Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas

2000

Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas

Critics Consensus

Jim Carrey shines as the Grinch. Unfortunately, it's not enough to save this movie. You'd be better off watching the TV cartoon.

51%

TOMATOMETER

Total Count: 135

56%

Audience Score

User Ratings: 948,783
User image

Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas Photos

Movie Info

The curmudgeonly recluse Grinch, who hates Christmas, becomes annoyed with the out-of-control Christmas festivities in Whoville, the town lying below his cave dwelling on Mt. Crumpit. But after the Grinch conspires to deprive the Who's of their favorite holiday by sneaking into town on Christmas eve to steal everything associated with the holiday, he learns that the spirit of Christmas goes much deeper than tinsel and toys.

Watch it now

Cast

Taylor Momsen
as Cindy Lou Who
Jeffrey Tambor
as Mayor May Who
Bill Irwin
as Lou Lou Who
Jeremy Howard
as Drew Lou Who
Kelley
as Max
Christine Baranski
as Martha May Whovier
T.J. Thyne
as Stu Lou Who
Molly Shannon
as Betty Lou Who
Joshua Ryan Evans
as Young Grinch
Rachel Bailit
as Nurse Who
Lacey Kohl
as Christina Whoterberry
Jim Meskimen
as Officer Wholihan
Clint Howard
as Whobris
Rance Howard
as Elderly Timekeeper
David Costabile
as Biker Who
Mary Stein
as Miss Rue Who
James Ritz
as Crazy Mose
Deep Roy
as Post Office Clerk
Mason Lucero
as Who Boy
Michaela Gallo
as School Girl
Reid Kirchenbauer
as Kid, Whobris
Steve Kehela
as Shopper
Rain Pryor
as Shopper
Kevin Isola
as Tree Trimmer
Mindy Sterling
as Clarnella
Gavin Grazer
as Yodeler
Verne Troyer
as Band Member
Q'Orianka Kilcher
as Little Choir Member
Caroline Williams
as Tiny Who Woman
John Short
as Tiny Who Man
Grainger Esch
as Near Miss Who
Eva Burkley
as Pudding Chef
Bryce Dallas Howard
as Surprised Who
Charles Croughwell
as Balloon Who
Anthony Hopkins
as Narrator, the Narrator
Jim Carrey
as The Grinch
View All

News & Interviews for Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas

Critic Reviews for Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas

All Critics (135) | Top Critics (32)

Audience Reviews for Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas

  • Dec 04, 2018
    Let's talk about Jim Carrey a little bit, shall we? This was a guy that, when I was a little kid, I idolized. Him, along with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jackie Chan, were my guys when I was growing up. To the point that I made my mom, along with my father (the less said about that the better), take me to see Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls in movie theaters. Probably some of the few people that actually saw that movie in theaters. I also made her take me to see The Truman Show when it came out in 1998. I probably wouldn't have understood that movie at that age, but now I see it as the incredible movie it is, one of the best of the 90s. I fucking LOVE The Truman Show, fucking ADORE that movie. Hence why I need multiple adjectives in all caps to illustrate how much I fucking TREASURE that movie. I've always thought that, when he's inspired, Carrey can turn in some tremendous dramatic performances as evidenced by, once again, the Truman Show and Eternal Sunshine. But, still, I think more people gravitate to his comedic exploits more because they're more 'easily' consumable when compared to his dramatic movies. That's why it was such a big deal when Carrey did Bruce Almighty in 2003 as they promoted it as his return to comedy after a few years away from it. Now let's talk about Christmas movies. Never been the biggest fan, honestly. Not saying that there aren't any truly great Christmas movies, but they're few and far in between. The thing about Christmas movies is that you can really just watch them during the holiday season. It doesn't really work outside of it. Horror movies you can watch every year and they're good all year, but an October horror fest is made more fun by the fact it's the month of Halloween (my favorite 'holiday'). Can't say the same for Christmas movie. A good movie is a good movie any time of the year, but Christmas movies have always been specific about their timing. That's just the nature of the beast. I don't think there's enough good holiday movies for me to do a 25 Nights of Christmas marathon like I did for horror in October. Plus I've never been a big fan of the saccharine nature of these movies. It's just not for me and 25 nights of that would just drive me up the fucking wall. This brings us to this movie, which I DID watch in movie theaters way back when it came out. I was only TWELVE. Jeez, I'm old. Or older. Anyway, I'm certain that I, once again, made my mom take me to see this movie because of Jim Carrey's involvement in it. I've wondered, a few times throughout the years, how well this movie has held up, if at all, in the almost two decades since its release. Well I'm here to pop that nostalgic bubble for most of you and say that the movie doesn't hold up. Now, really, perhaps that's not fair because, to me, while a lot of people claim Carrey overacts (and this is a more than valid criticism) in his comedic roles, and I think his earlier roles were sort of tailored to those specific gifts that he had at the time. Regardless, I think that the overacting, as far as the character of the Grinch is concerned, actually works. He's supposed to be this 'dastardly' and over-the-top villain. Not a serious villain, mind you, but a cartoonish villain nonetheless. And, honestly, Jim Carrey is absolutely THE best part of this movie, bar none. I feel that everything else around Carrey doesn't hold up as well. The set design is problematic because it looks like precisely that, a set. I suppose I'm looking for "realism", for lack of a better term, in a movie about a hairy green man that hates Christmas and wants to ruin it for everyone in WhoVille. That's not what I'm trying to say here, though, I couldn't suspend my disbelief when watching this movie because of how much the town looks like a fake set, not a real, however fantastical it may be, town. Here's the thing about movies like Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, however far into fantasy they may have gone, their worlds always retained a sense of believability. Like you could believe in these characters and immerse yourself in their world and their struggles because of how these worlds were built and maintained. This movie isn't that, but I just can't get over the fakery of the set. It sort of reminds me, in a different sort of way of course, as to how I couldn't really get into The Hobbit trilogy because there was so much CG that all the heart and soul of the movie, the characters and the story were lost. To this movie's credit, however, they do attempt to retain some of the heart. Ultimately, however, this isn't a bad movie per se and I'll never claim that. It's just that the humor is wildly inconsistent, like there are some stretches of the movie where nothing really happens and you wonder what the point of it all is. But the movie is still fairly decent and I think that's entirely due to Carrey's performance and some of the film's writing. Hell, this movie actually made people think that a LIVE-ACTION version of Cat in the Hat was a good idea and we all know how that turned out. I think perhaps a lot of people might have hated this adaptation because of the changes in humor when someone like Carrey is involved. But, here's the thing, and I've thought about this. As much as you'd like to think that the movie is meant for you and people who read the book or are nostalgic for the TV special, the reality is that it's not. You have to modernize and adapt things for the age that they're being released in. And that means making a movie that appeals to a wider demographic. I'm not saying that that approach leads to a better movie as I'm certain that I probably would have liked this movie more had it been more faithful and in tone with the original TV special and the book. And that's also not saying that this approach is inherently bad either. I liked the Peter Rabbit movie in spite of it not being entirely faithful to the original book it is based on. It's all just a matter of trying to look things as objectively as possible and not get bogged down in the details of 'oh, but it's not like the book or the TV special'. Again, the movie's not made for you specifically, it is made for the largest number of people possible. That's not necessarily a defense of this movie, since I still found it painfully average, but that's the reason why I feel it's not a fair point of criticism to point out of how unlike it is to what you grew up with as a kid. It's the same thing as remakes, change too much you get criticized, change too little (or do a shot-for-shot remake like Gus Van Sant's Psycho) and also get criticized. You will never please everybody with such a beloved and emblematic part of American Christmas culture as the Grinch. Once again, that is not to defend the film's weaknesses and inconsistencies in its humor. The sentimentality, in my opinion, also doesn't really feel earned. I don't think the Grinch is ever well-developed enough as a character to make his change of heart all that believable. It's sort of ironic that the TV special more likely did it better in only 26 minutes. This movie had more than 70 minutes more time to tell the Grinch's story and yet, somehow, they didn't succeed in making the sentimental parts of the movie work for me. I get it, the Christmas movie needs a happy ending where everyone celebrates the true meaning of the holiday, spending time with the people you love, yadda, yadda, yadda. I've seen it all before and I will hear it again, I just think that a movie needs more than that to work. It needs strong characters, strong comedy, good acting and writing, what have you. You can't just travel the road of Christmas trope after Christmas trope and hope that that's gonna get you a good movie, because it's not. That road has been traveled many times over and someone, eventually, is gonna have to bring something new to the table. This movie, however, is not that. It is exactly what you would expect, except it's not as good as you might want it to be. Jim Carrey is great here, but that's about the only great thing in this movie. I don't think that is enough to make this a good movie honestly. Maybe I'm being too much of a gloomy Gus, but I wasn't enthralled by this movie in the slightest. This isn't bad, it's just decent at best.
    Jesse O Super Reviewer
  • Dec 11, 2016
    I have never seen this movie. Cannot believe it will be remade in 2018 with Benedict Cumberbatch as The Grinch, but that's Hollywood.. I can see the Christmas appeal and Jim Carrey shines in this, as always. The dog is also awesome.
    Ian W Super Reviewer
  • Jun 21, 2016
    Live action adaptation of the classic book/animated film. If you were going to sit down and try to figure out someone to play the Grinch, I think they definitely got it right. Jim Carrey is well casted as the Grinch and does a good job with the script he was given. As this is a feature length film, they do have to pump a little more into the story than the original did, but it is appropriate.
    Patrick W Super Reviewer
  • Dec 24, 2015
    Ron Howard expands Dr. Seuss' timeless Christmas story with dazzling visuals and Jim Carrey gives a memorable over-the-top performance. As an overall film, The Grinch offers a lot more depth to its tale that tends to be hollow and unnecessary at times, but the film is a guilty pleasure that's enjoyable, especially during the holiday season 3.5/5
    Eugene B Super Reviewer

Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas Quotes

News & Features