Search This Blog

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Film Reviews: Christmas Edition 17: A Christmas Carol 2009

“If I could work my will every idiot who goes about with 'Merry Christmas' on his lips, should be boiled with his own pudding, and buried with a stake of holly through his heart!”


So my final verdict of the various versions of A Christmas Carol I have seen, in order from my favorite and what I consider the best, to the worst:
1984, 1970, 1938, 2003, 1951, Muppets, 2009
I finally watched the 2009 Disney version of A Christmas Carol. By now, I have nothing to say about A Christmas Carol, but plenty to say about this version
This version was hailed for being verbatim—word for world from the original dialogue. This is somewhat true; it is not 100% verbatim, close, but not fully. There are also a few things thrown in that did not happen in the story.
What follows is a list of everything wrong with Disney’s A Christmas Carol 2009.
First off, the main complaint that the movie was made too zany and silly is true—well, it is not very zany, but it does have the Disney feel. Also like Disney, all the children’s faces, except for Tim’s, are like fat little Cherubs and because of the CGI, I got to say, I found most of the faces really creepy and disturbing because normal people don’t look like that. Another thing that I really did not like was when the spirits and Scrooge would be traveling thru the air—I do not know, maybe it is because a few minutes before, I had had a poptart and some Coke, but those scenes made me slightly nauseous. I didn’t feel like I was actually going to vomit, but I definitely did not like how these scenes made me feel.
The best part—the real WTF moment of the film, is when Scrooge is listening to the business men casually talking about his death and one of them clearly just did some cocaine—I am not even kidding. Now I know that this was common and not even illegal at the time but what the hell was the point of putting that in there? It is completely unnecessary to the film in every way. I know that the kids watching the film will be totally oblivious to this most kids don’t know what cocaine is and it is only for a brief second but this is a kids movie, so who was it for? I understand putting subtle adult humor in kids films so that the parents will be able to enjoy it more, but this wasn’t humorous it is just “oh look, that guy just did cocaine”, I mean it is really out of nowhere.
Another thing that is totally unnecessary is the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come chasing Scrooge around the poor parts of London and then zombies come out of nowhere while he is being chased by Death, and then he shrinks for no reason! What the heck is going on?
Furthermore, the Ghost of Christmas Present dies in a really creepy way: while he is still laughing he starts to turn to dust even when he is just bones and eyeballs, he keeps laughing.
I will give the film some credit, it certainly had a few creative ideas—most of them I thought sucked—but it was creative. Jim Carrey actually does a good job portraying Scrooge; of course, he portrays practically half the characters as well. I did not like how when the ghosts would mock Scrooge for things he had said, they would imitate his face or the faces of others—it was somewhat stupid. I also feel that Zemeckis took the description of the Ghost of Christmas Past excessively literal because he looks like an actual candle. Again, creative but I did not like it. Or how the Ghost of Christmas Present traveled around with Scrooge in a spirit form of part of his house—just stupid.
I feel that even though the CGI made it easier to do many things, I think this version would have been better if it had been live action or even animated.

Overall, it is not that bad of a film—it is not my least favorite adaptation of A Christmas Carol, just the one that has the most things wrong with it and the most things I thought were bad. Therefore, in the end I give it 2.5 out of 5 for A Christmas Carol adaptation and 2.9 out of 5 as a film in general.



I guess at this point I should briefly mention another A Christmas Carol I recently watched—the 2003 version.
Not much to say about this one. Patrick Stewart plays Scrooge and he does a fairly decent job. This version is unique because like the 2009 version, it starts with Marley’s death just like in the book. I thought the affects were shoddy but the scene transitions were nice. Marley’s spirit was also different this time and I liked the portrayal of Scrooge and Isabelle’s love story. Scrooge is shown as a more sympathetic character from the beginning, more bitter and rude than an ass. The Ghost of Christmas Present showed Scrooge a prison which I have never seen in another version—I really liked the 2003 version’s Ghost of Christmas Present as well as The Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come and the scenes about death.



No comments:

Post a Comment