‘The Cat In The Hat’ Trades Dr. Seuss’ Imagination For Therapy Culture

“Inside Out” has done untold damage to children’s movies, and we might not recover for a long time. Along with the rise of therapy culture and an obsession with pop psychology and self-understanding, Pixar’s 2015 hit and its sequel have made children’s movies more introspective. (Not that I dislike the original entirely, though I do believe the second movie unnecessarily scares children by introducing the concept of anxiety too early.)

Today’s children’s movies have forgotten classic conflict structures such as man vs. man (“Toy Story,” “The Incredibles”) and man vs. nature (“Finding Nemo,” “Balto”). Now our gaze has turned inward, and the story is almost always man (or in reality, woman) vs. self.

Such is the case with “The Cat in the Hat,” which does deserve a certain level of praise. We’ll start with the good: The film is PG, and unlike the 2003 “Cat in the Hat” film, this one is squeaky clean; the worst you’ll hear is multiple fart jokes. The animation is a mix of 3D and hand-drawn, with beautiful sequences full of vibrant color and shifting lights that make it feel visually like a child’s dream.

This is a perfectly fine and even sweet movie about using your own talents to make other people happy and learning that your parents really do have your best interests at heart. But it’s not destined to be a classic, and it would do better to expand on Dr. Seuss’ imaginative universe than to look inward at our own. 

Beginning like “Monsters, Inc.,” the film reveals Dr. Seuss’ iconic cat to be part of a vast apparatus of idiosyncratic rhyming creatures (pig in a wig, giraffe with a carafe, etc.) that come to our world to make children happy. The institute measures their success by the happiness they bring as well as the damage they inflict. No one delivers more happiness, or damage, than our Cat. The employees’ resources are nearly infinite; out of his hat, the Cat (voiced by Bill Hader) can produce anything that might entertain a child, from a zebra to a piano to a potato on a string, or some water or a speaker or a bird that likes to sing. (Sorry, the Seuss is getting to me.)

Readers of Dr. Seuss’ 1957 picture book may recall that the plot is simple; two bored children sit inside on a rainy day, and in walks a cat in a hat with his circus tricks and wild contraptions and companions, Thing 1 and Thing 2. There are infinite directions to take it considering the source material offers so little and Dr. Seuss’ imagination was so infinite. The film imagines that the two siblings are feeling down because they’ve just moved to a new city. Specifically, the older sister, Gabby, is depressed, and her younger brother just wants her to play with him like she used to.

She’s mad that they’ve moved to a new apartment, town, and school. She thinks her mom did it for her own career, not realizing her mother picked a new job in this area to get better opportunities for her kids. This type of plot seems like something more designed for parents than their children. It also raises the question, why does a story for preschoolers have a teenage-ish protagonist whose biggest crises are existential? Doubtless, middle schoolers and up would rather be seen anywhere else than watching a Dr. Seuss movie with their parents. So why does this movie seem to try to court them rather than the littler viewers? 

Maybe there’s meant to be something for everyone — from the slapstick antics of the Things to the mother’s recollection of the Cat in the Hat from her childhood. The stakes are high — if the Cat and the children don’t stop the evil Something from stealing a time machine, “the very fabric of the universe could be destroyed forever” — and the villain is frightening; with sharp teeth, glowing eyes, and at least one jump scare, this Something is likely to give some children nightmares. 

There are jokes about nepo babies and telenovelas and secret families. Children are just as likely to miss these as they are the message that parents used to have their own interests and hobbies and maybe are still full people apart from their children. Like I said, this plot is for adults.

The Cat and the children spend the movie looking for the time machine he brings to them and loses in their new apartment. They must search three boxes of personal belongings, suddenly magical and expansive and full of living memories: one for Gabby, one for Sebastian, and one for their mother. Gabby’s box displays her memories of her old town, and the mother’s box reveals her pure motives. These are not worlds unto themselves à la “The Phantom Tollbooth”; they are reflections of each person’s consciousness. While each contains action and adventure in service of retrieving the time machine, the mission is really about fixing Gabby’s attitude. 

And maybe some parents will like that. We’ve had a pretty slow year for children’s movies. “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” was a dud, “Toy Story” should’ve stopped while it was ahead (two movies ago), and “Moana” was, of course, completely unnecessary. Besides “The Sheep Detectives” and “Coyote vs. Acme,” the year has had few reasons to take your kids to the theater. If you’re looking for something to see in the theater, “The Cat in the Hat” will do just fine, and its ending might just elicit a few tears. But don’t expect your kids to have much to think about on the drive home.

In one scene near the end of the film, the fish enlists the help of a legalistic landlord by appealing to the sign on her bathroom wall.

“Potty like a rock star?” she asks. 

“No,” the fish tells her. “Live, laugh, love.” 

This, he says, “is the only rule that matters.” And that’s about as deep as it gets.

***

This article is part of Upstream, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.