I need no convincing

It's honestly better then other Doctor Seuss movie adaptations

I literally had to sit on my hands through the entire movie when I saw it in the theater.

I watched it at my grandma's house

A lot of people seem to like it though it has a really high score on Amazon prime.

Has he not seen Willy Wonka or something? Either that or there must be some director's cut somewhere where he acts like a meth fueled ferret

The Cat is exactly like Gene's Willy Wonka - minus the charm, whimsy, cleverness, or subtlety.

@@HatsOffEntertainment 1:24: To me, Animation may not be an improvement to some people, but it does less damage, especially when it worked before in previous adaptations. Heck, one of the first adaptations was that of Horton Hatches the Egg. My Headcanon for Horton would be that since his trip to America, his mind hasn’t been the same since he was expose to American pop culture, hence why the “Horton Hears a Who” movie has him talk of multiverses, quoting movies and TV Shows (or perhaps saw a fight that happened in one of his sideshows), and even pretend that he’s in an anime. Believe me when I say that with Horton having a strong memory as mentioned in the movie, and for how long he was in that circus sideshow in the book, it suddenly starts to make sense. The Lorax, however, would be a later topic if you’re interested. Other than that, yeah, the cynicism is what ruined the Cat in the Hat movie, especially with how they treated Conrad and Sally’s Characters at the beginning. BTW, 7:35: No, they mean, they both wish they had a better life because of how abusive it is. How hard is it to understand? The Cynicism is stupid, yet I know what they’re trying to convey, despite how unnecessary it is.

@@HatsOffEntertainment Better to compare this too the Tim Burton movie?

Ironically, Myers' Cat is very much like JOHNNY DEPP Wonka.

Definitely

i mean he already did-e one for Nothing But Trouble, somethinks it is a series

Facts 😊 about to comment it lol

Agreed

I hope he does one for some Sandler comedies, Mario Bros. & Ghostbusters II

It's a guilty pleasure for me too.

Ditto

Yeah we know it's bad but it still entertaining

Yep had the dvd and love mike Myers.

I've not watched it since I was a kid but I remember it being really funny, might give it a rewatch

How is that a "fun fact"?

What did you see with the ticket is the big question

@@rippspeck I thought it was pretty fun

@@Jim26D Madea Goes to the Middle East

What a neat story!

Nate Gonzales the adult humor is funny like the dirty hoe scene hahah

@@random_1553 that's the exact joke I remember my dad referencing

Should have listened to his advice smh

that's basically a meme format

For real 😂 these people take themselves too seriously. I remember laughing my little ass off as a 7 year old in the theater. When the cat accidentally cuts his own tail and yells “son of a…” I was cry laughing. And then the scene with the lawyers… I lost it 😂. It’s honestly so good. I wish people appreciated it for how quirky and carefree it is. They will never make movies like this again. Guess people prefer preachy movies that talk about social problems lol

I loved that scene SO MUCH as a kid im glad someone else gets the same kick out of it lol

Love Guru is fukin hilarious

Never watched it, but I would be worried if that's an absurd movie and people got mad about it... so I bet its main problem is that is absurd, but it takes itself seriously.

@@MrlspPrt its hilarious people are morons...i like it better than austin powers etc those rarely make me laugh..love guru i laugh thru it...it doesnt take itself seriously but critics and fans do..they cant just enjoy some laughs they need to analyze it..im not like that luckily...i find tons of funny shit people have passed on...people want too much

Funny you bring that up considering that the cat in the hat was his last live action movie role prior to the love guru , which when you look at it was clear that it was his attempt to revitalize the magic he had with his films in the 90s , one which sadly failed miserably.(I’m talking about the love guru btw)

@@BugsyFoga in love guru people were hoping for critically acclaimed stuff like austin powers and its not that type of script

I tell you what I bet he wishes he did that Sprockets film now.

It really is other than the sets and makeup both suck and are just unfunny. Worst i got a headache just watching it. I hate these movies and wish they were never made.

There was more passion and talent put into the original animated Cat in the Hat iteration nobody wants to watch

Remember Scarface?

@@HatsOffEntertainment LOL REMEMBER SCARFACE x6

@@BaranoffIsaac He's not some wannabe critic on KZfaq, he's the ORIGINAL wannabe critic on KZfaq, the one all others aspire to be.

@@BaranoffIsaac GB16 probably doesn't deserve the level of hate it gets but its certainly no better than The Cat in the Hat. And you better send Plinkett some god damned pizza rolls to apologise for your disrespect.

@@BaranoffIsaac it's pretty terrible

Surprised to see you here

Really? THIS got worse aggregate than _The Love Guru_ ?

He has made some terrible terrible films He s also not very nice

After looking back at the movie after watching it with my younger sister i feel this movie is not that bad as the team try to make it their own and knew what they had to work with i feel it a shame a lot of other film critics tend to give this movie a hardtime despite the fact the book was short so you have to be reminded with a film they need something to be longer

@@comicbookreviewer4856 I watched with my twins and it was NOT as bad as people had said, actually enjoyable in many ways.

@@comicbookreviewer4856 Yeah but there are ways to expand a simple story that doesn't have to involve so much adult humor.

Even devito did a better job at being Burton with Matilda

The director was a production designer for Tim Burton, so that may have been the point. And Mike Myers could be Sandler-esque in his humor (weren't they on SNL around the same time?).

@@Kurtsg10 That might be the reason why it didn't work; the tone is completely inconsistent and too deviated from the source material. Yes, child siblings fight a lot, but it's best to know that they should also get along. If I were to write the story, I make it so that the reason the Cat in the Hat showed up, was because of parental negligence, so he's here to play Babysitter for them while his mother is away. I'd keep the "Astounding Products" Informercial Show segment, because it looks kinda fun; but I'd remove the large amount of smut they put in, and just keep the small amount that felt subtle (like the Spayed and Neutered Certificate, which I agree with Anti-Nihilist on), because Seuss does have a fair share of dirty humor back in his Warner Bros days in the 1940s, like with Private SNAFU (Situation Normal, All Fouled Up). I would also remove the whole "Proposed Marriage Sabotage" subplot, since according to the sequel of the book, Conrad and Sally canonically has a father that we don't see.

@@robbiewalker2831 Your idea sounds awesome. Also, I think that the movie should have been animated.

Now I'm wondering what a Cat in the Hat movie would look like if Tim Burton was in the director's chair

Bro being in that makeup is hell. Ignoring the hours and hours you have to sit almost perfectly still, the overheating alone would be killer

@@gamingphone7201 Jesus I now know why he was miserable

@@banishedtothebackshelf apparently he was wearing a cooling suit under it. Also kind of related fact: the makeup for jim carrey in the grinch was so unbearable, that they got him to be trained by some guy whose job it was to train the CIA to endure torture.

Like how Inspector Gadget did that on all the early DiC DVDS?

Lmeow o.O

@@Kr00zA People have lots of expectations, and this movie.. is different than clowns from space, or 'the thing, .. this has cats with hats :-)

Yes! I agree!

That's true. He's not the physical comic Carrey is. He always seemed a bit constrained beneath the heavy makeup. But he did a decent job

Both sucked in their movies. Its just gawking at the camera with look at how crazy this is and not being funny.

@@ianmartinezcassmeyer Jim has a very manipulative face that works even under that make up. Gave him more expression

@@Bowiiihowdy Carrey also had enough energy to work with the costume as if it was his own skin. Fun fact: they hired a man who taught CIA operatives how to endure torture to help Carrey adapt to the furry latex bodysuit while performing.

I think Robin Williams should’ve been cast as a The Cat in the Hat.

Yes this movie was so fucking ridiculous and had unnecessary things, but I still love it for how terrible it is as a 19 year old

@@mastercobragaming8780 Yet as the only 2nd liveaction Seuss adaption, its failure caused the Widow of Seuss to declare that no more liveaction adaptions of her late husband's work can be made again

If you want a genuine adaptation of the book, look up the 1971 Animated Cat in the Hat Special nobody gives a crap about. You're welcome!

it did make me laugh.. I mean, I never saw it, but the scenes here cherrypicked to point out it had good moments.. made me laugh. whereas the scenes picked to illustrate what sucked, totally blew chunks. Funny how that works, and I guess it's no wonder trailers seem to spoil so much these days.

I think Mike Myers is funny in almost any scene he is in and I still laugh at most of it. But anything not directly involving him is unbearable for the most part. It honestly is probably best enjoyed in a 30 minute cut of just Myers bits.

The thing with the filler at the beginning is at least it sets up the mom character's situation and how the kids have an emotional arc. Though the book didn't have that and it's story was fine, I think it's more so for padding

So it's camp

Adding the stuff with the mum at the beginning at least gives stakes to the house getting wrecked and the dog going missing as we know that Conrad is on his last legs with her and if the house is ruined she’ll lose her job

Honestly, this movie felt more like an extended SNL skit than a movie.

Absolutely. How about My favorite Martian? One of my favorites with Jeff Daniels.

That’s a good movie too. Jeff Daniels is a great actor overall.

I'll be damned, you read my mind! 〰️

I always wondered if there was other ppl out there that remembered There Goes The Neighborhood like I did lol....I still don't understand why it hasnt even been released on DVD atleast

Good choice.

After watching, OK, yes, it does look like a Seuss world and the practical stuff is good to see, though it wasn't as uncommon in 2003 as it is now. It is still "that bad" because of all the extra stuff and humor's tone for a movie from a kids' book.

In this comment section you seem to in the minority of thinking that the movie really is that bad.

@@JaredGriffiths2000In my defense, this is just me looking at the title of the video. As I've seen this, I could see the good things he saw such as the magnificent costume and set designs. But overall as a film, it's still a bad movie.

@@johnenigma8506 I wasn't attacking you or anything, it's just I find it funny that you seem to be in the minority of thinking it really is that bad because I remember a time when this movie use to be universally despised.

@@JaredGriffiths2000 Oh I know that you're weren't attacking me. No worries.

@@johnenigma8506 Oh okay.

He wrote a movie?!?

@@IcyDiamond yes. It was under his real name.

I've seen that movie. Apparently it was originally 2 and a half hours long but test screenings shortened it to 89 minutes and it was reshot with an opening and closing bookend directed by a Leave it to Beaver director to frame the whole movie as a dream like Wizard of Oz.

@@wstine79 Did he write any other movies?

Now THAT was a great movie! lol

Empire, like the rest of the Lucas 6, came out in May. He was saying "why would a non-holiday movie ro well during holiday season?" Lord of the Rings I think is a better counter.

"I'm not saying that we're GOING to sue..."

@@pcapusso That's another good one. I think I liked the lawyers more than Thing 1 and Thing 2.

Close. He actually referred to them as magical time-traveling elves. A for effort though.

@@DisneyMaster2 what a weird place to act condescending

@@pcapusso I wasn’t condescending, I was just helping him out.

I just can’t stand the sight of mike Meyers. Even under a cat suit. People say he’s not funny anymore but their wrong. He never was. People use shrek as an example of him being funny. He didn’t write it. Just reading lines, bro

@@edroseptic9442 ya idk i love Austin Powers and Waynes World though. And some of his SNL stuff.

@@lesclaypoolonbass9431 Austin powers? Really?

@@edroseptic9442 ya i loved them back when they came out. I feel like the first one still holds up but the other ones not as much but i still got nostalgia for them. But the first one is still a good Bond spoof.

It’s weird, I’m a huge horror fan, I’ve seen some gnarly, extreme films and barely flinched, but this is legitimately unsettling and disturbing to look at. Especially Things 1 and 2. Jesus.

If he was alive he wouldn’t have even wanted this to be a thing. Apparently he was famously opposed to his properties being expanded outside of his books. It’s why it wasn’t until after his passing that many of his properties started to be merchandised and adapted

Merchandised, yes. Adapted, yes and no. No because even in his lifetime, his works were adapted into cartoon specials. To his credit, he already had a working relationship with Looney Tunes animators Chuck Jones and Friz Freleng, having collaborated with them on Private Snafu in the 1940s. So he did not trust anyone else with his works other than those two. I encourage you to look up any of the animated Dr. Seuss specials from the 60s through 80s that NOBODY watched (except maybe the overlooked (when compared to the so-called "definitive" live action version) animated Grinch special from the 60s)

​@@kevinfrodahl5102 The Lorax isn't preachy. I could take a preachy movie about climate change, plundering of natural resources and the like. The book did that amazingly and the animated TV special from the 70s even moreso. As far as environmentalism and anti-pollution stories go, they're damn near perfect and it saddens me to no end to see that both are still topical (although they DID clean up Lake Eerie). The Lorax movie from 2012 isn't preachy. Quite the opposite, in fact: it's hypocritical. It is the most toothless, shallow, consumer-friendly piece of cheap entertainment that says nothing about environmentalism or natural resources, the dangers of short-term solutions, unless it's as a joke or SO oversimplified that it might as well be a joke. The book simplified these ideas for children to understand, but it still illustrated what over-consumption of natural resources for short-term benefits looked like AND why so many well-intentioned people pursue it despite the harm it does. The movie basically says "Save the trees because we told you to, now watch all these goofy characters be goofy!" It has all of the worst cliches of modern animated family films, or even of just movie in general: intrusive celebrity casting, a flimsy plot that stops every five seconds for an irrelevant gag, GENUINELY offensive jokes ("Dat's a WOMAN!"), latent female objectification (let's be honest: Ted flat out sees Audrey as a prize to be won), only slightly more overt mockery of men expressing emotion (Onceler's "sissy" crying when he gets to the meadow or announcing to literally nobody about how there's "nothing unmanly about knitting," which might as well be him shouting "NO HOMO!"), and a message delivered so poorly that you'd swear it was meant to teach the opposite. Granted, big-budget wide-release Hollywood movies preaching eco-conservation or support of local businesses is an act of hypocrisy in and of itself, IMO, but that movie seems to go out of it's way to flat out make fun of the message ("The trees had tufts that were softer than silk! And they had a sweet smell, like butterfly milk!" "What does that even mean? lol" "I know, right??") And that's not getting into how a movie meant to discourage pollution, mass consumption and fast fashion had SEVENTY, yes SEVENTY, product tie-ins, including A FUCKING CAR THAT ISN'T EVEN LOW-EMISSION, not to mention put the movie's logo on disposable popcorn containers and had a poster that used a shitload of orange ink. In the words of George Carlin, it's stunningly and embarrassingly full of shit. The Lorax movie is, in many ways, like the thneed itself, a cheap, useless piece of mass-marketed fashion meant to be consumed quickly and with no concern for the long-term effects doing so may have. It's not a movie so much as an object. The fact that it ends with the famous quote from the book, "Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot / Nothing is going to get better. It's not." decontextualizes a very bittersweet message and turns it into textbook ecofascist/capitalist rhetoric: "Well, if you care so much about the environment, why aren't YOU doing something about it??" says the white male billionaire CEO who pays no taxes, flies in private jets and generally doesn't do anything eco-friendly beyond recycling because HE'S too important. It's a Deadhead sticker on a Cadillac. I can handle a poorly-made movie, but I can't handle the poor delivery of a message I find extremely noble. The 2012 Lorax movie is both, and while I don't like to be hyperbolic about something as trivial as a movie, I find the whole experience downright insulting. It's a better constructed movie in the same way that H*t**r's "showers" were a better constructed form of mass m*rder than doing it to one person at a time. I'll take an unwatchably bad movie that's preachy about global warming over an unwatchably bad movie that capitalizes, trivializes and or even flat-out MAKES FUN OF global warming any day of the week. Did I answer your question? (And I'm not putting a TL;DR. Read the whole thing)

My only problem with The Lorax was how they blatantly stole the climax from WALL-E.

@@kamdan2011 Wall-E was a better adaptation of The Lorax than Lorax 2012

​@@kevinfrodahl5102 "Oh look a completely innocuous opinion on a movie adaptation, let me randomly assume you are probably uncomfortable with environmental activism (unlike me). Oh and let me condescendingly downplay your own opinion for my objectively better one."

If the Cat in the Hat was to be adapted in this era, the titular cat would've likely be a CGI character, which fits the bill better.

The whole movie was just them pissing on Dr. Seuss’s legacy

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS! If this wasn't a Suess story, I would have found it between acceptable and funny. But this is the fucking Cat in the Hat. There's a reason there's no cussing or boner jokes in Suess books. This is the main reason I'm not a Meyers fan. He can't separate his need for crassness from the projects he chooses. He HAS to insert it, no matter what

As a kid I recognized this fact. And this might be a hot take for some, but I felt the same way about The Grinch too.

@@The_Captainn And yet people love The Grinch, you see the problem with this logic?

My opinion on the movie is pretty much the same as yours.

@@JaredGriffiths2000 I think most people who don't like it were expecting something it's not. If you accept it for what it is - a fantastic take-your-brain-off-the-hook movie, it's a lot of fun.

I feel the same way. From what I've seen, 95% of the movie has Mike Meyers looking directly into the camera.

@@KasumiKenshirou What is worst too Jeff is that some of the reviews from youtube channels that came out in the early 2010's criticizing this film sadly tend to get a lot of flack because this film sadly tricked many of them.in their childhoods into thinking it's good and thus they feel the need to defend this mess.

@EQ Games Wrong. I saw it when it came out, and I saw it quite literally last year. But I appreciate your wrong response. The movie is still funny in it's funny moments

@EQ Games And I also saw it when I was an adult. I don't see your point. It's still a good movie at either age