Archives > McKinney Courier-Gazette > News
Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
RSS
Share
Christmas off to limp start with Zemeckis’ latest
By Andrew Snyder, Flu Survivor
For those complaining about Christmas music playing on the radio before Thanksgiving, direct the hate mail to director Robert Zemeckis; in association with Disney, he’s jumpstarted the Yuletide season with the release of his digitized version of the Charles Dickens’ classic “A Christmas Carol.” The result: a stocking full of disappointment.
To begin with the positive, in the spirit of the season, the performances are entertaining, especially those from headliner Jim Carrey. He comprises half the cast, playing Scrooge, young and old, and every incarnation of Christmas specter. Supporting roles are provided by Colin Firth (Nephew Fred) and Gary Oldman (Marley, Bob Cratchit, Tiny Tim), among others, but most scenes see Carrey talking to himself in the guise of two interacting characters. His interpretation of Scrooge contrasts with the raging, screaming miser in most minds. He pinches words as if they were pennies, quietly spreading hate with a scowl only Carrey’s overly expressive face could twist together. The opening scenes set up a traditional feel. Period specific looks and speech make for a feel of close translation. Dickens’ spirit seems captured.
That doesn’t last.
The sets range from the football field size stairs Scrooge trumps up into bed to the 100-foot Christmas tree the Ghost of Christmas Present sits atop; basically, big and bigger. The poor are given sufficiently cramped and damp space to emphasize their misery, but for the most part “A Christmas Carol” is a showy film. There are moments when the animation combines to create a truly remarkable image, see the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come’s section, but more often it serves as distraction.
The best quality of any version of “A Christmas Carol” is the story itself, and this version puts plot in the chokehold of digital effects. Too many scenes are devoted to bragging about the technological prowess Zemeckis has become enamored with. The introduction of each ghost is followed by a lengthy, uneventful travel through London, as if to ensure that viewers notice three times how much work went into recreating the city. “A Christmas Carol” never feels comfortable enough to rely on narrative; strange given the story has aced the test of time. Neither does it do a good job of handling character motion. Despite the beauty of the surroundings, human movement has a jerky quality that looks far from state-of-the-art. It also creates an atmosphere of disbelief, making it difficult to muster sympathy for any character, even Tiny Tim, for whom I cried even when he was a frog in “A Muppet Christmas Carol.”
The blockbuster pressure of appealing to every imaginable demographic explains why the movie feels so disjointed. It follows a pattern: plot, fireworks, plot, fireworks, fireworks, plot, etc. Kids need their effects-driven segments, I suppose, but still, “A Christmas Carol” feels too catering. One of the most intense segments of the film, the appearance of the Ghost of Marley, is wrecked by a misplaced joke, put there to keep the scene from becoming what it should be: terrifying. Viewers aren’t given much credit. The filmmakers imagine they can neither sit through much talking nor endure a good scare; a shame since the darker moments of the film hold such potential. The representation of the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come as Marley’s shadow is clever, and the penultimate scene of Scrooge hanging over his own grave is relentless rendered: hellfire, coffin and all.
Ultimately, “A Christmas Carol” doesn’t have enough substance to recommend. The pyrotechnics get so flashy they burn up the story of redemption that should be the purpose of all action. Scrooge’s travels are less about teaching morality and Christmas spirit than providing new scenery to dazzle the eye. For the kids who have never heard of Dickens before there might be something new here, but this film only makes me want to read the book again. It’ll take something more drastic than Zemeckis’ animation style to draw me in again. Maybe if Scrooge was an anthropomorphic panda or even just a duck or Michael Cane again.
1 out of 4 stars
The following are comments from the readers.
In no way do they represent the view of Starlocalnews.com
In no way do they represent the view of Starlocalnews.com
You must register with a valid email to post comments.
Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here:
Become a Registered User
- Return to: News «
- Home «
- Top of Page ^
