REVIEW: “How the Grinch Stole Christmas”

GRINCHAs audacious as filmmakers can sometimes be, their finished products don’t always match their ambition. Such is the case with the normally reliable Ron Howard’s “How the Grinch Stole Christmas”. When I first saw this film, I left the theater with a pretty gnarly opinion of it. My dislike has eased up after a recent viewing, this time in the presence of my two children. They thoroughly enjoyed the picture and watching their pleasure naturally impacted my experience. But while I have a slightly more favorable opinion now, it can only go so far with it.

Howard certainly had his work cut out for him. First, making a feature-length film out of a 26-minute animated short was a challenge. The script makes some required additions, some that work but more that don’t. And the movie gives its star Jim Carrey plenty of space to do his thing, this time in furry green Grinch attire. At first glance it’s hard to take the Grinch getup seriously. But it’s a pretty impressive transformation (Rick Baker and Gail Ryan won the Oscar for Best Makeup). Yet Carrey’s shtick grows tiresome and at times feels like a standup routine rather than a role in a full-length movie. The film also creates new storylines involving the Whos to try to stretch things out. But other than the expansion of the ‘cute as a button’ Cindy Lou character (played nicely by current hard rocker Taylor Momsen), the Whoville stuff falls pretty flat.

The second big challenge was visually capturing this unique world, first created by the pen of Dr. Suess in 1957 and and later with the classic animation of Chuck Jones in 1966. The scenery and background environments are vibrant and capture the imagination created in the original material. Whoville is a busy and colorful place which makes watching these Christmas-loving locals a bit easier. On the other hand, I didn’t remember the Whos looking quite so freakish. They’re protruding front teeth, wolf-like noses, and peculiar hairdos more closely resemble small woodland rodents. They’re more than silly looking and a bit distracting.

grinch photo

But for me this movie’s biggest transgression lies in the overall lack of charm that made the original short so great. To be fair, Howard does try to inject some feeling into the storyline. But these few instances of emotion are smothered by the film’s overall dependency on in-your-face slapstick and bathroom humor. And at times it feels more like a dark comedy rather than a spirited Christmas movie. The original story is still mostly intact and there are several clever nods that fans will appreciate. But unfortunately it’s missing the key components that made 1966 short so special – heart and soul.

“How the Grinch Stole Christmas” would be tough for any filmmaker to transform into a feature-length live-action film. Here Ron Howard shows enough to know that it can be done. But he, along with a sometimes grinding script, undermine much of what they get right. There are things to appreciate about the film and it can be fun watching it with children. But even with all of its aspirations and risk-taking, it still falls short of being the fun and festive treat it wants to be. Instead it’s a repetitive and laborious exercise that just doesn’t pack the emotional holiday punch that it should.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

15 thoughts on “REVIEW: “How the Grinch Stole Christmas”

  1. Good review Keith. This movie’s terrible and made even worse by all of the creepy things Howard added into production. Carrey is alright, but he’s simply just hamming it up as usual, but this time, with a big-ass, green costume on.

  2. Nice review. I agree. This just wasn’t at the level of the original animated short.

    “…its overall lack of charm…few instances of emotion are smothered by the film’s overall dependency on in-your-face slapstick and bathroom humor” Spot-on.

  3. this movie is awesome is a must see every Christmas for me is now a family classic don’t get the bad reviews they probably will be ok rainbow characters in it that’s why they have bad reviews on this great movie

  4. I find this review utterly distasteful with no sense of the work done for such movies. The writing in this review also seems to be spilling out of the mouth of a four year old because he doesn’t stop rambling. I’ve looked at some previous reviews and it seems this is nothing new for Mr. Garlington. I believe he should look into another profession because clearly critiquing is not his strong suit.

  5. how come I just fount t hi s picture? I didn’t know about it and this picture wernt nothing but a cash grab to make folks go out and buy them lucky charms cereal cause of them rainbows and green folks .

Leave a comment