Page 3 of 3

Re: Disney's A Christmas Carol

PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 10:48 am
by Bayouwolf
DerLanghaarige wrote:Isn't is pretty normal that christmas movies have to wait for their home video release until the next x-mas?

I think it got the standard dvd release already (sometime in January, if I remember right), but this is the 4 disc super-mega-awesome edition w/ sparkles.

Grab that golden ticket Disney...Run straight home and don't look back!

Re: Disney's A Christmas Carol

PostPosted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:26 pm
by TheBaxter
watched this last night on dvd to get in the xmas spirit. the dickens story is one of my favorite xmas stories (along with the grinch, which, when you think about it, is pretty much the same story). my favorite version has always been the george c scott version. the patrick stewart version was pretty good too, despite some cheesy fx. i've only seen parts of the alastair sim version.

anyway, i think this version is possibly the worst version ever. certainly the worst i've seen. there are a lot of problems. oh, where to begin.
i guess the best place to start is with the voicework, and in particular, jim carrey's scrooge. now, to his credit, at least he's not doing "schtick." he's doing an honest version of the character, not making it a joke, like, say, a robin williams or eddie murphy version could have been. but even playing it straight, his vocal approach to the character just doesn't work. it sounds phony and out of place, and doesn't carry the Punky Power or sincerity the character demands. i don't really blame carrey, i just think this was a bad casting choice. he's certainly no george c scott or patrick stewart.

to a lesser extent, this problem extends to the other characters as well. bob cratchit comes off like a mumbling buffoon, not at all helped by the physical character design either. scrooge's nephew is too loud and bombastic. the ghost of christmas past who's design is, to say the least, interesting (i could possibly warm up to this take on it) is often hard to understand because of how the voice is portrayed. really, none of the voicework stands out as particularly good, and the character designs as a whole don't hold up. the film as a whole also has a very bleak and depressing look to it. now, mid-19th century london was a fairly bleak place, so that's not necessarily wrong, but some of the film is just not enjoyable to look at.

another problem is the pacing. now, to the film's credit, it is very faithful to the original source material. perhaps too faithful, in that it doesn't really flesh out much of the story, particularly during the ghosts of xmas past and present. it seems they were afraid to add anything to the story, but dickens' original is a very short story and rather sparse in sections, and other films have expanded scrooge's story a bit, which fleshes his character out some more. this film doesn't do that, and so it comes off feeling rushed in these sections. at the same time, they do add one thing to the story: lots and lots of flying. oh, and a bit of "honey, i shrunk the scrooge" as well. no doubt these were added to keep the kiddies' attentions, but it's a DOUBLE EPIC FAIL - first, because the sequences feel tacked-on and lame and don't fit the tone of the narrative, and second because the rest of the film is not children's material at all, it ranges from very dark and dour to some rather creepy sequences (particularly with marley and the ghost of xmas yet to come) that would likely frighten very young children. it also betrays the filmmaker's lack of faith in the original material, that they felt they needed to add flying sequences and a bizarre mini-scrooge chase scene to keep the audience's interest. i think the staying power of this story is proof enough that those bells and whistles aren't needed. the story is strong enough to stand on its own without a bunch of overblown action scenes.

and that gets to perhaps the central issue, the one basic conceptual failure of this film, which is that it's completely unsuited for animation. it was simply a bad choice to try and make an animated film version of this story. first, by making it animated, they automatically invite the perception of this as a "children's film" when it's not that at all. dicken's story is for adults and for older children; it's not for the little kiddies. and while it's true that animation doesn't, and shouldn't, automatically imply that the film is for kids, that's still the way most of the public sees it. and i think the films producers knew that, which is why they tried to insert those "kid-friendly" sequences which do nothing but clash with the tone of the film completely. the other aspect that makes this story not suited to animation is that it's a very human story. and while the motion-capture is well improved over "the polar express" and the like, it still puts a major barrier between the audience and the characters, and makes it harder to connect to the characters, which is necessary to really get to the heart of the story and the emotion and meaning behind it. i just don't think there's a way for this story to work on film without real actors portraying scrooge and the cratchits and be able to hit the emotional beats to their fullest potential.

and that is why disney's a christmas carol fails.

Re: Disney's A Christmas Carol

PostPosted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:21 pm
by Ribbons
DerLanghaarige wrote:Isn't is pretty normal that christmas movies have to wait for their home video release until the next x-mas?

Yeah, I think so. At the very least I know Fred Claus did the same thing (came out in theaters around Christmas, then on DVD the following Christmas). When I started seeing the DVD commercials I was like "Holy shit, didn't that movie come out like 4 years ago?" But I guess it just feels that way when most stuff takes about 4 months to hit the shelves.

On a weirder note, We Are Marshall actually tried something similar (the story about the college football team that won the national championship a year after most of its players died in a plane crash)... the movie itself came out around December, and then the DVD came out next September to coincide with the start of the new football season.

Mickey's Christmas Carol

PostPosted: Fri Dec 19, 2014 5:41 am
by TheButcher
Mickey's Christmas Carol Marley's Ghost

Charles Dickens’ Immortal Classic SCROOGETTE

PostPosted: Sun Aug 28, 2016 9:08 am
by TheButcher
Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol is a universal tale, making it ripe for adaptations, parodies, and many different interpretations. The most recent one is Scroogette, which brings the story into modern day and re-imagines the protagonist.
Anya Crittenton wrote:Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol is a universal tale, making it ripe for adaptations, parodies, and many different interpretations. The most recent one is SCROOGETTE, which brings the story into the modern day and re-imagines the protagonist. Teresa Kale wrote the script, with the film set to be produced by Myriad Pictures.

On Christmas Eve, just as in the original story, a “rich snob high school girl” gets three visits from different ghosts (past, present, and future) to show her the real meaning of friendship and family. The original Ebenezer Scrooge finds his perspective on life changed by the fateful night and presumably so will this young girl. Characters like the nephew Fred and Tiny Tim will likely have re-imaginings as well.

Scrooge has been depicted as a woman before, but never on the big screen. The first iteration was the 1995 TV movie Ebbie, with Susan Lucci playing Elizabeth “Ebbie” Scrooge and set in a department store. Then, Tori Spelling took on the role in another TV movie in 2003, this time depicting Scrooge as a female celebrity. William Shatner also appeared in this take as Christmas Present. Finally, in 2008 none other than everyone’s favorite doll starred in Barbie in a Christmas Carol.

Kirk D’Amico and Theresa Won will be producing for Myriad, with Joe Russo joining them as producer as well.

Previously, Myriad produced Robert Carlyle’s directorial debut Barney Thomson and other films such as Mountain Men and The Curse of Downers Grove.

Kale is best known as a writer for the Disney Channel Series Girl Meets World, which is a follow-up series to the popular Boy Meets World in the 90s.