The Lorax – Blockbuster Buster

I am The Blockbuster Buster and I speak for The Fans, this terrible movie does not stand a chance.

About Blockbuster Buster


  1. TooMuchFreeTime

    I usually tend to give movies that look like they will be bad the benefit of the doubt but I saw one poster for this that was just the Lorax’s face and I knew. I KNEW it would suck. There was no way modern Hollywood could manage the original story with any dignity.

  2. The only funny thing this film did was make me remember this memory: When this film came out my nephew Alijah said “When I grow up I will speak for the trees. My niece Amira responded with “When l grow up I’ll cut all the trees down!”

  3. I actually never even heard of the Lorax until my teacher showed it in my high school biology class. I liked it okay. I haven’t seen this version though. I didn’t think that Taylor Swift did that bad from what I could hear. Oh, and at the Lorax should have at least been promoting a hybrid car or something. Or was that car a hybrid? Also, I can’t wait for next week. That should be interesting. LOL.

  4. Isn’t getting laid the basic motivation for all guys?

      • Besides, is it just me, or is the boy WAY younger than the FRI? Like, she looks like she is sixteen and he looks to be 12 or at the least in Fifth Grade.

        So yeah, younger boy wanted to get laid by older girl….kinda creepy, and just creepy enough to ruin The Lorax forever. THANKS MOVIE!!!! DX

        • Professor Persona

          Yeah…it’s not just you. I felt the same way when I was forced to watch it.

          Thankfully, I own a copy of the book, so I can bask in its wonderful story whenever I need to cleanse the thoughts of this movie out of my mind.

  5. fire lord lionheart

    This abomination disgraces the original book and the 1970’s tv special.

  6. Looks like he only needed the thread like material at the top of the tree. Instead of machines to cut them down he could have used a ladder. Thus have his industry and leave the trees standing to grow more of the material.

    With all those trees that were cut down there was only one seed? If the truffula are that slow to pollinate I think that forest may have been doomed anyway. It would have only taken a woodchuck or lightning related fire.

    • Actually if you watch the movie, he does for a while just take the top part of the trees. but his family convinces him that this is too slow and difficult.

  7. I never read this book, but seeing all of this and hearing all of this, now I hate this movie a lot more, but am forever thankful for not seeing this movie.

  8. I know the The Lorax (both the 1970s Original and Newer One) were suppose to warn about the dangers of overlogging. Companies cutting down and clearing away trees. It was a huge issue in the 70s up until they implemented the “Cut One Down Plant Two More Trees In Its Place” objective years later, because not only did it help replenish trees, but it was just common sense if they still wanted to keep in business (destroy all the trees, and you have no use for a lumber company; out of work lumberers and loggers) however, the difference was that the original was made in the Seventies and so the idea of just cutting everything down was fresh in people’s minds and that was the fear because we didn’t see loggers make those alternatives even for their own sake.

    Today, what with logging companies NOW doing the re-planting and merely clearing out trees to prevent forest congestion which can kill trees as well. The fear that all the trees will be gone is not very prevalent anymore and the new environmental fear has now been climate-change and global warming.

    • Professor Persona

      That’s a very good point (even though we still have tree-removal related problems in other places), and that’s why its all the more confusing to adapt such a story now. Just wait until they decide to reboot Fern Gully. ~_~

  9. Anybody notice that the villain looks and acts almost exactly like Zorg from the Fifth Element?

  10. Umm, Erod? WTF are you DOING!?!
    Why in the unholy fuck would you dedicate your review of this piece of shit movie to a man, I thought you admired, that IN ALL ACTUALITY had nothing to do with either the movie or your review OF the movie? Did he snub you at an autograph session? Did he run over your dog with his car? Was he in front of you at Subway and he took the last loaf of monterey cheddar bread so that you couldn’t get your favorite sandwich?
    I mean, I really want to know what he did to piss you off so badly that you would insult the man like this? Alan Young’s works have given billions of people countless hours of entertainment. The man was a legend and a treasure of the human race and YOU PISSED ON HIS GRAVE with that dumbass tacked-on dedication.
    I was about to give you a pass on your last voice actors video where Rob Paulson himself sent you an audio clip thanking you for your support on Patreon and then you went and said Sean Astin was the best Raphael in the very same video. You won’t get that pass now.
    Dude, that’s fucking low. What the hell is wrong with you? You use to be better than this.
    I use to have respect for you but if this is the kind of douchebag bullshit you’re going to be pulling from now on then I’ll show it to someone that deserves it more. There are plenty of other producers and bloggers on Channel Awesome that I can support, people that can still show some respect to those in the business and to their followers.

    • How in the HELL are you treating this dedication is an insult? He didn’t try to tie Alan Young to the contents of the movie he reviewed or the review itself. One has nothing to do with the other! Most of what he reviews are movies he considers bad. Anytime you want to make a dedication to someone who died recently you probably want to do it sooner than later. Was he supposed to review something he considers good before before making a dedication? That might have taken a long time. More importantly this doesn’t done ANYTHING to disparage his legacy. His work will survive regardless and so will Rob Paulson’s, so I think you’re WAY too offended over WAY too little.

      • “He didn’t try to tie Alan Young to the contents of the movie he reviewed or the review itself. One has nothing to do with the other!”

        You are exactly right about one having NOTHING to do with the other. They DON’T belong together and yet Erod put them together. He put the dedication of a beloved performer together with the review of a shitty movie that insults its source material and its creator’s intention. I could have sworn that was abundantly obvious.

        “Anytime you want to make a dedication to someone who died recently you probably want to do it sooner than later. Was he supposed to review something he considers good before before making a dedication?”

        No, he was supposed to do a dedication that actually honors the man’s work and talk about how he appreciates the impact that work had on his childhood and the lives of so many all over the world. Instead he made a cheap move and just tacked-on the briefest of, “cough” dedications, to a crap movie that he just finished ripping apart. There’s no honor or respect in that. Erod knows better than this. All the people that help him make his videos know better than this. After all the work Erod has done to show honor and respect for those he appreciates this was nothing less than a slap in the face to the late Mr. Young and all of his fans, including myself as the man’s work was a very memorable part of my childhood that brought me much happiness.
        Yes, the legacys of Mr. Young and Mr. Paulson will survive but Erod has shown them both disrespect and it seems he doesn’t even realize it.
        There are many offenses I let slide due to ignorance but I’ll make my stand on this one. Erod needs to see what he’s done and apologize. If neither you nor anyone else sees that then you can all piss off! These people that Erod claims to honor deserve the propper respect.

        • I don’t think that was his intention. Erod doesn’t seem like the kind of guy to insult a famous actor who recently died. I think what he was trying to do was dedicate an episode of Blockbuster Buster to Mr. Young because he had died while this episode was in production and so he was dedicating the time and effort put into this episode towards Young, not the actual movie itself. It’s not like Young died died and then Erod thought “I’ll do a review of The Lorax in his honor.” It could have been any movie, good or bad, and he would have done the same thing. It was just something he slapped on at the end as tribute.

          I think his intentions were good and he wasn’t trying to sully Young’s name and reputation. That’s pure speculation on my end of course, but don’t you think you’re being just a little bit harsh towards Erod for something that, at most, was likely an unintentional mistake on his end?

          • No. I stand by everything in my reply above.

            Look. I know very little about making videos but I’ve been watching Erod’s work for several years now and based on what I’ve seen this is not a casual mistake someone like him would normally make. I’ve seen his professionalism, his dedication and his respect to actors and performers he admires.
            What he has done is unprofessional and disrespectful by his own standards. You know how I know? Because it is both easy to see and easy to fix. You fix it by simply making it an acknowledgement of the man’s passing and NOT making it a dedication. A simple acknowledgement shows basic respect and allows you plenty of time to do a proper dedication video later. That man’s death is NOT something you jump on and you DON’T throw some BS dedication picture together and tack it on to a review that has nothing to do with the man.
            And I’m still irritated over how he treated Rob Paulson. You don’t say how you think someone else did a signature character better in the same video where said character’s very first performer took the time and effort to do something nice specifically FOR YOU. It makes me want to vomit just thinking about it.
            Regardless of my feelings on that do you know what’s even worse? It was something that could have been both noticed and fixed after an independent review of his video before posting. The opening with Rob’s recording feels tacked-on, as if he’d made Sean Astin’s acknowledgement before he received the mp3. (I could be wrong about it but that’s how it feels.) It’s another reason you don’t just casually tack something onto something else. And it could have, SHOULD HAVE, been fixed by either rewriting the script for Astin’s segment so that the offending line was left out OR rewritten so that Erod said that he believes the current show’s Raphael is “better written” than the Raphael Paulson voiced. This takes the focus of the character off of the performers themselves and places it on the writers, and lets face it, the writing for the original show was rather wonky and we can understand and forgive that seeing as how it was the very first series run of the TMNT show. There’s no harm in admitting something we all know by now and it is in no way disrespectful to the great Rob Paulson.

            You know, I don’t know what’s worse. Erod’s unprofessionalism or the fact that a nobody like me has to call him out on it.
            He’s better than this and he should apologize for it. – – – Not that he ever will because I doubt he reads these comments anymore.

    • Man, you’re an idiot and an overreacting one at that. He’s dedicating the review. THE REVIEW. He’s not dedicating the movie, he’s dedicating THE FUCKING REVIEW, whose entire purpose is to DESECRATE THIS SHITTY FILM.

      Are you really this retarded? This is the exact opposite of an insult. The only way this could be considered an insult if it was dedicated to the makers of this film.

      Jesus, imbeciles like you get on my nerves.

      • You came in this late and had plenty of opportunity to read everything I’ve said and you still don’t get it. “Total Fucking Brain-dead” should be etched on your tombstone.
        I will repeat myself and maybe you’ll get it before you die, but probably not seeing as how you’re brain-dead after all.

        Erod’s so-called “dedication” was tacked-on to the review. If it was something he really meant to do he would have mentioned it at the start of the review. Also, ‘The Lorax’ had nothing to do with Mr. Young’s life or career. Alan Young didn’t work on either this movie or the 1972 short. If he had worked on the original then Erod tearing this movie apart would have made perfect sense as a dedication, but he didn’t. It was a cheap move by Erod when he would normally have waited and dedicated an entire video to the man and his great career.
        This cheap move was both inconsiderate and disrespectful to the man and his works and Erod should apologize for it. If you can’t see this after all I’ve done to explain it clear as day to you and everyone else then you’re the retard here.

        You should really consider why people get on your nerves. It might not be their fault. It might be that YOU can’t understand someone else’s reasoning, or their feelings toward sheer stupidity.

  11. I’m probably one of the few people in the world that actually has never liked Dr. Suess. I don’t think his stuff is bad. I just had never liked the art style nor anything that rhymed unless it was a song, even as a kid.

    Another reason is my full name is Samantha but naturally, people call me “Sam”. Well, like Doug/Nostalgia Critic, who hates the series Doug, I HATED “Green Eggs and Ham” because of “Sam I Am”…and yes people use to tease me for that… -___-;;;

    • You wants funny. Supposedly there were two brothers with the last name “Grinch!” They wrote Dr. Seuss asking him to change the name of his book because they were tried of being associated with the bad guy. He refused, even writing that the Grinch turns good in the end and that’s what really matters.

  12. You left out one of the worst insults to the story. The book ends on an ambiguous note, leaving it up to the reader whether things will get better or not. This piece of garbage didn’t have the nerve to make a questionable ending that would force its audience to think. It showed a completely happy ending, complete with the Lorax returning.

  13. Eh, this was an okay film. If you read between the lines, it follows the original’s theme… moderately well. Certainly better than I originally expected. And how do people not get the car thing? It was a fuel efficient car, trying to help the environment. Yeah, yeah, corporate greed, blah blah, but the whole point of that was that “it’s so clean the lorax would approve”. I mean, I get it. Would have certainly worked better with an ELECTRIC car, but it’s not that hard to grasp their thought processes, at the least.

  14. The original book made, and STILL makes me, cry EVERY TIME I READ IT. It is one of the saddest stories that Dr. Seuss ever wrote, and the most gripping part was how the “villain” of the piece wasn’t doing anything that society considered bad at the time, and even now most of what he did could be justified by some corporate lawyer. Actually, the best thing I can say about this movie is that it isn’t really an adaptation, but actually a sequel to the original story…a sequel which totally undermines the moral of the original story and therefore not only has no reason to exist, but is actively harmful in its existence.

  15. There is a distinct possibility that these atrocious adaptations are made so as to deliberately trivialize the source material while making money off of it at the same time.

  16. So….read the book, the book made from trees…

    There doesn’t seem to be away to win here.

  17. This movie was just sad.

  18. Movies that add unnecessary hetero romances really annoy me.

Leave a Reply