Real News. Real Funny.

Comments

  • The Lorax speaks for the SUVs.
  • Dr. Seuss spinning in his grave

    My first thought, also.



    The Lorax speaks for the upcoming compact/small-family crossover SUV produced by Mazda starting 2012 for the 2013 model year.
  • It's almost as if making this movie was a ploy to make money.
  • welcome to 1984 where good is evil and evil is good. And in this alternate reality, the Lorax is not an alarmist extolling the virtues of conservation of resources and responsible environmental resource management.
  • Eh, there could be MUCH more pandering, disgusting Lorax knock-offs (new window, PDF). I'd cut the SUVax some slack. Ax.
  • I hate crossover promotions. They're almost always lame as fark and have nothing to do with anything.
  • dahmers love zombie: Yep. 26 seconds too late.


    Sorry, but the LORAX was never a guy that would be promoting a SUV (no matter how eco friendly). He was created at a time in the US when you couldn't see from one side of a city to the other because of the smog. Look at some 70's to 80's movies and look at how difficult it is to pick out skylines in the northeast and LA.

    Today, you can see the difference.

    (for a really good example of this, look at the Karate Kid remake and look at the gray sky in the background)

    Was the Lorax on target? Was he an alarmist? Or did he preach conservation of resources and responsible environmental resource management?
  • Really folks? The CX-5 is a small SUV - far shorter than a minivan. Comparing it to the Prius, it's the same length, 3 1/2 inches wider, and only 150 pounds heavier.

    Can nobody have a freaking all wheel drive station wagon anymore without being an anti-environmental asshole?

    Keep on alienating everybody in the mainstream based on the labels of what they buy rather than whether it's better for the environment than the alternative; that'll surely advance the environmentalist agenda.
  • Babwa Wawa: Can nobody have a freaking all wheel drive station wagon anymore without being an anti-environmental asshole?


    Know how I know you've never read "The Lorax?"

    images.t-nation.comView Full Size
  • EnviroDude: Sorry, but the LORAX was never a guy that would be promoting a SUV (no matter how eco friendly).


    Sorry, but the Lorax is and was a fictional character. It says whatever its money-grubbing owners tell it to say.

    We probably shouldn't debate Geisel's intent, since he's, like, dead and all. But I'm of the opinion that if he was OK his literary characters endorsing any product whatsoever, he'd be OK with the Lorax endorsing an environmentally friendly SUV. This one is a damned sight better than most vehicles on the road, including cars.

    In a sentence, the Lorax would be more concerned with the effect of the product, rather than the class the product competes in.
  • Well, I'm confused now. I thought Lorax was a new brand of laxative?

    /turtleling like Myrtle
  • Babwa Wawa: But I'm of the opinion that if he was OK his literary characters endorsing any product whatsoever, he'd be OK with the Lorax endorsing an environmentally friendly SUV.


    He was just fine with endorsing products.

    ak2.polyvoreimg.comView Full Size
  • Those responsible for the movie should be kicked repeatedly in the crotch.
  • MaxxLarge: Babwa Wawa: Can nobody have a freaking all wheel drive station wagon anymore without being an anti-environmental asshole?

    Know how I know you've never read "The Lorax?"

    [images.t-nation.com image 285x301]


    You know how much you know about what I've read?

    I don't really know what your point is. They say a picture is worth a thousand words, but yours said nothing. I'm guessing you read the Lorax as a blanket condemnation of industrial activity in general. Most people read it as a condemnation of industry's disregard of its impact on the environment.

    Given Geisel's history, politics, and the time in which he lived, it's highly unlikely that he was completely anti-industry. I think you're applying modern political and economic thinking to someone whose schoolmates parents were civil war veterans.
  • Ever since I stumbled on this last night, I've been weirdly honked off and disappointed, with no particular sense of where to direct my ire:

    I can't really blame Mazda. Like all good corporate entities, they know they can get a few more bucks by jumping on the green bandwagon. So the opportunity to co-opt one of the most beloved environmental symbols in all of creation must've seemed like a financial no-brainer.

    I can't blame the ad company. Someone was going to do the ad, after all, so financially, it was a no-brainer.

    I can't really blame Universal. Movies are expensive, so hitching up the Lorax to a Mazda to defray the cost of pushing all those pixels is, once again, a financial no-brainer.

    I guess what I wish is that some PERSON, somewhere along the line had said, "Y'know, the Lorax speaks for the trees, 'cause the trees can't speak for themselves. The Mazdas (even the relatively "green" Mazdas) already have lots of people speaking for them. Maybe we should pass on this."

    If corporations REALLY were people, then maybe something like that would've happened.

    / I'll stick with the book.
    // And the original cartoon.
    /// Get off my lawn. I'm growing Truffula Trees.
  • BKITU: Babwa Wawa: But I'm of the opinion that if he was OK his literary characters endorsing any product whatsoever, he'd be OK with the Lorax endorsing an environmentally friendly SUV.

    He was just fine with endorsing products.

    [ak2.polyvoreimg.com image 320x162]


    I know - and that's one of the reasons I don't believe the Lorax's condemnation of industry was intended to be universal.

    But I don't know of any instances where he had his literary characters endorse products while he was alive. There may be some out there, though.
  • I may not know what a Lorax is but I do know that is one fugly car.
    Although, that said, every single SUV is ugly, pointless and stupid.
    Much like their drivers who tend to be at least two of those.
  • CSB...
    One of my kids favourite books as a kid, I read him that book hundreds of times. Then once when he was about 5 he started to quietly cry when I read the last few pages. He finally "got it" at a different level. Haven't looked at it in a few years, which makes me sad, its a great book.

    Movie maker needs a C0ck Punch
  • When I first read the Lorax to my kid (when he was 3 or 4) he absolutely loved it.

    Because of all the cool tree-whacking vehicles.

    2.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size
  • unitednihilists: CSB...
    One of my kids favourite books as a kid, I read him that book hundreds of times. Then once when he was about 5 he started to quietly cry when I read the last few pages. He finally "got it" at a different level. Haven't looked at it in a few years, which makes me sad, its a great book.


    OK, since you pre-empted my CSB, let me simply add that my kid had that same experience the first time he listened to the full length of "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald".
  • hippyneil: I may not know what a Lorax is but I do know that is one fugly car.
    Although, that said, every single SUV is ugly, pointless and stupid.
    Much like their drivers who tend to be at least two of those.


    Spoken like someone who has either one kid (or none) and doesn't have to drive in the snow.
  • It's ok, it's part of an alternative energy plan!

    www.smbc-comics.comView Full Size
    (new window)
  • Krymson Tyde: It's almost as if making this movie was a ploy to make money.


    ...so we're jumping right to the "HURR THEY SAID CAPTALIZM IZ BAD DURR" rebuttal?
  • Load 23 of 23 newer comments

This thread is closed to new comments.