The Invisible Man
The Way Back
Blow the Man Down
Better Call Saul
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
Got more questions about news letters?
Already have an account? Log in here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
We encourage our community to report abusive content and/ or spam. Our team will review flagged items and determine whether or not they meet our community guidelines.
Please choose best explanation for why you are flagging this review.
Thank you for your submission. This post has been submitted for our review.
Sincerely, The Rotten Tomatoes Team
Definitely the worse of any Grinch adaptations. It was slow from the start and never really picked up steam. Really boring but at times cute. Has a sweet message behind it. (32%)
Not bad. Not as good as Him Carrey's voice, but it had nice animation and was a great christmas movie for the family
3/5 it's good , and funny. But no it's excellent
At the very least, Dr. Seuss' The Grinch is an okey Christmas Illumination film with an okey story that adds little to the source material, good animation in the same route as The Lorax, acting that it's just mediocre (with the exception of Benedict Cumberbatch as The Grinch being as good as Jim Carrey's Grinch) and the rest being a standard okey Christmas flick. It may not be as bad as the 2000 live action version but it's not as good as the 1966 animated version by Chuck Jones. I give Illumination's second Dr. Seuss film adaptation a 3/5 (6/10) rating being just an Okey Christmas film.
Its been done before, but It was cute and my whole family enjoyed it.
Expanding this poem to a full-length story is ALWAYS a mistake. We don't need the Grinch's psychology; the character's original intent is to serve as a stand-in for anyone who has forgotten "the meaning of Christmas". Making him a secluded, unloved orphan takes away all the joy in the story, and completely changes the message. And whose BRILLIANT idea was it to change and dumb-down Seuss' brilliant narration? The line to apologize to Jim Carrey and Ron Howard starts behind me.
Come for Benedict Cumberbatch's flabbergastingly unrecognisable performance, stay for the Christmas gangster rap in the end credits.
The Grinch is a largely unnecessary, sometimes sweet, sometimes funny, animated cashgrab.
I re-started watching this 87 minute long film at the 60 minute mark with my fiancé who missed absolutely nothing by dipping in with 20 minutes to go.
It reminded me that I missed Pushing Daisies, itself a Wes Andersony riff off of Dr Seuss. As it is, The Grinch is exactly what you expect, a more sugerpuff saccharine version than Ron Howard's much-derided live action entry, that I very much enjoyed, and still do.
The problem that I had with this movie is that the 2000 version wasn't particuarly dated at this point. Any person looking to view a modern movie would not usually be duped by the 2000 version, and as such this entire movie felt unnecessary. I can't pretend that it wasn't successfully pulled off, as it made more than its production costs and all that, but I think the 2000 one was more sincere and more accurate to the source material. I noticed them quoting the source several times in this movie but they just didn't spend enough time on Grinch's backstory. I liked the addition of the reindeer, but for the most part it felt like they settled on an animated remake after they realized there wasn't a star the caliber of Carrey that could do the live-action Grinch role in this day and age. I felt this in addition to the general criticism that it didn't even live up to the 60's animated special.
It’s really good movie to watch at home not at the theaters
La película no creo que sea mala,solo creo que lo que la evita brillar ,es que es muy suave.No hay nuca riesgo , pero la película es bella en animación.