who was in the wrong here?

Once-ler invents a false dilemma of either completely shutting down his factories and firing everyone vs. continuing his unsustainable business as usual. But to be fair the Lorax isn't smart enough to see this or point it out.

>>94352212
>>94352260
They both had meritable points but in the end the Oncler's greed clouded his foresight.

I always liked how the special didn't make it completely black and white, there's moments where the Onceler and the Lorax are stumped by the others arguments

Interesting that they were able to present a more complex altercation in half an hour than the 90 mins of crap CG movie

File: wuncler.png (377KB, 638x353px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 638x353px

>>94352260
>Once-ler
I never realized the similar names until now.

>>94352212
Why isn't the Onceler a sexy bishi for my tumblr fan fics and fan art?

>>94352212
both are wrong. nature exists to be exploited by humans, but we need to exploit it responsibly.

File: 1475031053848.jpg (911KB, 1750x1215px) Image search: [Google]

911KB, 1750x1215px

>>94354007
there was a "Polluting Asami" thing for some reason. I think some guy had a bunch of money for commissions and a very specific fetish.

>>94354083
I heard that was some faggot on Funnyjunk. Could be wrong, though.

Did you not get enough replies when you posted this thread last night, OP?

>>94352212
As a kid I thought the Once-ler was the same race as the Grinch, not picking up on the fact that his green parts were just clothes.

>>94354007
Because the fact that we never see his face was supposed to represent how this could be anybody. It could even be you or me if we make the same mistakes.

And the fact that the filmmakers didn't understand that/didn't care is depressing yet not surprising.

It's the same old eco-shit, well-meaning but totally wrong on the facts
loggers replant trees like crazy. the shit's growing back faster than they can cut it. after all it's in their vested capitalist interest to keep a large number of trees around to use.
the only enemy is the idiots who clearcut land to put something permanently non-tree-related on it. The poor-ass south americans who want to raise beef because beef is worth money.. in land where beef just doesn't belong, trees are supposed to be there. There's massive huge wide open plains in tons of parts of the world with plenty of room, because you can't do much else there but graze cattle, they just aren't willing to leave the cattle raising to those people. fucking idiots. but it's not some big eco issue about big eevil rich people from rich countries, it's just poor thirdworlders fucking things up, as always.

>>94355744
It's a book written in a time when ecology and sustainability were just starting to become a thing, "third worldlers" weren't the only ones fucking things up and "poor-ass south americans" were more common.
And besides, it's written for little children, I'm sure the lesson of leaving nature alone or not be greedy gets through and is useful for them.

how bad

>>94355744
Call me crazy, but I have the odd feeling someone with an agenda is behind this post...

File: 1500733621972.png (290KB, 600x615px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 600x615px

>>94353962

File: howbadmebe.png (133KB, 500x314px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 500x314px

>>94352212
They both had valid points, although the dilemma wouldn't have existed in the first place if the Once-ler had just practiced moderation and self control in his business practices. But in the long term the question is one that's hard to answer, because both sides are essentially right. The Once-ler is ruining the environment, but he's also forwarding the economy and providing jobs for decent people who just want to feed their family. I don't think its a question necessarily meant to have a straight answer because its a real world dilemma with no clear solution.

Basically, they're both in the wrong, yet both in the right, though the Once-ler is slightly more in the wrong for creating the situation in the first place.