Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>but it is still creepy looking<< I cannot comment on the animation in A Christmas carol as I haven't seen it, but part of me wonders... why? Why is the end-all-be-all goal now to make animation as "real" as possible? Why can't there be just cartoons anymore? There's more "life" in 20 seconds of Jungle Book, with its sketchy, construction-line-displaying Xerography than in any of these overwrought motion capture things. I mean, if you want it to look so "real" then just shoot a movie. But isn't the point of animation to go beyond what is real? Where's the fun? The exaggeration? The wildly imaginative stuff? Anime isn't my cup of tea, but at least I can appreciate that they are trying to push the envelope in fresh ways. And it looks like someone actually drew it.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan It's just strange to me -- you have these behind the scenes clips where someone involved says something like "We sent a team of artists to 3 countries to find the right style of lamp post, and then we added tiny flakes of rust to that lamp post to get the color as we wanted it, and then it took 50 computers 17 weeks to render it." I mean, just have a prop department build you a lamp post and shoot a movie. Ya know?
Originally Posted By threeundertwo I decided to be a good sport and took my kids to this yesterday along with a troop of their friends and moms. Afterwards I asked the kids (aged 9-13) if they would recommend it to their friends. There was a universal chorus of "NO!" It's what A Christmas Carol would look like if Stephen King wrote it. Complete with zombies jumping out of an alley. The jovial ghost of Christmas present who reminds Scrooge of the joy all around? Creepiest. Character. Ever. And he DIES. Quite graphically. I'll have nightmares. This movie was so dreadful and depressing that I wanted to find a prescription for Prozac when I left. Certainly not a movie to put you in the Christmas spirit. The animation in the aerial views of London were great, but I didn't need to see them 10 times. So sorry I wasted time and money on this. I really think the screenwriters don't understand the book at all. On another note, thank you so much for that Youtube link. Alastair Sim did the voice of Scrooge! Great stuff. Far better than my theater experience with the same story.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>It's what A Christmas Carol would look like if Stephen King wrote it. Complete with zombies jumping out of an alley. The jovial ghost of Christmas present who reminds Scrooge of the joy all around? Creepiest. Character. Ever. And he DIES. Quite graphically.<< Well, now you've got me wanting to see it. ; )
Originally Posted By threeundertwo LOL, it's your money. I have several versions that I enjoy, including George C. Scott's, which is very good. I like Patrick Stewart and Alastair Sim. Last year I picked up the musical version with Kelsey Grammar and Jason Alexander with music by Alan Mencken. Love it, despite a few odd quirky scenes. I have the audiobook read by Jim Dale, which is great to play while wrapping presents.
Originally Posted By basil fan Okay, ANY audiobook by Jim Dale is great ANY TIME. >There's more "life" in 20 seconds of Jungle Book...than in any of these overwrought motion capture things. At last, somebody gets it! I don't know why, but genuine hand-drawn animation has a reality that nothing done on a computer has ever come close to. Scooby-Doo Glitches <a href="http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/glitch/sdglitch.html" target="_blank">http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/...tch.html</a>
Originally Posted By dizkid >>It's what A Christmas Carol would look like if Stephen King wrote it. << Actually it's what christmas carol would look like if Charles Dickens wrote it. I think it is just as scary as any version. Except for maybe the other disney made ones.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Actually it's what christmas carol would look like if Charles Dickens wrote it.<< I must've missed the part in the Dickens story where the ghosts shrank Scrooge to 6 inches tall, gave him a chipmunk voice, and had the coach from Darby O'Gill chase him through the streets of London for what seemed like 45 minutes. >>I don't know why, but genuine hand-drawn animation has a reality that nothing done on a computer has ever come close to.<< Because pooter animation is more like stop motion than like drawing. One department "builds" the character models, and another department manipulates them. It creates limitations. (BTW - The Internet Nitpick Police have requested that I point out that ALL animation nowadays - including hand drawn - is done on pooters.)
Originally Posted By threeundertwo >>Actually it's what christmas carol would look like if Charles Dickens wrote it. I think it is just as scary as any version.>> We must have seen different versions of this movie. I can't find the part in Dickens where the Ghost of Christmas present turns into a cackling skeleton and disintegrates. Can't see where the child who is ignorance becomes a knife-wielding convict, or the child who is want becomes a prostitute trying to seduce Scrooge. Missed the part where scrooge caps the Ghost of Christmas Past and ends up flying into outer space. And when Dickens said the fiddler "plunged into the ale" he didn't mean literally doing a swan dive, he meant he drank it. I could go on and on. This movie is an insult to Dickens fans. We'll just have to disagree on this one.
Originally Posted By jkayjs Well I saw it last nite in IMAX 3-D. I also attended the Train Tour promotion. I'm sad to say the the Tour was the better part of this production for me. I found some of the characters almost disturbing to look @. As someone mentioned they almost had a deformed look. The Colin Firth character esp. The Elder Scrooge was technically amazing but for me actually a little too grotesque to be endearing @ the end. Of course it doesn't help that I find wearing the large 3-D glasses @ IMAX less than comfortable. I too love this story & have read the book many times. I have to say it is the first time I haven't become completely engrossed in the story & the characters. I had really hoped to like it more. I didn't hate it but..... I'll stay with the classic Alastair Sim version which I have in my hand as we speak so it's off to watch it for the gazillionth time.
Originally Posted By basil fan >>ALL animation nowadays - including hand drawn - is done on pooters. Mea culpa. I was trying to find a way to include CGI and mo-cap without having to come out and type "CGI and mo-cap." Guess I should've said "CGI and mo-cap." Less Is More <a href="http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/sherlock/less.html" target="_blank">http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/...ess.html</a>
Originally Posted By dizkid >>I must've missed the part in the Dickens story where the ghosts shrank Scrooge to 6 inches tall, gave him a chipmunk voice, and had the coach from Darby O'Gill chase him through the streets of London for what seemed like 45 minutes.<< Sorry if I confused you, I was refering mostly to the more scary parts of the movie. Which some have been saying are not true to the book, but actually are pretty true to the story. Believe you me, i'm not gonna argue with anyone about mini-scrooge. I know that's not anywhere in the play. That sequence really proves that Rob Zemeckis is unable to make an adapted screenplay without adding a chase sequence that is not relevant to the plot.
Originally Posted By threeundertwo As my older daughter said "it looks like they just threw that in there so they could make a video game out of it."
Originally Posted By RockyMtnMinnie I saw the movie this afternoon in 3D and I really enjoyed it. I've seen pretty much every version of Christmas Carol that has been made including some live stage versions, and I have even *giggles* read the book. The story is meant to be dark and scary. It is a Christmas story, but it is also a ghost story and a story of redemption. The flickering face of the Ghost of Christmas Past was off-putting to me. I also didn't like the shrunken Scrooge scene. But overall, I really enjoyed this movie. While Jim Carey played Scrooge, there were few over the top Jim Carey moments in the film.
Originally Posted By DAR If you read the story that Dickens wrote(and not including the chase scenes or anything like that) but it's a pretty creepy story.
Originally Posted By tonyanton I have never read the book and went in with little expectations...I was unable to see it in 3-D, but ended up really enjoying it. I thought it was really well done!
Originally Posted By andyll I saw it last weekend. Didn't like it much. While visually well done there were many parts of the movie that confused me. I never read the original story... perhaps that would help? 1) Christmas past - Who was the kid in the school? The later scene makes it seem like his family kicked him out. I thought this section of the story was to show how past experiences shaped his views on Christmas. 2) Present - I never realized that the ghost of Christmas present was Jesus. At first I thought it was supposed to be subliminal but the section on the closing of the soup kitchens on the Sabbath and the rant on organized religion diverting from Jesus' message sealed the deal for me. I guess the ghost dying represents the crucifixion? In Dickens version are the relatives so hypocritical? 3) Future - What was that chase scene about? One of the few films I've seen that I feel I wasted 2 hours. Bill Murry's Scrooged has always been my favorite version. Balance in all areas.
Originally Posted By threeundertwo >>If you read the story that Dickens wrote(and not including the chase scenes or anything like that) but it's a pretty creepy story.>> The longest scenes in the book center around the joyfulness of Christmas - the party at Fezziwigs, the family parties in the present, even the Cratchits, who are able to experience joy and deep love despite pain and poverty. Scrooge changes because he sees the joy inherent in the holiday, as well as the utter lack of joy that can happen to him if he rejects the season. Scrooge isn't "scared straight." He is gently persuaded from the very first scene with a spirit where he sees his boyhood neighborhood. With so much happiness throughout the story, it only takes the mental imagery of a crutch without an owner to horrify Scrooge. In the book, even the Ghost of Christmas Future soft peddles the point, by not forcing Scrooge to look on the face of the corpse on the bed and letting him approach the gravestone of his own free will. Even at that perilous moment, Scrooge is already a changed man, and does not need any further persuading. This is not a horror story, it is a tale of the love and joy and the beauty of Christmas that exists for all men despite their circumstances. It is a compelling reminder to those who have been blessed with much to remember to share with and help their fellow man.
