Turn Advertising Off
 
    NEW>Full Movies!        Movie News        Top Stories      Theatrical Release Dates      Movie Pictures      Trailers & Clips      Listen to Movie Soundtracks

DISNEY'S A CHRISTMAS CAROL (2009)

"Marley was dead to begin with, and this film is deader than a doornail."

Cinema has brought to us another yuletide rendition of A Christmas Carol, the most read, told, acted, and filmed Christmas story besides the birth of Christ, thanks to Charles Dickens, who wrote the enduring novella in the mid 1800s. It still stands as one of my personal favorite stories of all time and it has been a family tradition to watch A Christmas Carol, in one form or another, every Christmas Eve. Countless black and white versions, some animated, and one with puppets. I am no stranger to this ghostly tale by any means. Robert Zemeckis (Back to the Future/Who framed Roger Rabbit/Forest Gump/The Polar Express), a director who can't live without heavy special effects, has returned for his third go at Motion Capture technology, creating the most expensive and visually engrossing Christmas Carol adaptation ever. The question is, does this film hold up to the merits and vision of the 19th century novelist, or is it a real humbug?

My consensus: Humbug!

While painful it is for me to say this, Disney's A Christmas Carol treats its audience like a seedy seesaw, a cheap thrill-ride that would have been a more appropriate attraction at Disneyland. The film has its moments, such as its dark depictions from the novella that film has yet to capture until now, but the life lessons and growing empathy that you are meant to feel for the old miser are frequently tossed aside and irreverently dropped for the sake of attempted "total immersion".

I will say this. The beginning and the ending were done well. The moment our friend Marley seeps through the door, things become too difficult to digest. Every ghost is over the top and Marley is too silly and bipolar to be taken seriously. Scrooge has several crazed out adventures alright; a snuffer-turned rocket trip into the sky, being chased by a demonic hearse, becoming the size of a mouse, and icicle surfing on London rooftops. That's one agile old man! Other characters had more dexterity than we've ever seen before as well; a somersaulting Fezziwig and a levitating Mrs. Fezziwig to boot! While visually stunning, there's not enough drywall to cover this mess. To be fair, this film may be appreciated when seen in 3-D. I decided to see this with the traditional 2-D format, for, if the film holds up in 2-D, it would be great in 3-D. However, if watched in 2-D, the 3-D hokum is painfully obvious and does absolutely nothing to enhance the story or move it along. The Polar Express did a better job and is a far better film compared to this.

Is this the story that Dickens "originally" envisioned, as Mr. Zemeckis so affably boasted?

I think not.

There's more gravy than a grave about this film, and I'm sure Dickens is rolling around in his.

What saved this film from total disintegration was Jim Carry's portrayal of Scrooge and Alan Silvestri's score. So much talent was gathered for this film (who ironically share a past with director Robert Zemeckis), but they did not amount to anything more than two-minute cameos, given the performances of Gary Oldman, Bob Hoskins, Colin Firth, Robin Wright Penn, and Cary Elwes (he was in the film, right?). A few unnecessary verses were added to the rendition of this off key Carol, in the form of flying-towards-you objects and rollercoaster antics, meant to fully utilize the film's use of 3-D, which, for the most part, should've been left out entirely. Jim Carry's portrayal of Ebenezer Scrooge, I must say, is the most appeasing and appealing since Reginald Owen and Alastair Sim.

If you enjoy crazy 3-D thrill rides, than this is your ticket.

If you want a great story and message, read the novella. It's still in print and cheaper.

This is the third film where Zemeckis has decided to run with the likes of 3-D Motion Capture technology, and it continues to prove an unpopular medium to his movie-going public. For as talented a director as he is, he really ought to pull back and start filming actors without the use of glued dots and green screen.

If these shadows remain unaltered by the future, his career may die.

8 Comments


November 12th, 2009 7:35pm
One of the worst movies of the year.
  (Delete)
November 11th, 2009 4:59pm
idk i thought it was good.. i had fun and that's all that mattered to me.. i wasn;t looking at other stuff that much.. but it was good.. oh well to each his own.. :D
  (Delete)
November 11th, 2009 6:38am
I'm a big Jim Carrey fan, but I don't know if I want to see this movie because it's Disney and I'm NOT into that.
  (Delete)
November 10th, 2009 6:46am
Good review, though I did like it more than you.
  (Delete)
November 9th, 2009 10:07pm
Good review. I wasn't really planning on seeing it, it looked overdone as you said. Thanks for the heads up
  (Delete)
November 9th, 2009 4:16pm
At least I paid only 5 bucks for it :P

Thanks guys.
  (Delete)
November 9th, 2009 3:46pm
Great review. It's a shame that the film didn't live up to it's source material. I will give this a rent when it's released.
  (Delete)
November 9th, 2009 3:23pm
Good review. Sorry that you disliked it. Oh well.
  (Delete)

2.5
  Stars
Story:
Acting:
Directing:
Visuals:
Reviewed: November 9th, 2009
More of My Reviews:
Was this review helpful?

0 Users

0 Users
Average Score:
3 Stars
Viewing
2 of 4