which was to make a homage to the old British Hammer films of the 60s. The film could have been following a checklist:
Does it have dark, gothic set design? Check
Does it share a title with a work of classic literature? Check
Does it bear absolutely no resemblence to said classic? Check
Is it instead a needlessly complicated whodunnit with an anticlimatic resolution? Check
As far as costume design, does it think mainly of tight corsets straining to contain amply endowed women? Check
Does it contain overwrought and melodramatic dialogue straight from a penny dreadful novel? Check
Does it conain oodles of blood? Check
And Christopher Lee? Check
With "Sleepy Hollow" Tim Burton forgets the cardinal rule of homage; refer but do not recreate. The film's main fault is that it is not so much a homage to Hammer horror as a carbon copy. Fidelity is not always a virtue, for while the film manages to capture all that was good about Hammer horror, it also manages to capture all that was bad.
I have to say that "Sleepy Hollow" had one advantage over its source, there were moments in this film that were genuinely scary and suspensful, and I can't remember being scared once while watching any Hammer film. However, Hammer's failings ultimately undermine it. Most of the cast deliberately camped up their roles, and so did disservice to themselves (Miranda Richardson, Michael Gambon, Christina Ricci, and Johnny Depp are all excellent actors and it is a bit depressing to see them as they are here) but Christopher Lee, who only appears briefly, reminds the world why he is and always has been the greatest conveyor of primal menace in the history of film; a fact Burton makes all the clearer by pairing him with his lesser modern counterpart, Christopher Walken. I find it interesting that Lee's career shot into the sky after this film was released.
Given its aims, "Sleepy Hollow" could be called a success. But since it was aiming so low I can really only call it a failure.
Does it have dark, gothic set design? Check
Does it share a title with a work of classic literature? Check
Does it bear absolutely no resemblence to said classic? Check
Is it instead a needlessly complicated whodunnit with an anticlimatic resolution? Check
As far as costume design, does it think mainly of tight corsets straining to contain amply endowed women? Check
Does it contain overwrought and melodramatic dialogue straight from a penny dreadful novel? Check
Does it conain oodles of blood? Check
And Christopher Lee? Check
With "Sleepy Hollow" Tim Burton forgets the cardinal rule of homage; refer but do not recreate. The film's main fault is that it is not so much a homage to Hammer horror as a carbon copy. Fidelity is not always a virtue, for while the film manages to capture all that was good about Hammer horror, it also manages to capture all that was bad.
I have to say that "Sleepy Hollow" had one advantage over its source, there were moments in this film that were genuinely scary and suspensful, and I can't remember being scared once while watching any Hammer film. However, Hammer's failings ultimately undermine it. Most of the cast deliberately camped up their roles, and so did disservice to themselves (Miranda Richardson, Michael Gambon, Christina Ricci, and Johnny Depp are all excellent actors and it is a bit depressing to see them as they are here) but Christopher Lee, who only appears briefly, reminds the world why he is and always has been the greatest conveyor of primal menace in the history of film; a fact Burton makes all the clearer by pairing him with his lesser modern counterpart, Christopher Walken. I find it interesting that Lee's career shot into the sky after this film was released.
Given its aims, "Sleepy Hollow" could be called a success. But since it was aiming so low I can really only call it a failure.