Currently Browsing: Entertainment / Movie Reviews
A Christmas “Carrey”
.
Written by Henry Mouat
Grade: B-
The biggest question that was pounding in my head after watching A Christmas Carol was, “Why is Robert Zemekis so ferociously hell-bent on demolishing great literature with digital animation?” After eternally tarnishing The Polar Express (not exactly ‘literature’ but still) and Beowulf, Zemekis has returned to smear Charles Dickens’ beloved tale with the wonders of modern technology.
The timeless and beloved Scrooge is played by Jim Carrey, who…well, really, he’s Jim Carrey. Carrey has all the talent of a great actor, but as usual, he isn’t asked to use it. Unfortunately, the result is that Carey’s Scrooge doesn’t feel particularly genuine in any way. His character, in short, is simply a weird accent, alarming posture, and a freakishly long nose (which, if you watch the movie in 3-D, is the most common object on screen to hover over the audience). His performance is entertaining, but not as real as some of the past Scrooges.
The movie also lacks a narrator, which has worked tremendously well in past interpretations (Muppet Christmas Carol, anyone?). The narrator’s absence hinders the plot to the point where the story seems woefully incomplete.
But of all the movie’s flaws, the most jarring is the lack of good cheer. Some scenes can be positively creepy, and I’m not even referring to Scrooge. The ghost of Marley, though he creates perhaps the best scene in the film, drains any tidings of comfort and joy that the film could’ve offered. Likewise, none of the spirits (all of whom are also played by Carrey) add any positive feelings, and if they do, they lose those feelings from being creepy. It’s no wonder that this film was released a month and a half before the Christmas season; it has none of the warm fuzzies associated with the holiday.
The main story is generally intact, with the exception of a chase scene through the streets of London that would have made Dickens scream in dismay. The story still has most of the same fun as it ever has; Zemekis did not stray as much from the source material as he did with Beowulf.
The most unique and masterfully executed parts of the film are its visuals. The animation is stunning at times, especially with the sweeping shots of 19th century England. It can occasionally be distracting that all of Scrooge’s spirit traveling is done flying at high velocities like Superman; however, these parts are among the most visually amazing scenes in the film. Most of the character designs reflect the actor playing them, and are often breathtaking to watch. The oddest character is Scrooge; while most characters appear relatively realistic, Scrooge looks like a decrepit Wicked Witch of the West.
` On a whole, A Christmas Carol is the best of Zemekis’ animated films (although if you’ve watched Beowulf, you’ll know that that isn’t saying much). There is certainly entertainment in watching the beloved tale once again, even without the Christmas cheer. Just don’t bring the kids; Kermit the Frog isn’t there to make everyone happy this time around.
Email This Story
Print This Story
Loading ...
November 11th, 2009 at 12:42 am
I strongly object to the Beowulf charge.
[Reply]
December 12th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Beowulf wasn’t that great. It didn’t stick to the book and I personally think it was too sexual to make it a good adventure movie. Since I’ve never read or seen any plays/movies on A Christmas Carol (but I’ve heard a little about the Scrooge character)l I can not agree (or disagree) with Henry’s judgement of Jim’s Scrooge. But, I can say I think that Jim Carrey’s acting is wild and too…cheery…peppy…energetic (at least in the movies that I’ve seen him in) to play the character of Scrooge properly.
[Reply]
January 6th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
mao mei…u know beowulf is the best thing u have ever seen
[Reply]