‘Horton’: Cute or cultish

Editor’s Note: Each week staff writers Casey Phillips and Holly Leber will review a new film in point, counter-point style.

Casey Phillips: I liked “Horton Hears a Who!” because it really succeeds in bringing the Dr. Seuss literary experience to the screen. To me, it captures the essence of what Dr. Seuss is about, presenting children with social lessons wrapped in a kid-friendly package. The vivid colors of the mostly computer-generated graphics really tie the whole thing together and do a phenomenal job translating the book’s distinct art style.

Holly Leber: In a lot of ways, “Horton Hears a Who!” felt like a one-sided faith debate. I certainly remember Dr. Seuss books from childhood as being life-lesson stories, but this felt borderline cultish. Some may see the stubborn kangaroo (Carol Burnett) as the Evil Atheist, but to me she represents people who don’t consider viewpoints other than their own. The argument that faith shouldn’t be limited to what you see loses merit since Horton can actually hear the Mayor.

Casey: I don’t agree with your interpretation of the film’s lessons. For the target audience, those messages are going to be completely over their head and aren’t likely to elicit any reaction beyond, “Gee, I know kids who are different, but deep down, they’re just like me.” Dr. Seuss should be enjoyed for what it is, and looking for secret messages smacks a bit too much of people hunting for dirty imagery in Disney movies.

Holly: I’m concerned about parents using the film to drive home religious dogma. I think it’s different than blue imagery in Disney movies, because parents aren’t going to point that out, and small children are unlikely to notice it.

Casey: Of the lead actors, I personally loved Carell as the mayor of Whoville. The role caters to his ability to balance between plain-faced sarcasm and silly antics, both of which he does well. I also appreciated the exaggeration of the mayor’s facial expressions, which I’m sure were matched to Carell’s sound-booth line reading.

Despite great interplay between the two lead characters, I think adults will find more humor in Carell’s performance since it’s more subtly humorous than Carrey’s performance as the elephant Horton. I just couldn’t get behind a reprise of the slapstick ridiculousness I hoped Carrey outgrew from his days as “Ace Ventura: Pet Detective.” Then again, the kids will love his cartoonish delivery, and somebody had to play the bumbling Horton. If not him, it would probably have been Will Farrell.

Holly: I agree that Carell’s performance was funnier and more multifaceted than Carrey’s. Carrey has a lot of capability as an actor that is overshadowed by his predilection for rubber-faced comedy. I highly recommend watching his performance in “Doing Time on Maple Drive” (1992). When it comes to comedy, he’s a one-trick pony, even in animation. I also have to wonder what it was that drew Burnett, who does not do a whole lot of acting these days, into voicing the role of the Sour Kangaroo.

Casey: Sounds like it a recommendation depends on the parent. If you’re going to try to interpret the lessons for your kids, maybe you should give it a pass. Otherwise, it gets a green light from me.

Holly: I thought the kid-heavy audience would be like attending the movie in Whoville, but they were well-behaved. Thankfully, no parents tried to have discussions with their children during the film. I’m definitely among those who believe that the moral-of-the-story talks should be saved for the car ride home. I think it’s a bright, fun movie for kids, but I would implore parents to ask children what they feel the lesson of “Horton” is, rather than tell them.