Le drôle de Noël de Scrooge

There have been many films based on Charles Dickens' Christmas carol and each one has their own way of telling it. This version is no different story wise (obviously). The only things changed were the visuals and tone. There was nothing I didn't like about this film but there were parts that make me question whether this movie was intended for children.

The voice cast to this story is pretty remarkable. Just like how Tom Hanks was able to do multiple voices for The Polar Express (2004), Jim Carrey plays Scrooge and various other characters throughout. Along side Carrey is Carey Elwes, Robin Wright, Bob Hoskins and much more. Surprisingly, the audience will be able to identify which actor/actress is doing the voice for whomever the character they are portraying. I suppose the voice characterizations were not needed to be enhanced. But it's blatantly clear whose speaking for whom.

Visually, the film's animation is nothing to scorn at either. Much of the characters, the backgrounds and lighting is accurately spaced, colored and shaded. Perhaps the most colorful spectacle is the transition between the spirits who visit Scrooge during his sleep. But what's extremely odd is how all the animated characters in this movie look like the actors who give them their voice; especially Scrooge! Look closely when he's on screen; Scrooge at the current time, looks like a weathered Jim Carrey and the younger version of Scrooge looks like Carrey as he is now. I'm curious if the animators knew this while making the film.

Nevertheless, I am leery about the reactions small children will have if they are given the chance to view this film. Scenes where Marley, Scrooges' partner, pays him a visit from hell, or when the ghost of Christmas present dies, is on the edge of being dark. Marley having a lazy eye, or dislocating his jaw? Ehh...not quite sure what those parts were put in for. Comedy? Or the dying ghost of Christmas present having a maniacal laugh? That kind of stuff could freak out a child. The ghost of Christmas yet to come is always a spooker for kids. I'm surprised Disney went through with it. It's not bad though. I liked the change, but it's not suitable for a child maybe under twelve.

Overall Zemeckis' take on Dickens' Christmas carol is visually intriguing and has a great voice cast. All the same, there are some elements in this film that are darker than usual and that's puzzling especially for Disney.

From an artistic viewpoint, the new Robert Zemeckis film from the man who gave us THE POLAR EXPRESS, is another of his animated features using the motion picture capture technique that allows the actors to play several roles. The cinematography is exceptionally well done.

JIM CARREY, as miserly Ebenizer Scrooge, looks nothing like his real self. He's a perfect Scrooge, using his voice and mannerisms to great effect, never overplaying the role as you might expect he would.

The visit from three spirits is more frightening than usual, since Zemeckis decided to throw everything he could into startling special effects--sometimes with very gruesome results. The sight of Marley's Ghost with a flapping jaw that has to be realigned by Marley is just one of the "extra" touches. Some of the "spirit" scenes are too intense for small children, more likely to frighten them than anything else.

There are times when the story remains very faithful to the Dickens book, sometimes even word for word. But when Zemeckis decides to show off that the camera can do with flying aerial scenes zooming over Victorian London, it begins to stray a bit. Biggest stray is a chase scene that has a miniature Scrooge going through drain pipes to escape an oncoming coach and horses trying to run him down.

The lovely score by Alan Silvestri blends perfectly with the on screen action and includes a number of traditional Christmas favorites. GARY OLDMAN and COLIN FIRTH do well in key supporting roles but it's really Carrey's show all the way. He plays several main characters with great skill.

Not quite as festive as you might expect, it's a darker version of Scrooge, handsomely executed so that many of the scenes look like Victorian illustrations from the novel.

Warning: This is not a child's version of the tale. Parents should be advised that some of the content is too gruesome for young kids.

I took my grandson to see this, but I was dreading it. I'm not a Jim Carrey fan but it's a Christmas movie, after all , so I bit the bullet and we saw it at the IMAX in 3-D.

The visual effects are great, even though a lot of it was :"Look, we have 3-D!" They stayed very close to the original story, though they added a miniaturization segment that was unnecessary. Carrey was muted and did a great job with some occasional clowning around. It was actually scary in some parts, as it should be, but not overwhelmingly, and there were some laughs as well.

I have always enjoyed this story, because it's one of redemption, and there is no better time than Christmas to tell it. It shows people being compassionate, even in the face of someone as seemingly heartless as Ebeneezer Scrooge. I was first exposed to this story as a little boy watching the animated version with Mr. Magoo that came out in 1962 and is shown every year on TV. There are many such movies that define the season and I truly expect this to be one of them, along with Christmas Story, Home Alone, Miracle on 34th Street, and It's a Wonderful Life.

Like the Macy's Parade, we all have our list of must-see holiday movies, no matter how many times we have seen them. I really expect this to make this list, with one caveat- I'm not sure how well the non 3-D version will translate to the TV screen. But the story is timeless and this movie does a good job of telling it.

In the Victorian era of the United Kingdom, the stingy and cranky Ebenezer Scrooge (Jim Carrey) that hates Christmas and people loses his partner Jacob Marley in a Christmas Eve. For seven years, he runs his business exploiting his employee Bob Cratchit (Gary Oldman) and spends a bitter treatment to his nephew and acquaintances. However, in the Christmas Eve, he is visited by the doomed ghost of the chained Marley that tells him that three spirits would visit him that night. The first one, the spirit of past Christmas, recalls his miserable youth; the spirit of the present Christmas shows him the poor situation of Bob's family; and the spirit of future Christmas shows his fate. Scrooge finds that life is good and God bless us everyone, changing his behavior toward Christmas, Bob, his nephew and people in general.

This dark adaptation of "A Christmas Carol" by Charles Dickens to the screen is one of those optimistic films that follows the style of Frank Capra's "It's a Wonderful Life" and it is impossible not loving it. The redemption of the mean Ebenezer Scrooge in a Christmas Eve is one of the most known worldwide novels and this animation produced by Disney Company follows the style of Tim Burton and may not be the best adaptation to the cinema, but it is indeed effective and a good family entertainment. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Os Fantasmas de Scrooge" ("The Ghosts of Scrooge")

I wonder if Robert Zemeckis weren't a filmmaker if he would have become a pilot. Look at his films and you may find a recurring shot in them, if not all then at least a good lot of them: a shot up in the sky, flying around and bringing the audience along (i.e. the feather in Forrest Gump, the pull-back through the valley and mountains in Beowulf, Back to the Future with the flying Dolorean), and here too are shots like that, more than one in fact. It's exhilarating to see Zemeckis at a mastery of this particular shot, and in the full scope and awe in 3D it's even stronger to watch and wonder 'how did they do it(?)' With motion-capture, anything is possible... except, sadly, making one feel a true emotional connection to the material.

Oh, don't get me wrong. It's an improvement over The Polar Express, whose creepiness was more unto itself and jarring as opposed to serving the story, and one can already see advancements in the technology from Beowulf, which was also lots of fun and had an edge to it allowed only with the digital animation. But for some reason- maybe my heart is a lump of coal or I wasn't in the right Christmas spirit or something- the material in the film didn't connect with me, except those moments that were funny (intentionally or not, sometimes due to Jim Carrey's performance), and it became something peculiar. It's a story that is practically timeless, and the director is at the top of his game, almost at the same control of the medium for a particular story like Forrest Gump or Back to the Future - maybe more-so.

It's also still a WOOSH experience, not carrying the same time and effort for characters to really feel fully human before our eyes like, for example, Up did back in the summer. I mention all of this first since the story we all know pretty much (as an aside, I kept thinking back to the first incarnation of the story I saw as a child, the Muppet Christmas Carol, and marveled at how both that and this film kept much of the book's dialog and storytelling devices exactly), and it's almost pointless to recant it here. What is paramount to mention though is that Zemeckis, in keeping with the tone of the original Dickens text (and having the clout that he has), makes it a true Victorian horror movie.

It should be said also that children will be hit or miss with this version; while they'll delight and be awed by the animation and moments of craziness (my favorite being the scene with the ghost Marley and his entire presentation before Scrooge, unhooked jaw uneasily included), they may be put off by the "old" language, some of it in that olde 19th century English Dickens wrote in. Perhaps this is why, against his own better judgment, Zemeckis decided to add in a few scenes to change the very faithful adaptation, the key one being the chase through the streets of London in the Christmas-Future sequence. This is smack dab in the middle of what is the best segment of the film - seeing death as a silhouette with a bony finger and Scrooge's stark pleas is truly chilling - and it suddenly makes it also the worst. It kills the tension and makes a strange sensation: does one laugh at a tiny-voiced Scrooge running around like a mini Daffy Duck cartoon while he's supposed to be facing down his own demise? It's entertaining to watch, but awkward to behold at this point of the story.

That the motion-capture, for all of its beauty and detail in the faces and people and locations and dazzling set-pieces, doesn't engage on a purely spiritual level (not even to the extent that 'Muppet Christmas' did, that at least had the ghost of Henson on the production to keep things truly haunting), is somewhat forgivable for what Zemeckis does accomplish here. He puts a modern spin on a classic tale, makes it approximately dark and mostly uncompromising for all ages- adults will jump possibly more than the kids at the WHOA effects- and Jim Carrey is nothing short of astonishing.

Carrey plays Scrooge in such a bravura way that only calls attention to itself as a dramatic part (only toward the end, when he becomes "happy" Scrooge are there a few unintentional laughs), and it may even be the best Scrooge seen in many years in any medium. Added to this are his *other* parts in the film, as the ghosts of Christmas past and present, the former creepy just on the pronunciation of 's'. Others like Gary Oldman and Colin Firth come off more or less fine if not remarkable (Oldman as Marley is fantastic - as Cratchit, a Oldman-faced Hobbit, is another thing).