaptation of the book. I thought Who-ville looked cool.

Maybe I'm being dense, but I didn't notice any overt social messages.

[GothicGyrl]

The "pouch schooling" line is supposed to come after Horton is seen holding "class" with his fellow animals regarding the spore and the kanga utters that one line, then says "this is why we pouch school" .. I am off to work, so I can catch it again to get the exact scene and quote.

[Valerie in Chicago]

...MamaBear. I figured to just shrug and move on to another option (taking my $$$ with me). Maybe I'm just feeling a bit defensive, and therefore "knee-jerk," due to the CA decision, plus just dealing with my M-I-L recently asking, "so are you going to put her in school?" YET AGAIN. (as if THIS WOMAN has room to think the WE are the weirdos given HER sick history... but that's another post) I'll try to take a breath and lighten up. I will, I will!

[GothicGyrl]

...MamaBear. I figured to just shrug and move on to another option (taking my $$$ with me). Maybe I'm just feeling a bit defensive, and therefore "knee-jerk," due to the CA decision, plus just dealing with my M-I-L recently asking, "so are you going to put her in school?" YET AGAIN. (as if THIS WOMAN has room to think the WE are the weirdos given HER sick history... but that's another post) I'll try to take a breath and lighten up. I will, I will!
No, your MIL is wrong and I totally understand your "knee jerk" reaction. I'm sorry you are going through that.

I really was only commenting on the comments section from the OP's link and the review in that link.


Now, I'm off to work...

[Maria/ME]

I first heard the 'pouch school' comment via a forum when someone mentioned they saw the trailer "....that's why we pouch school" and the reply from Horton was "good luck with that illusion of superiority".

I could not find that in either trailer i saw...so when my dh and dd went last night I asked them to look for that line. (I frankly thought the line was hilarious because while I believe in homeschooling and the evils of ps I can see how homeschoolers can so totally be viewed as thinking they are superior....I can laugh at myself when the mirror is held up!)

My dh came back and said that there was only one pouch school comment and the other line had nothing to do with the other...they were in different spots in the movie. Again, I love the "pouch school" idea...reminds me of the whole attachement parenting thing. He never got an overall "anti homeschooling" message and we're pretty sensitive to the subject.

Does every movie have to have an agenda? I realize that many do. I realize there are all sorts of subliminal stuff that takes over society slowly, ...I hate Disney movies for their portrayal of women and girls,for example... but for the love of Mike, can't we just enjoy the movie w/out thinking pro choice/life, liberal/conservative and agenda. We're all big people. We're not w/out agenda ourselves, either, right?

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I first heard the 'pouch school' comment via a forum when someone mentioned they saw the trailer "....that's why we pouch school" and the reply from Horton was "good luck with that illusion of superiority".

I could not find that in either trailer i saw...so when my dh and dd went last night I asked them to look for that line. (I frankly thought the line was hilarious because while I believe in homeschooling and the evils of ps I can see how homeschoolers can so totally be viewed as thinking they are superior....I can laugh at myself when the mirror is held up!)

My dh came back and said that there was only one pouch school comment and the other line had nothing to do with the other...they were in different spots in the movie. Again, I love the "pouch school" idea...reminds me of the whole attachement parenting thing. He never got an overall "anti homeschooling" message and we're pretty sensitive to the subject.

Does every movie have to have an agenda? I realize that many do. I realize there are all sorts of subliminal stuff that takes over society slowly, ...I hate Disney movies for their portrayal of women and girls,for example... but for the love of Mike, can't we just enjoy the movie w/out thinking pro choice/life, liberal/conservative and agenda. We're all big people. We're not w/out agenda ourselves, either, right?

How many times do we find ourselves muttering, "Sheesh, just another reason I home school" or "Good thing she's in private school" or "What DO they teach them at those schools?"

As a throwaway line, I think "That's why we pouchschool" is hilarious.

[*anj*]

As a throwaway line, I think "That's why we pouchschool" is hilarious.

I do too, btw...

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

I do too, btw...

I figured as much. :cool: