Just got back from a screening of A Christmas Carol. Thought it was one of the weirdest, coolest, most unusual theatrical experiences of this year. Thought it took very hefty balls to make a kids movie that was as dark and emotionally complex as the Dickens story. Somehow I knew, though, that when I started looking around at the reviews I would find a handful of wet blankets ready to remove all of my fun. And lo, a 55 rating at Metacritic.
At least a couple of them, Owen Gleiberman and Roger Ebert, liked it as much as I did. I can say this about the movie: it is way ahead of its time. I know I keep saying this over and over again about the movies I like that the groupthink doesn’t, but in this case I really do believe this film will be rediscovered by less grumpy people as time goes by.
I think to appreciate the movie, though, you have to be digging on the special effects, namely the 3-D. I think it is as good and as enjoyable probably without the glasses, but with them – a whole new world unfolds. This is digital effects as their most stunning. Since I was greatly moved by Peter Jackson’s King Kong and David Fincher’s Benjamin Button, I think I have to dub myself a bit of an f/x geek. Either way, I don’t know if it manages an Oscar nod or not, but this film is one of the best I’ve seen this year. And I’m not afraid to go up against groupthink. Just watch me. See, not afraid. Still not afraid.
23 Responses for "A Christmas Carol – Why Crickets so Bah Humbug?"
You should be more afraid to follow the groupthink that go against it. At least I would be. I would hope that most critics/bloggers disagree with the Academy’s choices on a year to year basis. I know I do.
Should Pixar’s UP feel threatened now?
Great! I’m going with my god son on Saturday, 3D IMAX.
This can’t be nominated in both V/FX & Animated Feature, can it? I see it as becoming a lock in An. Feat right behind Up & Coraline.
If you read the consensus on Rotten Tomatoes, it reads: “Robert Zemeckis’ 3-D animated take on the Dickens classic tries hard, but its dazzling special effects distract from an array of fine performances from Jim Carrey and Gary Oldman.”
In other words, the performances are great, but the effects are too good.
Seriously, even if the audience has too much ADD to pay attention to the story, they will at least have experienced fine visuals. And for those of us who CAN see the story past the effects, we’ll enjoy it as well, thanks in part to some fine performances.
I don’t think that’s a valid reason to dislike a movie. Two strengths do not add up to a weakness. I got my ticket to check this baby out at El Capitan, and I’m looking forward to it.
“Should Pixar’s UP feel threatened now?”
If it were up to me, yes. In reality, no. Up, A Christmas Carol and Coraline are the three strongest for sure. Up probably wins.
Mateo, groupthink meaning “bloggers and critics” perhaps…Academy, a whole different ball of wax.
Wait a minute, wait a minute. So you’re telling me, “A Christmas Carol” is actually…
…good?
I guess I might have to give this a shot. I was *extremely* reluctant because of the previews and I wasn’t a fan of “Beowulf” (*cough* crap! *cough*), but now, I’m not too sure. Better to give it a shot than to completely write it off, right?
Speaking of “A Christmas Carol”, by a funny coincidence I found this brief article written by A.O. Scott in defense of “A Christmas Carol”, “Where the Wild Things Are” and “Fantastic Mr. Fox”. It’s worth a read and makes a valid argument that children can handle dark stuff.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/movies/08scot.html
“Why Crickets so Bah Humbug?”"
Easy. It’s cool to hate Performance Capture, so any movie made with it will automatically get split reviews.
Also, that Rottentomatoes critical consensus is one of the baffling I’ve ever read on their site. The acting is great, the visuals are great, but it’s a mediocre movie? WHAAAAA!?!
I have got to see this movie.
I still have absolutely no problem with the mo-cap – I think it looks great. What I have a problem with, and what will more than likely keep me from checking out the film, is the casting of Jim Carrey as Scrooge. Much like the bigger problems with Polar Express lied in Zemeckis’ tired attempts to stretch out the story with cliched action and out-of-place musical numbers, the unappealing aspects of this movie go beyond the animation, but the artistic style is easier to blame.
In other Digital Scrooge News You Can Use, the blu-ray of the 1951 Alastair Sim version has been released this week.
Check out this screenshot comparison between standard DVD and HD.
Ryan, you supply an actualfax interesting bit of info. I’m getting that blu-ray.
To be honest, Polar Express was really awful to watch, and felt pointless, as if I had somehow betrayed myself sitting through it all. This looks pretty much the same.
Kris Tapley also quite liked it. Maybe there’s more to this film than most of us realized.
Is this the first U.S. poster for Nine? I saw it on GoFoBo.com, a free screening site thing. Certainly the first I’ve seen.
http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/7046/nineticketart4039.jpg
Jim Carrey gives his best performances in this movie. Seriously.
[...] raves by two writers who I greatly respect – Kris Tapley of In Contention and Sasha Stone of Awards Daily – has got me re-thinking my interest. I do need something to jump start my Holiday spirit, [...]
Zemeckis really knows how to capture that eerie, slightly dangerous feel that Christmas has. I actually thought that Polar Express was a near masterpiece, and also felt the ahead of its time vibes there.
Rewatch the train on the ice scene. Stunning.
I’m sure this is worth seeing but I haven’t much interest in seeing A Christmas Carol again, and the animation of The Polar Express really turned me off. So I wonder if this is more of the same?
“Jim Carrey gives his best performances in this movie. Seriously.”
That just makes me that much sadder that Zemeckis didn’t do this as a live-action movie. IMO, watching real actors perform is always preferable to watching the CG versions of them perform. Like, watching Andy Serkis perform Gollum scenes is frankly sooo much better than watching the CG gollum version of him.
I just have one question, though: Do the characters still have dead eyes? Because if they do, than I won’t be seeing this movie.
Yawn…already seen it a thousand times before, and without the goofy looking motion capture animation.
Stunning is the right word for this movie. And it has a story. Which is certainly more than I can say for Ponyo or Cloudy with a Chance. I second the enthusiasm. I was completely dazzled.
and, once again, the marketing GENIUSES in Brazil botch yet another animated release by offering only dubbed copies. way to alienate a huge chunk of your audience, folks.
I’ll have to wait for the DVD on this one since the dubbed ads I’ve seen are cringe-worthy at best. until then, I believe you, Sasha!
i went to see this film expecting another polar express combined with the messy insanity of beowulf. boy i was wrong. i liked this film a lot, i though jim carrey was really good especially at the beginning of the film. i loved how dark it was at parts and scary too, i really did not see that coming. i hope it gets nominated for animated feature it really deserves ir, great year for animation.
Poor reviews. Bah, Humbug! This is a dazzling movie with mostly great performances. My only problem is some small issues with the screenplay (not enough focus on Scrooge’s past, etc.)
I still think Jim Carrey’s best performance was in “The Majestic”.
Leave a reply