Talk:How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000 film)

	guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Holidays: Christmas Low‑importance

	Holidays portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Holidays, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of holidays on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HolidaysWikipedia:WikiProject HolidaysTemplate:WikiProject HolidaysHolidays articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Christmas task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Christianity: Christmas Low‑importance

	the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Christmas task force (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Trivia section

There is a bit of trivia behind this movie... such as the director taking the idea of the world being in a snowflake to a Dr. Seuss book about a world in a speck of dust. --70.58.58.104 (talk) 04:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cast list incomplete

Nowhere in this article does it mention that Anthony Hopkins did the narration for this film, and on the Anthony Hopkins wikipedia page it says he narrated "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" not "The Grinch." I changed the article to reflect this. 65.96.38.93 (talk) 02:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

I don't know how to suggest mergers or deletions. There is another article at

How the Grinch Stole Christmas! (film) that is pretty much a duplicate of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Funkeboy (talk • contribs) 16:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I Agree

This Article Should Be Called

How The Grinch Stole Christmas! (film)

- Guest

No, it shouldn't. The Grinch isn't the film's name. The full name is How the Grinch Stole Christmas.

^[talk] 15:13, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Name Change?

I noticed that the book this was made after was called How the Grinch Stole Christmas! with an "!" at the end, shouldn't the movie title have that too? Stealth (talk) 19:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All the promotional materials for the movie omitted the exclamation point: [1] [2] Robert K S (talk) 20:57, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was oppose Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:10, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone requested to move this page, under the uncontroversial requests, from
ƒingers^on_Roids 01:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose. Likewise often a story named X written by Mr.Y is listed as "Y's X". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:08, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not official title per imdb. Usage in article should change too. --Born2cycle (talk) 20:52, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merge or Deletion proposal

This and The Grinch (film) are clearly duplicates; either one should quite clearly be deleted. The Grinch (film) is the more recent article so I've nominated it for deletion. YeshuaDavid (talk) 16:58, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Seuss Film made to books

Dr. Seuss The Lorax is coming soon to theatres. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.255.90.25 (talk) 00:48, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reception - Controversy

I recall there being a large critical backlash about the movie conspicuously side-stepping the anti-materialism message of the original work, including the omission of the verses that deliver the "moral of the story" and a larger than typical wave of merchandising. If sources could be dug up, I feel this subject would be worthy of some play in the article. 72.12.68.214 (talk) 20:45, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article improvement needed

WP:FILMPLOT says that a good target for the length of a plot synopsis is 400-700 words. Currently, this article has over 800. So it could use a little trimming. Also, aside from a Box Office Mojo link, it is completely unreferenced. Good sections to get sourced would be "Home media" and "Reception" and probably some of the stuff in the lede paragraph could use it too. Elizium23 (talk) 07:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Requested move 9 October 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Some quite unconvincing oppose reasons here: "Same IP who's made dozen's of poor RM requests", and "obviously not" for example, are not valid reasons. And at least one version of the movie poster does use "The Grinch" only, as indicated in the support !vote, but there's less evidence that lots of reliable sources call it that. Overall then, the opposers have numerical advantage, and their assertion that the sources don't call it "The Grinch" for the most part seems to be borne out by evidence. — Amakuru (talk) 12:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OFFICIALNAME and COMMONNAME. 31.53.108.231 (talk) 10:08, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Oppose obviously not. Vague and confusing rationale. Nohomersryan (talk) 15:34, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy oppose per sources. Ribbet32 (talk) 17:27, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not the name of the film, redirects will work well.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 18:01, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I agree it should be moved per COMMONNAME however all the sources listed state "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" so IMHO moving this would only cause confusion and could break Wikilinks too, Best off kept as it is, Also the nom states "please see other examples like this concerning
WP:OFFICIALNAME and COMMONNAME." yet hasn't provided any examples ... anyway IMHO to save confusion it's best left as it is. –Davey2010^Talk 20:35, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose Same IP who's made dozen's of poor RM requests... Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 07:46, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Clear common name for this film. Never, ever seen it referred to any other way. Nothing vague or confusing about the rationale and certainly not a "poor RM request". -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:45, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale doesn't address the fact that the sources in the article all refer to it as "Dr. Suess' How the Grinch Stole Christmas". Nohomersryan (talk) 12:49, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if this may be a
WP:ENGVAR issue. It was certainly called nothing except The Grinch in the UK. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:39, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

U.S. film,
MOS:STRONGNAT. Ribbet32 (talk) 14:53, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Obviously. However, my point hasn't been answered. Was it commonly (and I don't mean by the industry, I mean commonly by the public) known by its long title in the US or not? Because it certainly wasn't in the UK. It was billed as The Grinch. Was this not the case in the US? Note that even the article says in the first line that it was "promoted theatrically as The Grinch" and that's the title that appears on the poster shown in the article. This suggests that this was its common name even in the US. If so, per
WP:COMMONNAME, that's what we should call it. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:33, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

I don't live in the U.S. so it's pretty much impossible for me to quantify what the average illiterate Trump supporter called the film in casual conversation. What I do know it that the long title was what appeared on screen and it's in the reviews, written by critics and not people who work in the industry.
Bah humbug!" To the extent that people called it "The Grinch", it was to save breath- the same could be said of the 1966 cartoon and the book. By that logic you can move Hillary Clinton to Hillary (2016 U.S. presidential candidate and former Secretary of State) Ribbet32 (talk) 04:56, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

A lame-ass joke

Yes, I know Cindy Lou's father is listed in the ending credits as "Lou Lou Who", and her brothers "Drew Lou Who" and "Stu Lou Who". This must have been a lame attempt at a joke by either the screenwriter, or whoever is responsible for creating the end credits. (The joke apparently because the women in the family, Cindy Lou and mom Betty Lou both have the middle name "Lou", and someone thought it would be funny if the men had the same middle name.) But apparently Ron Howard didn't find it funny enough to use it on screen; the characters are simply known as "Lou", "Drew", and "Stu" (not "Lou Lou", "Drew Lou" or "Stu Lou"). I think the plot description needs to reflect the actual onscreen usage. It might be worth pointing out the end-credit joke in the Cast section, but I can't find a reliable source and can't figure out how not to make it sound like original research. JustinTime55 (talk) 17:59, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"May Who" or "Maywho"?

We need to establish a consensus on whether we should list the mayor's name as "Maywho" or "May Who". The credits list clearly says "May Who", but this shouldn't always be taken as gospel, since the credits also say "Lou Lou Who", "Stu Lou Who" and "Drew Lou Who", which are not at all supported by what is heard in the film's dialogue and seems to be a lame-ass attempt at a joke by the screenwriter. Since we don't hear these in the film, I would guess Ron Howard didn't think too highly of this joke.

The problem is, the paradigm of naming all the Who characters with the last name Who (an invention of Seuss which he had the wisdom of not taking too far, which is required by the more complex plot of this film) defies logic when carried past a certain point. Also, we're not supposed to theorize or speculate beyond what "reliable sources" say; we call that "original research". JustinTime55 (talk) 16:45, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The entries should be as in the credits (see

WP:FILMCAST), which is the definitive source for this article. How Seuss named them or how they are in any book is not relevant to here as this article is about the film.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 00:51, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Removed possible circular reporting

I've gone ahead and removed what I believe to be a case of circular reporting. In particular the cast section said that "Jack Nicholson,[source1] Robin Williams, Dustin Hoffman, Nicolas Cage, Tom Hanks, Tim Curry and Eddie Murphy[source2] were all considered" The first source is from 2000 and only says that Audrey Geisels agents wrote a letter declaring that "any actor submitted for the Grinch must be of comparable stature to Jack Nicholson, Jim Carrey, Robin Williams and Dustin Hoffman." This does not mean that they were considered for the role. I can find no credible sources on Nicolas Cage, and the addition was made in 2023. Likewise for Tom Hanks (2020) and Tim Curry (also 2020). Some noncredible sources refer to IMDB. I am also skeptical of whether Eddie Murphy was considered, since he is mentioned along with Jack Nicholson in the article. But the source seems credible, so I'm letting those stay. QuarksAndElectrons (talk) 22:26, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Media Effects

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2024 and 2 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Xinliuuu (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 03:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]