Dr.Seuss!
We all have grown up reading and cherishing his books for his use of rhyming to tell his stories; having deep and thought provoking morals underneath his lighthearted stories; and creating illustrations that are so imaginative and iconic that you couldn't mistake his art style for anyone else. He's a legendary genius in the world of children's literature who continues to inspire and amaze us as we get older, whether it being from an artistic level or a storytelling stand-point! But as much as we love to remember him fondly (and for good reason) that doesn't mean that he always created material that wasn't mediocre or down-right offensive. When he wasn't writing a book geared for children in the 40s such as "Horton Hatches the Egg", he drew hundreds of political cartoons for the newspaper geared for adults that would contain the same amount of shocking racially insensitive stereotypes that animation studios like Disney and Warner Brothers were infamously known for at the time. And out of all the racist imagery that he drew in these political cartoons, his most infamous ones were his drawings of the Japanese.
During World War II when America was at war with them, Seuss would depict the Japanese as violent soulless monsters in his cartoons as he would give them slant-eyes, buck-teeth, pig noses, thick glasses, and had them speak in broken English. This was not uncommon since that's what other animators and war-time propaganda films were doing at the time (and I'm NOT AT ALL saying that it was right), however Seuss' anger towards the Japanese seemed to come off as more obvious and personal, as opposed to a great artist who had no choice but to draw these images because that's what the country wanted at the time of fear and despair. Seuss was in fact open about his hatred towards the Japanese outside of his drawings, by being a full supporter for the "Internment of Japanese Americans", and responding to his readers who complained about his sick depiction of them that "when the Japs are planting their hatchets in our skulls, it seems like a hell of a time for us to smile and warble: 'Brothers!' It is a rather flabby battlecry. If we want to win, we’ve got to kill Japs...We can get palsy-walsy afterward with those that are left.”
When reading these quotes, looking up these facts, and gazing at cartoons that I couldn't believe came from Seuss, I was disturbed that such a wonderful man from my childhood was cruelly racist, but decided to move on with my life and take in the good with the bad as I've already done with other influential artists that I grew up with. Upon doing research for this review, I came across a little light to the controversy that's been following Dr. Seuss for decades. In 1953, Seuss went to Japan to do research for an article for Life Magazine about the post-war effects, and how the children in Japan are recovering from it. During Seuss' visit, he met the dean of Doshisha University in Kyoto named Mitsugi Nakamura and was aided by him during his trip, where Seuss talked to people who witness the aftermath of the Hiroshima bombing and went to schools asking children to draw what they wanted to be when they grew up. When returning home from his trip to Japan, shocked at what he saw, and seeing the citizens of Japan to be more civilized human beings than he previously gave them credit for; Seuss' wanted to reflect his change of heart while dedicating it to Nakamura for helping him during his journey in his next book...
The story about an elephant protecting a civilization of Whos living in a tiny speck of dust on top of a clover believing that "a person is a person, no matter how small", as he's being laughed at and harassed by the animals in the jungle who think he's crazy and want to rid that speck of dust is a timeless Seuss story about the value of life that has been celebrated, and studied for years to come! Kids enjoyed it for its characters, illustrations, rhyming, and message; while adults can find more to admire from it for its subtle social and political commentary, and how much of the story reflects the artist himself. The story has become so popular over time that it's been adapted for TV, theater, and film; and for this review, I'm going to take a look at its television adaptation in 1970.
I was first introduced to this cartoon through my VHS copy of "How the Grinch Stole Christmas?" that would play right after the film being that it involved the Whos in "Whoville", and was the next televised Seuss cartoon to follow after the Christmas classic that people nowadays take fore-granted. I remember enjoying it fine as a kid, and being blown away at seeing more of "Whoville" while witnessing a few cameos of the Who's from the original special, but it wasn't a cartoon that I admired as much as its predecessor and a few of Seuss' other animated shorts that I grew up watching. I didn't think it was bad, I just wasn't all that mesmerized by it. But now after discovering the meanings and history behind the book and looking into its legacy, it made me wonder if the TV special is better than I remembered it to be. It's obviously not a cartoon as iconic as "How the Grinch Stole Christmas?" but does it still do a beautiful job at capturing Seuss' story and message to almost make it nearly as incredible as the "Citizen Kane" of Seuss cartoons; ON WITH THE REVIEW!
I've already gone over the story when talking about the book's history, so I'm just going to start talking about the title character Horton.
Taking on the role of Horton is legendary voice actor Hans Conried, which seems like an odd choice considering that he's best known for voicing the devious smiling sophisticated villains that love to twirl their mustache, and would later on during these televised Seuss shorts be filling in the shoes for Boris Karloff as in the Grinch in the Halloween spin-off. But Conried surprisingly does manage to capture the innocent nature to this famous Seuss character. Before Conried stepped into the role of this simple elephant, the Merrie Melodies cartoon of "Horton Hatches the Egg" in 1942 would give Horton a loud and goofy voice that became gradually annoying as the cartoon went along, as Horton's personality would be so dimwitted and over the top that he had very little dignity. Conried gives the character the same amount of innocence and dignity as what Sterling Holloway gave to Winnie the Pooh. He speaks in a calm and elegant voice that matches perfectly with Seuss' words and tone, while still being able to pull off the sweet child-like wonder and helplessness to the character. And through his animated expressions, writing, and voice acting, you feel and side with his determination of saving the Whos and feelings towards his motto "A person's a person's, no matter how small" all the way through for how much he legitimately cares and doesn't give up, even when all seems lost and that no one will listen to him. Conried also serves as the special's narrator (because it's almost traditional in these Seuss cartoons that the actor voicing the main character will also be given the task to tell the story) who brings the same kind of warmth and subtly as he provided for Horton, and for what Karloff did when he narrated "How the Grinch Stole Christmas?".
Just when you think Conried is given enough characters to play, he's given a third character to voice who is the Who that communicates with Horton Dr. H. Hoovey. Conried again provides the same tone and heart that he brings for the narrator and protagonist, and seems to be bringing a small dose of his cartoony voice acting when voicing the Doctor by giving him an old voice without ever going overboard, however since Conried has such a distinct voice when voicing all three of these characters with little alterations in the way he sounds, it becomes a bit of a distraction. You become aware that all three characters are voiced by the same guy for the little differences there is from how the pitch of their voices sounds and is one of those occasions where I can feel the actor recording his lines in the booth for how rough the audio sounds at times. I can recall at least two occasions when I found myself confused about which one of the characters voiced by Conried is currently speaking when we don't see a character's face or lips move. You can argue that Boris Karloff as the Grinch/narrator was guilty for these problems too, but the reason why it's not as much of a bother when compared to Conried was because Karloff knew what kind of tone and personality he should give to both roles to make them stand-out; Conried tries to do that and does make the characters he voices successfully endearing, but he doesn't reach that point where he gives each person he voices their own vocal identity where you can overlook how obvious it is that these characters share the same voice actor.
Focusing on the character of Dr. Hoovey himself, what's intriguing about his character is that he's Horton's Who counterpart. Horton, though not nearly as intelligent as Dr. Hoovey, is wiser than his animal acquaintances give him credit for, but is always laughed at and bullied when trying to prove that another world exists which he acknowledges is strange too, except that he has proof while the others choose to ignore it since they don't share the same incredible hearing as he does. Hoovey deals with a similar problem of trying to convince everyone that their world is being kept alive by the watchful eye of an elephant, which they find to be silly and never ever taken this scientist seriously since they believe he's a crackpot, therefore making him a misfit in his own community for how different and unbelievably smart he is (though it puzzles me a bit how he's never tried to show a single Who what goes on outside of their world through his periscope). The bond that they share comes across as strong, and gets even stronger as well as smart regarding Seuss' themes of tolerance and equality when you realize that they're the only friends they have, and though living in two completely different societies they still have tons of things in common to bring them close together. Conried's voice acting does get in the way at times for me to fully embrace their relationship since I get the impression that Conried is talking to himself, but on the whole, it's still an overall beautiful friendship that the two share with a deep meaning underneath it.
I mentioned how amazed I was at seeing more of "Whoville" when I watched it as a kid, and looking at it again, it, for the most part, is still intriguing. We all know how much "the Who's down in Whoville" are full of Christmas cheer during the holiday seasons, as some us know how helpless they are during the fall on "Grinch Night", while others overlook how scary and cruel they can be when depicted in live-action; but this (before the remake) was the only version where we see the Who's interact in their town outside anything holiday related as they appear to be more human than they were in any of the versions that came before and after this special. They as a community are friendly and humble creatures that seem pleasant to be around, but they're not as perfect as they are in "How the Grinch Stole Christmas?" for how they mock and snottily dismiss Dr. Hoovey's warnings, only they do it in a more playful and naive way to keep with their humble nature as opposed to acting as soulless and selfish as the Who's were in the live-action remake involving the Grinch. And when their life is in parallel they act as frighten and helpless as they would later be in "Halloween is Grinch Night", but don't want to go down without trying to get their voices heard. As much as I will always cherish the Who's in any Seuss film THAT IS AN ANIMATED SHORT, the Whos in this cartoon are the best depiction of them since they don't come across as one dimensional because they’re given more of a personality, as well as authentic feel of how they live and work together as a society since every other time we're with them, is always during a holiday. Is it perfect, I can't say that 100%. It’s cool seeing how they live outside the holidays, but it's not as visually stunning when compared to how their world looked in the other animated specials. And though we get a nice tiny cameo of the Grinch singing with the Who's in their time of despair, the cameos of the Who's that appeared in the Christmas special are copied and pasted onto the environment when making noise, that was amazing when I first saw the cartoon as a kid, but now it just feels lazy. What's even more awkward than Conried having nearly the same voice for the characters his voice, is hearing Chuck Jones' voice come out of a little kid. It's an interesting cameo from this legendary animator, it just doesn't feel as special when he's already voiced many other characters in this special, including some of the male Who's which makes me wish that they just hired a kid to yell "YOPP" if not have him just scream that one word and let Conried do all the talking before that moment.
As we're given a cynical but happy community with the Who's, the characters in Horton's world (with the exception of the gossiping birds that fear that Horton is crazy) all play as the antagonists since they're the ones who are always putting the Who's world in danger, whether it's from the taunting black-bottom eagle Whizzer McWoff (Chuck Jones), or the playfully mischievous Wickersham Brothers (who resemble the Grinch if he was given a chimp-like design), who are led by the animal behind the whole conspiracy Jane Kangaroo and the small Kangaroo in her pouch Junior. All of them are fun to watch through their sinister designs and playfully mean personalities given to them. My favorite out of them all growing up was always the Wickersham brothers for how much life is given to these scoundrels from they move and sing together as they chase after Horton. And while I still get a kick out of them, truthfully I now get more enjoyment out of Jane Kangaroo. As a kid I find her to be nothing more than a stick-in-the-mud villain, which she still is, only upon recent viewing I find her bitterness to be more comical as opposed to a killjoy to all the color and life given to all the characters around her. The elegant and snobby personality that the late June Foray brings to the character combined with a design that's always seen to be frowning and pouting brings the same sense of threat and humor as what Boris Karloff's Grinch provided. The Grinch's expressions, design, and voice work is easily more iconic and way more menacing when compared to the Seuss antagonist that follows after him, but she still has all the qualities of what makes a good Seuss foe, thus making her a worthy follow-up. Plus having a baby Kangaroo with practically the same design except only darker, smaller, and having Chuck Jones put on a voice just as snobby as Foray only with a high pitched voice to make him sound young always gets a big chuckle out of me.
Of course, what's a televised Seuss short without containing songs? As some of you probably guessed none of the songs come across as unforgettable as the songs from its predecessor, but they're not as forgettable as say the songs in "The Lorax" short (not to imply that they are bad). Most of them are quite memorable for being catchy and containing inventive lyrics written by Seuss. The best ones all come from the Wickersham Brothers who are voiced by the famous Mellomen (including Thrul Ravenscroft) who are the perfect group at singing chilling upbeat villain songs (such as "Yo Ho, a Pirates Life for Me", "Grim Grinning Ghosts", and "Heffalumps and Woozles"), and their singing here is no exception. They bring the same energy, fun, and sense of dread when singing the "Wickersham Brothers Song"; to later on building up the suspense and tension when chant singing "Horton the Elephant's Going to be Caged". The closing song "Be Kind to Your Small Person" is also a nice catchy triumphant send-off to end the cartoon on the perfect note (like most Seuss cartoons) as well as help make the message stick with younger viewers after it ends. The songs that the Who's sing isn't bad either, for the majority of songs they sing, they hit all the emotions that they have towards Dr. Hoovey, whether it be mocking him, realizing the grim reality of their situation, or seeing the light as it's all sung in excellent harmony. There are, however a few songs that don't match up with the quality as the others I've praised. The song that Dr. Hoovey sings at the climax starts out fine with a melody and tempo creating the fear of time running out, and having lyrics that Seuss can only come up with, but towards the middle of the song, it begins to sound disjointed. I guess that was the intention considering that the Who's are making all kinds of loud noises and calls left and right, but Conried's singing of expressing Hoovey's fear of being boiled comes off as casual instead feeling like he's distressed that this might be his final hour. But the worst song in the cartoon is easily the first one "Mrs. Toucanella Told Me" sung by the birds in the Jungle of Nool. Foray does a flawless job of voicing all the birds by making it seem like that they're all being voiced by different people, and the song does express the fear that the jungle residence feel towards Horton talking to the dust speck; but this is a talk-singing song, which I'm fine with and was done greatly during the song "Old Doc Hoovey" with the Who's. However, while that song had the right balance of the characters talk-singing and harmonizing as it had a wonderful melody to keep it together, this one is so focused at talking at such a fast pace in order to build-up to them panicking that the melody trying to tie it together feels lacking for how last minute it sounds. These two songs aren't bad since they are memorable and help tell the story, they're just the weakest ones of the bunch by sounding less like songs and more like scenes of dialogue that were later decided to be given a musical treatment.
The animation quality is not really all that different compared to the other Seuss cartoon shorts that I reviewed in the past. It overall captures Seuss' illustrations extraordinarily well, even down to the point where the drawings and movements that come across as sketchy add to the charm for how much it resembles Seuss original works. The environments themselves are all colorful and carry a visually distinct look to them for places like Whoville (outside of the holidays), the Jungle of Nool, and the bright and beautiful clover-fields (that makes me wonder sometimes why Horton didn't just let the Clover stay there since it seems they'll be safe from any kind of harm). Sure there are some notable continuity errors, recycling of animation, and lip movements that at times don't match up to what the characters are saying, but on the whole, it's still just as good as the animation from "How the Grinch Stole Christmas?" and in the following specials. All I can really say is while still being very good, it's not as visually interesting when compared to the Seuss specials that I previously reviewed. Each of the Seuss specials was always throwing uniquely creative surprises at us left and right, and had environments that were atmospheric and given plenty of personality. This special doesn't get as imaginative with providing us with as many zany and bizarre visuals, as the places we visit are nothing more than a simple city or jungle with not much going on. But to be fair, the cartoon seems more focused with bringing a sense of weight for how vulnerable the dust speck is as it emphasizes on the dangers surrounding it, and in that regard it does a suspenseful job at doing so where you always feel constantly aware of what is at stake if Horton should fail to save them.
OVERALL THOUGHTS
Watching and analyzing this special from an adult stand-point after researching Seuss' history with the book, though I can't necessarily call it better than "How the Grinch Stole Christmas?" for the distracting voice acting from Hans Conried and Chuck Jones, lacking the creative freedom that other Seuss specials that I reviewed had, and having a few songs that feel a bit phoned in, it is by far the most thought-provoking Seuss special that I reviewed. Its message of tolerance and valuing life among mankind is still as powerful as it was when I watched it growing up, but there are so many different layers of adult topics like politics and religion that they remain as strong and relevant as it was when it was released making it timeless. Seeing the Who's recovering from the wreckage after being dropped in the clover-field from the black-bottom eagle is much more haunting and an effective turning point for the characters after realizing that it's an allegory for Japan recovering after the bombing from America; the Who's laughing at the absurdities of what's helping their way of life seems more like a form of atheism as Horton practically plays the role of God; and watching the Who's desperation to get their voices heard where they need everyone they can to prevent a disaster from occurring at the hands of an organization more powerful than them is stronger than ever when viewing it regarding today's politics. It's a cartoon to a classic story that offers more than meets the eye at first glance where it only gets better and more meaningful the more times you watch it as we become older and wiser towards our surroundings in life. It's one of Seuss' smartest works he's ever created, that contains colorful characters, neat animation matching with Seuss' style, and tuneful songs that tell the story and give excellent depth to how the characters are feeling, that in the end deems itself as a worthy follow-up to a groundbreaking Seuss classic!
No comments:
Post a Comment