IMDb user comments for
A Christmas Carol (2009) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 15:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

146 comments in total

---

63 out of 78 people found the following review useful:
Do some basic research parents, 12 November 2009

Author: kevcom from Hawaii

I read that this film has been labeled by parents as a "Disney Bomb" because it's too scary for their young children. Parents who take kids to see any movie need to be aware of something: if it's rated PG there are likely going to be scenes that your six year old will not enjoy -- even if the name Disney is attached to it. The cutesy versions of A Christmas Carol (The Muppet Christmas Carol and Disney's own Mickey's Christmas Carol for example) have little in common with the classic, and sometimes very scary Charles Dickens story. The plot should be familiar to just about anyone who has been alive sometime during the past 150 years, and the fact that there are spirits (ghosts) in the story should also be a red flag to parents. Especially since two of them are downright frightening in just about any version of the story.

The truth is that this is one of the most beautiful and faithful remakes of the Dickens classic. The dialogue is taken nearly word-for-word from the book, and the look and feel of the film brilliantly capture what you would imagine wintertime in London in the 19th century to be like. A few of the special effects are a bit over-the-top, but most work well and add enough pizazz for cynical modern-day audiences. The scenes featuring the Ghost of Christmas Present are worth the price of admission alone.

Once every few months I'm dragged kicking and screaming to see a new film. I can't stand wasting my hard-earned dollar on the crap Hollywood throws at us these days, but every once in a while I'm pleasantly surprised and thoroughly enjoy a movie. This was definitely one of those rare times.

---

55 out of 78 people found the following review useful:
not quite a Disney story, 3 November 2009

Author: Maria Ioana from Romania

Jim Carrey is full of surprises and the entire movie is a theatrical outburst of his talent, under the brilliant direction of Robert Zemeckis. Brilliant because it manages to make take the Dickens story and walk us through all its dimensions, without fear of sadness and, in the same time, he has the cold blood to use the magic wand for a happy end. I wasn't a big 3D fan until this movie, maybe because I didn't see any possibility to enrich the classical format, perfect as it became with the years... 'A Christmas Carol' gains a lot from 3D being a sensorial experience enhanced by IMAX technology.

All in all, it's not a story for kids, because it's rather disturbing and contemplative. Gary Oldman's pointing finger will stay with you for a while... It's an enchanting story and I encourage you to go and see it.

---

47 out of 67 people found the following review useful:
Both children and adults will gain more from this experience than most family films., 6 November 2009

Author: Troy_Campbell from Sydney, Australia

After directing The Polar Express in 2004, Robert Zemeckis vowed to only make 3D movies using motion-capture technology from then on, never to return to traditional live action films again. What? How could he? Moviegoers everywhere were bemused at how the bloke who gave us Forrest Gump, the Back to the Future trilogy, Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Contact and Cast Away could settle for some silly 3D business. Perhaps Zemeckis was smarter than us all though, his pledge to developing a decent 3D output coming half a decade earlier than most. It seems he was on to something.

It is credit to Zemeckis though that his use of 3D isn't the drawcard for this wonderfully told fable, it purely enhances it. The opening title sequence is one of the most breathtaking of the year, as we soar over - and through - the old Victorian town in which Scrooge inhabits in only one shot. It doesn't end there however, with no less than two more flying scenes and a splendid chase sequence on foot, which capably show what mo-cap and 3D are capable of. One small gripe, as was present with Up, the glasses still make everything darker and subsequently duller; especially as this picture is intentionally not well-lit to begin with.

We all know the famous Charles Dickens novel for which this is based on and Zemeckis stays faithfully close to it, unworried about making a family movie that has very few laughs. Let's face it, the story of Scrooge isn't meant to be a light-hearted laughfest. With demonic horses (complete with glaring red eyes), ghosts with broken jaws and men withering away to a skeleton, this is anything but a hoot. But is that a bad thing? Not at all. In fact it is a relief to see a movie for young (but not too young) and old that doesn't shy away from evoking feelings of fear and regret rather than always sugar-coating them with funny moments. If dealt with rightly, emotions like these can be healthy and will have a longer lasting effect on you and your kids than something that only makes you laugh.

Providing the voice of Scrooge from childhood to old-age, along with the three Ghosts of Christmas, Carrey does a fine job, even with his normal over-the-top voicing toned down a few hundred decibels. He is barely recognisable in all his parts - a result that I'm sure Zemeckis would have been aiming for - which allows the characters to stand on their own two feet rather than be a typical Carrey product. The experienced supporting cast of Oldman, Hoskins, Firth, Elwes and Wright Penn add a nice level of class to the proceedings.

The dark and morose atmosphere might at first shock, but ultimately both children and adults will gain more from this experience than most family films. See it on the big screen.

4 out of 5 (1 - Rubbish, 2 - Ordinary, 3 - Good, 4 - Excellent, 5 - Classic)

---

20 out of 26 people found the following review useful:
Better than I thought, 9 November 2009

Author: mccurdy444 from United States

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.

---

20 out of 27 people found the following review useful:
a high-point for director Zemeckis, and a good step forward in motion-capture, 9 November 2009

Author: MisterWhiplash from United States

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).

---

28 out of 43 people found the following review useful:
A Fun Ride! - Must see in 3D, 6 November 2009

Author: lucas9109 from United States

A Christmas Carol was very entertaining and the animation was superb. You must see it in 3D! However, kids who go and see this movie probably won't understand the majority of the dialogue and will probably get lost. It has a lot of adult situations and the accents are pretty thick as well. Also, don't let the PG rating fool you. It's actually quite mature and in my opinion it's more suited for adults than kids as far as the dialogue and story goes. I think both kids and adults will love the animation and have a lot of fun - especially in 3D! Unfortunately, that might be the only thing the kids will like...Nonetheless, it's a great film and it's definitely Oscar worthy for the animation. I'll definitely be seeing it again in theaters and in 3D!

---

21 out of 30 people found the following review useful:
A mostly loyal, thus successful, adaptation, 6 November 2009

Author: GiveMeJustice from United States

Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol is perhaps the most recognized story about the holiday within our culture and it's also one of our definitive tales of redemption regardless of season. Robert Zemeckis' A Christmas Carol is a fairly loyal film adaptation that succeeds, for the most part, because of exactly that. Dickens created an enduring masterwork that has the same amount of thematic resonance today as it did when it was originally published in the 19th century. Simply retelling this classic story will make for an enjoyable film. When Zemeckis stays true to the source material and tackles the themes of selfishness, regret, and, ultimately, redemption, the film works very well. The 3D animation is also truly stunning and allows the viewer to enter this beautifully crafted Victorian era world. However, the film does occasionally diverge from Dickens' story and becomes a rather crass corporate product. For instance, there's an unnecessary and tedious chase sequence towards the end of the film. Still, because of its mostly faithful treatment to the original work and the wonderful animation, this version of A Christmas Carol is quite satisfying.

---

15 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
3D version is very cool, 16 November 2009
Author: Stanley Strangelove from Portland, Oregon US

This is a review for the 3D version of A Christmas Carol. I was astounded by the 3D in the film and I would recommend it because seeing it in 3D is worth the experience.

The only other 3D film I've seen is Journey to the Center of the Earth and there is no comparison. Director Robert Zemeckis seemed to have a handle on how to effectively use 3D and not let it get in the way of the story. A few scenes got "oohs and aahs" from the audience. I thought the CGI in the film though was uneven. Some of the scenes, the closeups with Jim Carrey and some of the other characters, looked very realistic. But others, such as the chase down the streets at the end looked flat and unrendered. I suppose it could have to do with technical limitations. Anyway, there are enough visuals in the film to please most anybody. Seeing it snow in 3D was worth it. Based on this movie I am definitely going to see more 3D films in the future.

As for the content of the film itself, everyone has probably seen A Christmas Carol before and the story is the same as it always has been. Jim Carrey plays many roles including Scrooge and all three of the ghosts. He manages to have his humor come through even though he is mostly CGI. The "candle" ghost is particularly amusing as is the ghost of Christmas present. Gary Oldman and many other well known actors are in the film but it is hard to tell who they are because of the CGI and effects.

The film showed previews for two other 3D films that looked spectacular: Avatar and Alice in Wonderland (Tim Burton.) I think I've just seen the future of films and it's 3D. It's only a matter of time before someone makes a great work of art using 3D. It may take a few decades but it will happen. One other thought: if someone makes an R rated horror film in 3D it will probably give people heart attacks. The 3D effects are just too realistic and they are right in your face. I'm not sure I would want to see one of those.

---

9 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
A new twist on "A Christmas Carol" with Jim Carrey in several roles..., 19 November 2009

Author: Neil Doyle from U.S.A.

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.

---

10 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
Not great, but not bad...., 6 November 2009

Author: Bruce from Columbus, OH

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A Christmas Carol – let's face it, this is one of the most powerful ever tales written, and has well withstood the test of time. With good reason, the story has been told many times both in live action and in purely animated forms (there is an animated version starring Mr. Magoo that is actually rather good in my mind). The challenge each time is to tell a story that follows the viewer's expectations of the story while trying to be fresh about it.

Thus, we have the most recent incarnation, done using motion photography of actors which is converted into animated video. So, how does this version stand up?

Well, it isn't the best, and it isn't the worst either. Zemeckis has taken an old story, stayed true to it, and created a somewhat unique version of it.

Now, I saw the 3D version of it. Frankly, with the exception of a couple of places, the 3D added a minor amount of interest to the story. To give Zemeckis credit, he generally didn't shove the 3D into the watcher's face.

Nevertheless, the problem with the film is that much time in spent in pure spectacle. Some was OK – when the Spirit of Christmas Past takes Scrooge back in time, the flying sequence is short, exciting and adds some interest. However, when the Spirit of Christmas Future takes Scrooge, there is a long chase sequence that is reminiscent of the 3 Stooges and Saturday morning cartoons. This disrupts the flow of what should be one of the most serious and scary parts of the film. Character portrayal was uneven. Certainly, Carrey's Scrooge is quite good, as was his portrayal of many of the characters. I will admit, Carrey has come a long way from such movies as Ace Ventura. He demonstrates a good range of acting in the portrayal of the various Dicken's characters.

But the portrayal of some of the other character's left me scratching my head. In particular, the animated version of Bob Cratchit reminded me of Mad Magazine's Alfred E. Neuman for some reason. And the movie's end seems sudden and left some ends loose. For example, Scrooge sends a turkey to the Cratchit family, but then there is no follow-up – what happened when this massive bird suddenly appears at his doorstep?

So, overall, a decent enough film – but with flaws.

---

---

Page 1 of 15:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
Newsgroup reviews	External reviews	Parents Guide
Official site	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history