SFX
SFX Merchandise
Newsletter

20091106 Friday November 06, 2009

FILM REVIEW: A Christmas Carol


PG • 96 mins • 4 November

Director: Robert Zemeckis

Cast: Jim Carrey, Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, Bob Hoskins, Robin Wright Penn

Rating:

Charles Dickens’s A Christmas Carol is like Shelley’s Frankenstein or Stoker’s Dracula: so ingrained in universal consciousness that any new interpretation of the tale needs to offer that bit extra, a little something to freshen up the well-worn dramatics.

Disney’s new take on the material is all about its dazzling 3D motion-capture, zipping the 19th century novella into the 21st – and how (although it retains a good deal of the original’s dialogue).

A quick plot recap for those new to the planet: miserly Ebeneezer Scrooge is visited by four ghosts (yep, four, not three – don’t forget Marley’s ghost, pub quiz fans) who show him his past, present and future in an effort to make him mend his penurious ways. Jim Carrey “plays” most of these parts, and here’s where the “hmmms” start coming in: you’d think that with Carrey around there’d be big laughs throughout. There aren’t. A couple of chuckles, but little more.

Further raising the question of exactly who this film is aimed at, it’s blooming scary for youngsters – several intense scenes must have meant this was a whisker away from getting a 12A. Gorgeous, enrapturing 3D visions of a chocolate-box Victorian London and a heartwarming finale add some glittering tinsel, but it’s the terrifying ghoulies that’ll stay with the younglings into the night.

Robert Zemeckis has given us some of the most engaging fantasy films of the last 25 years, but one thing A Christmas Carol doesn’t have is the same level of engagement as, say, the Back To The Future films. Trying to work out why isn’t easy: maybe the animation detaches us from the characters? Maybe some of the action sequences are more suited to a Universal Studios theme park ride than a movie? Maybe it’s that lack of humour? Whatever, the film isn’t quite the triumph it might have been. But it is an experience, being stunning to look at – and you’ll only get the full effect from seeing it on the big screen, rather than waiting for the DVD.

Russell Lewin

Advertisement
Trackback URL:
Comments:

Hmm, I'm surprised by this. The trailer looked awful, and a shocking travesty of the book, but it's been garnering pretty decent reviews. Might pencil it into my watch list then, even though the idea of a shrunken Scrooge being chased around London grates against my soul.

Posted by shinysavage (127.0.0.1) on November 06, 2009 at 12:19 PM GMT
Website: http://shinysavage.blogspot.com/ #

If anyone's not read the original story, I'd definitely recommend it. It reads as if Dickens knew about Hollywood special effects, it's so visual.

Posted by Fridaydalek (127.0.0.1) on November 06, 2009 at 12:59 PM GMT #

Maybe I'm getting old and cranky, but I still don't like this whole "Motion Capture" (or whatever it's called) thing that Zemeckis apparently finds himself so enamored with; I find it all very unpleasant and distancing.

And, for whatever it's worth, I've always enjoyed George C. Scott's interpretation of Scrooge. His may have been atypical casting, but you can certainly see why the other characters in the film find him so intimidating. Plus, his film's got the scariest Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come that I've ever seen (and it's certainly scarier than that dreadful Muppet in what should've been - but wasn't - Patrick Stewart's definitive take on the role).

Posted by theshadowalker (127.0.0.1) on November 06, 2009 at 04:28 PM GMT #

@theshadowalker

We were having a similar conversation in the office. As it happens, I love Patrick Stewart's film version - but I recommend even more strongly his one man stage performance of A Christmas Carol.

Posted by Dave Bradley (127.0.0.1) on November 07, 2009 at 02:11 PM GMT
Website: http://forum.sfx.co.uk #

@ Dave Bradley

Yeah, Stewart's one man show was brilliant. I saw him, live, a couple of times; and I listen to the audio recording fairly consistently throughout the holidays. But I'm fairly certain that he no longer tours with it, though.

Still, I was disappointed in his filmed version. I thought it lacked atmosphere and just looked, well, cheap. (Sorry.) And that overgrown jawa posing as the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come REALLY annoys me.

Then again, I know a lot of people who say that Scott's version, which I'd mentioned above, is just TOO scary. So, what do I know? I mean, I always thought that "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" was far scarier than, say, "The Exorcist". So my personal Scare-O-Meter probably needs some adjusting.

Posted by theshadowalker (127.0.0.1) on November 07, 2009 at 11:42 PM GMT #

This looks horrible and I absolutely HATE these rubbish mocap films Zemeckis insists on doing. They just look creepy and plastic. No thanks very much. As for the tale itself I'll stick with the Muppets version. Sir Michael Caine as Scrooge gets my vote over Carrey any day.

Posted by Nick (127.0.0.1) on November 09, 2009 at 12:41 AM GMT #

Post a Comment:

Name:
E-Mail:
URL:

Your Comment:

HTML Syntax: NOT allowed
SFX Movie Trailers

Calendar