Big Fish

I've had high hopes for this movie since I first heard about it some time ago. After all, most of the Tim Burton movies I've seen (barring Planet of the Apes) have been really wonderful. To say the least, Big Fish did not disappoint me. The story - by no means complex or suspenseful - was simple enough to allow the viewer to really take in the fantasy and mythology in Edward Bloom's tales. One didn't need a surprise ending or secret identities to make this film enjoyable. Rather, it was the simplicity and universal nature of the story that made it interesting. While some reviews have mentioned that the film can seem choppy at times, I didn't see this at all. The transition seemed smooth and logical, and while sometimes I found myself wishing for more scenes of younger Edward Bloom, I never felt bored by any of the movie. Nothing seemed to 'drag'. I was also quite impressed with the quality of acting in nearly the entire cast. Billy Crudup didn't really hit his stride until the end, but he was tolerable through the first three-quarters of the movie. Albert Finney did a great job of portraying a lion on his last legs, bigger than his body but unable to show it. Jessica Lange was amazing and added the emotional oomph that Billy Crudup often failed to provide. And while Ewan McGregor's role was not particularly difficult, at no point did he overplay the character, and his accent (to my ear anyway) never slipped. Though this wasn't as dark as Sleepy Hollow or as bizarre as Edward Scissorhands and Beetlejuice, Big Fish definitely had the Tim Burton touch in its scenery. The colors - whether dull for Elder Bloom's time or bright for Younger Bloom - matched the mood perfectly, and everywhere you looked (especially in Bloom the Younger's timeframe) there was something else to marvel at. Tim Burton fans will not be disappointed.

Every other year you get a movie that oozes magic and charm. Think "Chocolat". Think "Amelie". Think "What dreams may come". Perhaps even, "Being John Malkovich". And this year, it's time to think big... "Big Fish", to be precise. All four of these movies have some things in common. Merely describing the premise is not nearly enough to do justice to the mood of the film. And the mood, the emotional reaction of the audience, is in many ways much more important than the actual content. Still, there's no way around it in a proper review: We meet a disillusioned young man and his father, a charming old guy who knows exactly how to tell stories to fascinate first-time listeners and children. Unfortunately, there's barely any of those left, as he retold his magical stories once too often. When his health and life are beginning to fade away, his son wants to finally learn the truth about his father. Meanwhile, we hear his life story, as he tells it... Tim Burton is probably best-known for visual eye candy movies. Few directors can compete with the imagination he's shown in movies like Batman, Nightmare before Christmas and Sleepy Hollow. Outside the realm of darker, more gothic visuals, Tim Burton has so far been somewhat less prolific. Planet of the Apes was an expensive embarrassment, and Ed Wood is a decidedly acquired taste. Big Fish, then, is a new direction for him. Yes, it is eye candy, or perhaps even eye H"agen Dazs. But this time, the movie has much more of a soul than his monkeyplanet. This soul is achieved by two means: a great story (or collection of stories) and great acting. If you don't believe that the story is great, watch the audience. At key moments, everyone was chuckling or laughing, at others, I heard dozens of sniffs and tissues being unpacked around me. Yes, this is heartwarming stuff that a colder, more cynical soul would call cheese. Finally, Burton has found a story worthy of his talents again. And, better yet, he did not forget to encourage his cast to act. For a case study of such failure, see Christina Ricci's completely flat performance in Sleepy Hollow. In Big Fish, the cast is so carefully selected that failure is simply not an option. Ewan McGregor (playing the father in his youth) may not have much more to do than smile, be charming and sustain a Southern US accent, but he does it brilliantly. Much more important are the performances of Albert Finney and Jessica Lange, playing the aged father and mother, respectively. And they both deliver character performances worthy of prizes.

After cheerleading so enthusiastically for this movie, perhaps it is time to take a step back and look at it from a more critical perspective. Yes, it managed to enchant the audience, but it did so the Hollywood way. Special effects and big budget feature heavily. This is in stark contrast to the seemingly much less organized and much more intuitional charm of Amelie. This movie is also much more comfy about its pace - it takes its time just like a good storyteller would, but perhaps leaving behind the five-second-attention-span MTV generation kids in the process. On the other hand, I am tempted to say that its biggest vice is that there just isn't enough of it. Given the episodal structure of this movie, I can almost imagine what it would have felt like as TV series, or multi-part TV movie. I am not sure whether to wish for this to happen or shudder at the thought of "Big Fish: The Animated Series" or some such atrocity. Every story told in this movie is perfect, and a series of such perfect stories would be wonderful. Yet can perfection be sustained for a large number of stories? Either way, I wonder what is going to become of Big Fish - a franchise or a single movie. It definitely is more deserving of praise, awards and viewers than any other movie released during the past six months, including LOTR-RotK.

The whole story of a man's life is something large, but this movie managed to be entertaining and comical telling a story by dividing it into many stages so well told it feels like it's a little fairy tale, so many aspects and many temporal lines in 2 hours that feels like just a single hour.

The story itself is touching and beautiful while the time placement (involving the wardrobe used and design of the places as well) totally transports the audience to those years, it's colorful and complements the "adventure vibe"

This is undoubtedly a great movie to watch with the family, so every single member can appreciate each other stories and how they all got intertwined.

When I saw the French movie Amelie I sat in the movie theater with a smile on my face throughout the whole movie. The exact same thing happened while watching Big fish. It is simply one of the best movies I have ever seen. It made me feel good, it made me laugh, and it almost made me cry. What else is there to ask for?

The actors did an excellent job, and the dialogue and the story was told in a very good way! The characters are also well described, every character had a meaning in the movie, everyone from the friendly giant to the twins to the witch to the big fish!

The are a couple of movies that really makes me feel good, and Big fish easily enters that collection of feel-good-movies. (Amelie, The Cider House rules, Chocolat)

It was either "Cheaper by the Dozen," "The Haunted Mansion" or this. I didn't exactly feel like watching my favorite comedian run around with a horde of little kids cracking bad poopy jokes behind them, and I didn't want to see Eddie Murphy do this either (it was bad enough in last year's "Daddy Day Care"), so I chose to see the more adult-oriented of these three films, and I'm glad I did, because Tim Burton's "Big Fish" is a marvelous film--full of wit and imagination and eerie vibes that sometimes don't fit into Burton's films the way he wants them to--but actually have a purpose here.

"Pee Wee's Big Adventure" is simply one of the best films of all time, and you can quote me on that. That was Burton's breakthrough--then came "Batman," which was very good but slightly lacking in substance, and then came "Edward Scissorhands"--one of my sister's favorite films, a beautiful love story and an eerie fable...but just missing a very small ingredient that kept it from becoming a great movie (perhaps the same with his film "Ed Wood"--a very good film, but not exactly one of my all-time favorites).

I have my doubts as to whether anyone other than Tim Burton could have pulled off "Big Fish." Here's a movie I expected I would dislike and come away feeling a little bit empty--but that's only partially true. The movie doesn't quite exceed on the level it tries to, but as a film, it's one of the best motion pictures of the year.

It stars Albert Finney as Edward Bloom, an old man who loves to exaggerate tales of his past and pass these on to his friends and family. One night his son, William (Billy Crudup), tires of hearing the story about how he caught the town's largest fish in a lake using a gold ring--so he ignores his father for three whole years, until his mother (Jessica Lange) informs Will that his father is dying of cancer, and that he wishes to speak with his son one last time.

Drawn back to his old Alabama hometown with his new wife, Will finally learns the truth about these so-called "exaggerated" stories--and we, as the audience, get to see them in flashback mode. It begins with a young Edward (Ewan McGregor), a "big fish" who was just too small for his own town and had to move away to search for brighter prospects. On his journey he comes across an assortment of odd fellows, including a "Gentle Giant," a failed poet living in a heavenly town named Spectre, and a strange circus ringleader who also happens to be a werewolf.

All of these stories that Edward Senior tells his family relate to their current positions, and to call the film simply beautiful would be what John Candy once said is "the understatement of the year." My particular favorite character was the poet living in Spectre, played by Steve Buscemi (a wonderful supporting actor), who I had no idea played any role in this film prior to viewing the opening credits and seeing "with Steve Buscemi" appear on screen.

Buscemi's poet has been working on a particular poem for twelve years whilst living in Spectre. "Can I see it?" asks Edward. It says, "Roses are red, violets are blue, I love Spectre." "But it's only three lines long!" says Edward. "That's the reason you don't show your work to people," Buscemi says.

Danny DeVito also appears as the circus ringleader, and the most regretful scene in the film is that in which we see him naked from behind. I shudder at the thought. But, for what it's worth, DeVito's second re-teaming with Burton is magnificent--he's a supporting character, but the film certainly benefits from his performance.

Like all of Burton's films, "Big Fish" teeters on the edge of greatness, but it never quite crosses the line. This is a marvelous film, full of warmth, kind-hearted fables and beautiful cinematography, and it's one of the best films of the year. It's certainly a unique film experience unlike any you've ever had before. Unless, of course, you've seen "Edward Scissorhands" or "Ed Wood." Then some of it may look a bit familiar.

Still, I enjoyed it more than "The Lord of the Rings." And I could actually relate to this film.

Trivia note: "Edward Scissorhands" was a Tim Burton film. The main character of this film is named Edward. Sometimes when people pronounce his name with their thick Alabama accents it comes across as "Ed Wood." Mere coincidence or something more? We may never find out.

4.5/5 stars.

• John Ulmer