The Cat in the Hat is a 2003 live action remake of a classic Dr Suess book and one of my personal favourite films but every time you tell a group of people how funny you find it, you will be met with at least one response of “omg it’s so scary.” It isn’t. But let’s discuss that.
Stuart Hall’s reception theory is the idea that communication involves encoding by producers and decoding by audiences leaving 3 ways in which messages and meanings can be decoded. These 3 ways are the dominant/hegemonic reading which is the meaning that the original producer intended, the negotiated reading where the encoder’s (the producer) meaning is negotiated to fit individual experiences or contexts better and the oppositional reading which is where the intended meaning is understood but rejected by the decoder and therefore read in an oppositional way.
I believe that the intended reading of the 2003 blockbuster The Cat in the Hat ($109 million budget and $134 million. Yes, it is a blockbuster) is a comedic reading. A film made based on the book and targeted towards children with its grand colour schemes and huge stunts but still making nods towards the parents watching along with the innuendos and subtle jokes that the children won’t get. Mike Myers is a known comedy actor (Wayne’s World and Austin Powers being his 2 biggest roles) and so this casting decision is the immediate nod to this being a comedy film. This hegemonic encoding is proven all throughout the film by the endless jokes and varying accents and ‘spin off’ roles that we see from start to finish. Also reinforced by the fact that we see The Cat, Sally and Conrad all laughing all the way through. If this was not intended to be read as a comedy film then we would not see these characters finding it funny. These details would not have been included by the producer/director. Seeing characters on screen laugh (or hearing laugh tracks, of which there are some ironically) tells audiences when they should laugh, it highlights the intended comedic aspects and shows us the direction this is designed to go in.
I am an audience member who reads this film with the intended reading. I think this film is hilarious and even though I only watched it for the first time in June 2020, I have probably rewatched this more than any other films I've been watching since I was very young. I am obsessed with this movie and will never stop being shocked when people tell me this film traumatised them as a child. Although it actually predates me, I think the comedy in the Cat in the Hat is as relevant now as it was at its release in 2003.
The most common negotiated reading I would say is that people used to be scared of this film when they were children but have since rewatched it through older eyes and now appreciate the comedy. It is easy for old fears to control how we feel about media as we get older and is so hard to release feelings for ,media that you have held for years, especially if that feeling runs deep. However, many films and series target themselves differently for children as they do for adults and so, ignoring the fact that it is far less common for people in their late teens / early twenties to be scared of a fictional 6 foot black and white cat, there will be different ways for it to be appreciated with age and a whole new level of jokes that will have completely gone over peoples’ heads as a child.
The oppositional reading most present in audiences is that The Cat in the Hat is intended as a scary film. Not that this is a horror film but that it was made purposely with creepy undertones. Using the fact that a 6 foot talking cat is inherently freaky and using it to make this film creepy. There are sections of the film which may be reminiscent, for older audience members, of drug fuelled trips. This element may add to that supposedly creepy tone. That this confusing and inexplicable twist of events is intended as something to be scared of. Also on a much more mundane level, the concept of ones house becoming as messy as the house in the film does and having such a huge intruder may be a slightly frightening concept for the parents of the intended audience say.
First of all I need to make a disclaimer of the fact that I've never seen this film. I am a fan of Mike Myers - I saw both Wayne's World movies at the pictures and enjoyed the Austin Powers films to a lesser extent. But I would say I am familiar with his style and his comic influences. What interests me about your take on this is that you seem to have run into the same problem applying Hall as I did - namely that, how do you decide what the Preferred Reading of a text is when it is aimed at children but which most people only seem to fully appreciate the text when they are older and more…