Rating
3.0

Is there a Christmas story more popular in the United States than Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol? Some may argue on behalf of the accounts of Jack Skelington, the Grinch, and/or Jesus, but I think it’s debatable. At the very least, the tale of Scrooge and his three ghosts is basically recognized by most people. Therefore, in the case of writer/director Robert Zemeckis’ Disney’s A Christmas Carol, let’s consider the basic storyline as read.

In this film publicity image released by Disney, Ebenezer Scrooge, voiced by Jim Carrey, is shown in a scene from "A Christmas Carol." (AP Photo/Disney, ImageMovers Digital LLC)

Instead, I offer a different history. Zemeckis is one of the better-known filmmakers to the public consciousness, in part due to his directing of Forrest Gump and in part because of his recent fascination with motion capture animation. His last two films, The Polar Express and Beowulf, utilized this developing technology to bring two well-known texts to the big screen in ways audiences had never imagined. The effect was mixed, offering viewers some stunning visuals, but eerily lifeless characters.

With A Christmas Carol, Zemeckis got ahold of his beloved animation style. The movie stays (from my memory) very close to Dickens’ original text, and so any surprises in the dialogue comes from the way in which the actors read the script. Jim Carrey does some especially fine voice and motion capture work as not only Scrooge (at all ages), but also the key ghosts (those of Past, Present and Christmas Yet to Come). But critiquing primarily voice-based performances in a world without professional voice actors (a trend that began in the early ‘90s) seems frivolous. We like the actors beause we know their voice, and everything else about the characters is the work of a computer and an accomplished effects artist.

Accordingly, the more important consideration in the scheme of the movie is the visually intriguing interpretation of the source. The most interesting scenes in the film are the simple ones: the old man trudging through the long, lonely walk to his mansion, the observations of the past and present events. Yet, for every scene of emotional resonance, there is a jarring sequence of unnecessary rollercoaster-style non-pertinence. Scrooge flies about, going this way and that, forcing erratic movement of the camera, the scenery, the characters — everything except the story.

Perhaps it was to capitalize on the 3-D format available in cities that aren’t Flagstaff; perhaps there was fear that today’s kids, who are so absorbed by transforming robots and supped-up non-soldier G.I. Joes, would be bored by the emotions and desires of a crotchety, old curmudgeon. Regardless, for a movie whose central message is to simply embrace the spirit of the holiday season, A Christmas Carol certainly gets caught up in its own aims and desires.

Regardless of the imperfections, it’s hard to dislike Disney’s A Christmas Carol. The rosy cheeks and “too-perfect” quality to the animation, where off-putting in Zemeckis’ previous attempts, fits appropriately with the feeling of the Dickens’ tale. It’s not perfect, but hating this film is to be as cold as Scrooge’s heart (you know, during the first half of the flick).