Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Walt Disney's A Christmas Carol

This is topic Walt Disney's A Christmas Carol in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=001603

Posted by Michael McGovern (Member # 4807) on 11-04-2009, 08:45 PM:

I find it kind of silly that they push these Christmas movies out so far ahead of the actual holiday, especially since they always end up starting out slow business wise, and get increasingly busier as the holiday approaches. I guess Disney wanted to push this one out and get as much out of the 3-D runs as they can until Avatar comes out in December and takes over every 3-D screen in the country.

Anyways, I rather enjoyed this film. It stuck really close to the source material, which was good. I was afraid the film would take the low route as they often do and dumb down a lot of the dialog to make it more accessible, but no, a lot of the dialog comes word for word from the original Dickens. I'm not really sure how I feel about the photo realistic animation, it worked well in Beowulf, but here I thought it looked a little odd at times.

The story is the same as it's always been whether it's Mr. Magoo, Bill Murry, or Beavis and Butthead, we've all seen it before. Scrooge is the focal point of this adaptation, as he should be, so the movie is almost all Jim Carrey, but he takes it on pretty well.

The 3-D effects work really well here, and go well with the animation, so if you plan to check this one out, I wouldn't even bother with the 2-D version, it just wouldn't be the same.

Keep in mind however, there is a lot of frightening imagery in the film, which will scare younger children, so I can foresee this being a problem for parents taking the family to see this one.

Overally it was good, but not great. The 3-D effects help set this one apart from prior adaptations, but otherwise it's the same story we've seen hundreds of times in the past. I give it 7/10.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-05-2009, 03:05 AM:

quote: Michael McGovern
I find it kind of silly that they push these Christmas movies out so far ahead of the actual holiday, especially since they always end up starting out slow business wise, and get increasingly busier as the holiday approaches.

Well you contradicted yourself there...obviously they will like it if the movie gets busier as the holiday approaches.

Warner Bros. created this model with the Polar Express; they put it out on this same weekend and it did great business. But you're also probably right that Dis knows they're going to lose most of their 3D screens when Avatar lumbers in.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 11-05-2009, 01:34 PM:

Charles Dickens A CHRISTMAS CAROL has always been a favorite of mine every since I saw the MGM movie version with Reginald Owens when I was little and after I had read the book when I was in the 6th grade. I had revisited the classic tale every Christmas ever since and I am glad I will have a opportunity to see a new adaption this time in 3-D. If the movie follows very closely to what Dickens wrote , I am sure it will be a success. It is unfortunate the film will not be playing in 3-D during the holidays and possibly not at all because AVATAR has been booked in all the 3D venues this year. However, there is no reason why Disney cannot book it during the next holiday season like Warner Brothers did with THE POLAR EXPRESS if the film proves to be a succes. This will mean there will not be a home video release of the film until it's theatrical run is over in a year or two and I will not mind that all because if the 3-D is as good as Michael say it is, I would prefer to see it that way in a theatre.

-Claude

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 11-06-2009, 02:25 PM:

Probably the best movie version yet.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 11-08-2009, 01:42 PM:

I saw A CHRISTMAS CAROL at Reading's Consolidated Kapolei 16 in Dolby 3-D and found the film to be a mix bag. Fist of all, I loved the 3-D. As michael had stated, it is the only way to watch this movie and I fully agree. Unlike many previous 3-D films I have seen in the past that were projected too dark, the presentation I saw yesterday was perfect. I did like the opening and the closing of the film because it was very true to Dickens but I was not too thrilled with the three ghosts segments. Fisrt of all, I thought the ghost of Christmas Past was kind of creepy the way it was animated and what had happened to the Ghost of Christmas Present at the end of his segment was also creepy. A lot of liberty were taken during the three spiritual visitations that deviated from the original story just to impress the audience how cool this movie version is in 3-D, just totally turned me off and I was rather bored. It is unfortunate the movie had strayed from the humane aspect of the original story and made it very impersonal and I doubt it will be back next Christmas.

1 out of Four Stars

-Claude

Posted by Joe Elliott (Member # 4006) on 11-08-2009, 03:42 PM:

This is the first movie that the public is HEAVILY weighted towards 3D. We have had about 20X the number of people in the 3D version, vs the 2D. We even had 1 2D show friday night that only had 2 people in it. People were even waiting 2 hours to watch the 3D version rather than the 2D.

Posted by Julio Roberto (Member # 4976) on 11-08-2009, 03:58 PM:

There are MANY movies that, given the "inmediate choice" between 2D and 3D and not too much of a price penalty, will get some >80% people preferring the 3D.

Only about 10% of patrons would much rather not watch a movie in 3D given similar conditions (i.e. similar price, similar theatre, similar size screen, etc). The other 90% either don't mind or prefer the 3D version if the conditions are better (i.e. a larger screen, not high ticket premium, subject matter screams out for 3D like in horror movies or some animated ones like this).

This is one movie that would be tons more boring in 2D, as it's "pretty boring" without the 3D already.

If a movie, like a Horror movie, is known to be "pretty weak, pretty lame, pretty boring" but it's available in 3D ... well, most people would preferred it in 3D as it would be unbearable without the added perk of seeing the goodies* stick out of the screen.

*(not thinking about the mandatory B-horror bare breasts here ... maybe)

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 11-10-2009, 08:32 PM:

The best version of CHRISTMAS CAROL is the one with Mr. Magoo.

This one is not bad. The motion capture process is quite a bit better in this movie than POLAR EXPRESS, but it still has some problems. The carolers at the beginning looked very strange. Jim Carrey makes a pretty good Scrooge. The other characters are well-done, especially Gary Oldman as Cratchett. I thought the ghost of christmas past looked a lot like Harpo Marx.

I did not like the chase scene in the film, although the kiddies in the room seemed to like that best. The 3D was very effective and not in the way. I saw very few gimmick scenes.

OLD DOGS and TOY STORY III trailers were not shown. We did see the underwhemling Avatar trailer.

I took my mother to see this one and it gets the official 83-year old seal of approval! (First movie she's seen in a theatre in 4 years!)

Shame on the staff of Marcus Pickerington. Only one person working concession stand and that person was busy making hot dogs and doughnuts, so I had to wait almost 10 minutes and I was 3rd in line. There were 4 or 5 other staff members who saw the line and seemingly deliberately ignored things. One was a shirt/tie manager type and the others were wearing those ill-fitting tuxedos Marcus uses. When I went back into the theatre, the tuxedoed twins were lurking in one of the theatre entrances, seemingly trying to hide. The young woman running the counter could have really used some help. A couple of scoops of popcorn and a cup (you fill your own at this theatre) certainly wouldn't stain a tux!

Good movie -- Let's give it a B+. Oh, and it is WAY to scary for young kids.

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 11-26-2009, 06:01 AM:

Well the story is pretty solid (I mean, what the Dickens am I supposed to say?) and I think the visual design of the film is very impressive (from a conceptual POV) but I think this CG technology that Zemeckis is persisting with is still heavily flawed to the point of distraction. Great effort has gone into the 3D modelling of Ebenezer Scrooge but everyone else still looks like Polar Express-style manakins.

I had a lot of fun with it but the young girl sitting with her mum across the aisle did not - the dark visuals and themes are stretching it's PG classification just a little bit.

7.5 out of 10.