"I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees."
And so goes the famous or soon to be very famous line from Dr. Seuss' 1971 ode to overconsumption. The book has seen its share of controversy as it demonized logging and other industries. Fans and environmentalists say the book is an apt warning about the future of our country and the world if those mean, for-profit corporations are allowed to destroy the planet in the name of a buck ... or two. Hollywood keeps coming to us with movies centered around nature taking revenge, and like those anti-war movies that have won a bunch of awards, moviegoers haven't mostly yawned.
Of course this time it's different because the message is aimed out our children. I'm a fan of Dr. Seuss and have no problem with his concern about pollution and overconsumption, but in the hands of Hollywood, we have to get ready for a giant dose of hypocrisy and finger wagging. These jetsetters that make more money than any Wall Street titan and consume just as many resources with their personal footprints have been such phonies about the environment and about being clean. They sell fear to the rest of the world while living the good life that includes no accountability, and they get paid when the movies is in the can, even if nobody goes to see it.
As snipers for the environmental movement, their aim is too often off the mark because they love money more than they love anything else. I'm not knocking them for that, just for acting like your priorities are wrong and theirs are lined up just right. But in many respects, Hollywood is the right place for the Lorax considering his description.
He was shortish. And oldish.
And brownish. And mossy.
And he spoke with a voice
That was sharpish and bossy.
How can Hollywood keep churning out movies where condemnation is the main point, whether its war, republicans or success? At some point these studios have to make a buck, too. Well, maybe the compromise will come from corporate sponsors, mass marketing deals and product endorsements. Sure, in many respects this goes against the very theme of movies and the industry itself, but you can't pay $25.0 million salaries and have a person dividing M&Ms by color in trailers without going against some principles. I guess they rationalize that in the end you can exercise moral indignation if you are preaching worthwhile messages.
In other words there are greedier people committing more harm than we do with bad movies.
But maybe with the "Lorax" Hollywood has pushed the envelope of even its standards of hypocrisy, considering the movie has 70 different product tie-ins including an SUV and a company that makes disposable diapers. Sure, it's a crossover with SUV's and the diapers com
Charles V. Payne is a regular contributor to the Fox Business and Fox News Networks.
He is also the Chief Executive Officer and Principle Analyst of Wall Street Strategies, Inc. (WSSI)
, founded in 1991 which provides subscription analytical services to both individual and institutional investors.