The only things this movie has in common with the book by Dr. Seuss or the movie by Chuck Jones are the title and some basic plot points. There's nothing especially wrong with this children's movie about a bitter outcast who gains the acceptance of the intolerant jerks who ostracized him years before. It simply has nothing to do with the How The Grinch Stole Christmas that we all grew up loving.The Who's, formerly a bunch who lived for sheer joy and simple fun, are now a bunch of conniving racists who are concerned with nothing more than getting ahead of the Jones'. They are, in fact, transformed from a jolly bunch of Who's to typical human beings with goofy nose-jobs.
The Grinch, formerly a nasty-wasty skunk of a creature who learns to relax with the help of a Cindy-Lou (who was no more than two) is now a righteously angry outcast who is basically decent and just wants acceptance from the Who's at large and particularly from Christine Baranski (local hottie and the only who that needs no nose makeup).
Unlike the original, the Grinch returning the Who's gifts is no longer done in a festive spirit, but in direct contradiction to the stories ostensible point (that gifts are just the crass, commercial side of the holidays).
I understand that Hollywood loves a love-interest, and that today's notion is to provide kids with strictly benign stories that hammer them with morality lessons. But that doesn't make it right.I'll take a return to the days when children's tales were designed to terrify and control. Grimm's and such. The Grinch should have scared kids - at least at first, instead of being a goofy teddy-bear.