We received an onslaught of merchandising and advertising once this bomb was released, and the cat in the hat was literally everywhere you looked, an obvious sign of studios spending too much money on a crappy film, when it could have been spent on a better film. The filmmakers don't call it "The Cat in the Hat", they call it "Dr. Seuss' The Cat in the Hat", just to assure everyone this definitely is the book their children, and their children's children read, but trust me when I say, this is not the same Dr. Seuss, it's an embarrassment! What is up with Mike Meyers here?! He doesn't look like the Cat in the hat I knew as a child, the cat in the hat I spent countless hours reading.

Dr. Seuss paved a special place in every children's heart, and he did it to me, and I shall protect his books like a father lion to his favorite author cub... okay, not a good analogy, but this really does embarrass Dr. Seuss, whom, if you listen closely, is rolling in his grave. Meyers' body suit makes him look twenty pounds heavier instead of the lean original Cat, he looks nothing like a cat instead, yet looks like a perverted mental patient who broke free from Bellevue and killed someone sneaking into their costume, and he bears the accent not of a distinguished cat who once approached chaos with sheer normality, but of his signature character Linda Richman from "Coffee Talk", not to mention the facial expressions he makes, looking into the camera like "Aren't I funny? See what I'm doin?", and the laugh from Austin Powers.

Most of the cat's jokes rely on the usual safety zones like flatulence, bodily humor, unnecessary toilet humor and sexually suggestive material like bare butt shots and wiggling his butt as Carmen Miranda, a joke that was so much more funnier when Bugs bunny did it, and instead the writers turn the cat in the hat into a Bugs Bunny clone instead of his real character. And about the toilet humor, it's toilet humor that doesn't even try to be original like loud burps, and farting; that's not funny, not to mention there are a lot of suggestive jokes both sexually and derogatory; all the desperate cry of writers trying to stretch a
fifteen page book into an hour and a half movie.

There is also very disturbing imagery like thing one and thing two (very creepy creatures) riding the babysitter's body down the stairs, the badly animated fish. The writers also manage to concoct a range of forgettable bland, musical numbers, and gags that border on repulsive. This is a movie that will also have your kids asking jolly old questions like "What's hepatitis?", "Why is his butt showing?", "What did he mean by dirty ho?", "Do they really torture animals?", and "What did he mean by Son of a Bi--?"; good old questions you'll have a hell of time answering.

The scenery is both bright and neon as well as headache inducing, and director Bo Welch doesn't help the audience to like it any better by hitting us with an onslaught of spaztic visuals at all time. Do you want "The Cat in the Hat"? Read the frikkin' book, joker! Gather your children, read the book and do the voices, it's not that hard, and, for a second resort watch the classic 1971 cartoon for "The Cat in the Hat" a faithful, accurate and charming cartoon that won't make you wonder why Paris Hilton is in a kids movie.

In the spirit of Seuss I sum this up with a rhyme, this is so bad, it should be considered a crime; extending a classic story into mindless crap, the producers deserve a nice big slap; acting is well, some gags are funny, but the story's brains are clearly lacking, by the end of the film adults will be surely cracking; dumb, crude, and gross in all, Mike Meyer's awful attempt to act screwball , it's clear from the toilet jokes the plot does disjoint, simply: This sucks like a hooker at gun point.

[   Link to Us   |   FAQ   |   Top^   ]
All written reviews material and content are a copyright of Felix Vasquez Jr. and Cinema Crazed.
Content borrowed without written permission will not be permitted.

¤ ¤ ¤