|
|
Author
|
Topic: Walt Disney's A Christmas Carol
|
Michael McGovern
Film Handler
Posts: 57
From: New Britain, CT, USA
Registered: May 2008
|
posted 11-04-2009 08:45 PM
I find it kind of silly that they push these Christmas movies out so far ahead of the actual holiday, especially since they always end up starting out slow business wise, and get increasingly busier as the holiday approaches. I guess Disney wanted to push this one out and get as much out of the 3-D runs as they can until Avatar comes out in December and takes over every 3-D screen in the country.
Anyways, I rather enjoyed this film. It stuck really close to the source material, which was good. I was afraid the film would take the low route as they often do and dumb down a lot of the dialog to make it more accessible, but no, a lot of the dialog comes word for word from the original Dickens. I'm not really sure how I feel about the photo realistic animation, it worked well in Beowulf, but here I thought it looked a little odd at times.
The story is the same as it's always been whether it's Mr. Magoo, Bill Murry, or Beavis and Butthead, we've all seen it before. Scrooge is the focal point of this adaptation, as he should be, so the movie is almost all Jim Carrey, but he takes it on pretty well.
The 3-D effects work really well here, and go well with the animation, so if you plan to check this one out, I wouldn't even bother with the 2-D version, it just wouldn't be the same.
Keep in mind however, there is a lot of frightening imagery in the film, which will scare younger children, so I can foresee this being a problem for parents taking the family to see this one.
Overally it was good, but not great. The 3-D effects help set this one apart from prior adaptations, but otherwise it's the same story we've seen hundreds of times in the past. I give it 7/10.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 11-08-2009 03:58 PM
There are MANY movies that, given the "inmediate choice" between 2D and 3D and not too much of a price penalty, will get some >80% people preferring the 3D.
Only about 10% of patrons would much rather not watch a movie in 3D given similar conditions (i.e. similar price, similar theatre, similar size screen, etc). The other 90% either don't mind or prefer the 3D version if the conditions are better (i.e. a larger screen, not high ticket premium, subject matter screams out for 3D like in horror movies or some animated ones like this).
This is one movie that would be tons more boring in 2D, as it's "pretty boring" without the 3D already.
If a movie, like a Horror movie, is known to be "pretty weak, pretty lame, pretty boring" but it's available in 3D ... well, most people would preferred it in 3D as it would be unbearable without the added perk of seeing the goodies* stick out of the screen.
*(not thinking about the mandatory B-horror bare breasts here ... maybe)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|