A Christmas Carol

This has two things I cannot stand, motion-capture and Jim Carrey. Pass.

---

I haven't seen the movie, but my boyfriend dragged me to the train tour they did to see the eight-minute 3D preview. The visuals are very striking, but I'll never warm up to the motion-capture CGI technology. I just don't understand why you would spend millions of dollars to take actors acting and turn them into animated characters... imitating real life. If you're going to make an animated movie, why try to make it super-realistic?

---

Roxy, I have a few questions about this film and perhaps you can answer them.

First, I'd like to take my four year old granddaughter to see it but have heard that some of the chase scenes are too intense for youngsters. Do you agree?

Secondly, I am vision impaired and have never been able to see the special effects in 3-D movies that you have to wear those glasses for. Do you have to wear those green and red glasses or have they made significant improvements in 3-D filmmaking?

---

I'm monocular--I only have sight in one eye.

---

I would say leave the four year old at home. There were small children getting either bored or scared throughout. This is a very dark and appropriately disturbing film for young adults... not for the veggie tales crowd.

Also, most theatres I believe are showing it in regular screens in addition to the 3D showings. It's worth checking out. I was not a fan of Polar Express or Beowulf but was very impressed with this film, aside from a few scenes, the facial expressions were less zombie like than the previous two films and took on a more animated feel (go figure)

and I would like to add that Jim Carrey does not pull his usual comedic stops out here, but rather plays all of these characters appropriately low key and in tact with the rest of the film. You forget it's even him voicing for the most part.

I have a similar predicament, Dolly. I have little, or possibly no, depth perception. I can't detect 3D effects either.

Not that I'm interested in this movie anyway. For one thing, I can't stand motion capture. Like others have said, why bother making it animated if you're going to make it realistic? And also, I kind of consider it cheating. Happy feet was motion-capture, while over at Pixar at the same time, people were working their butts off painstakingly animating characters in Ratatouille by hand (via computer). Motion capture is comparable to tracing.

And for two other things, A Christmas Carol has been done to death (nothing can beat the Muppets version for me anyway), and the graphics/animation in this version look like they're cutscenes from a video game.

However, oddly enough, I do like Jim Carrey.

Updated On: 11/8/09 at 12:24 AM

Disagree on statement # 1 but agree re Alice

Avatar looked amazing. We will see it after we return.

---

Updated On: 11/8/09 at 09:51 AM

I can't stand Carrey but some of the lines in the trailer suggest that he is in fact toning his usual mannerisms down a little for this movie. But there is no better Christmas Carol than the Muppet version, with the George C. Scott version in second place and the Alistair Sim version in third. IMO, of course.

I think the George C. Scott version is THE definitive version of the story. I also really like A Christmas Carol: The Musical, with Kelsey Grammer, mostly because of the score.

The musical version with Albert Finney is very good.

---

I understand that Loretta Swit is in talks to play a female version of this. She will be Ebonica Scrooge and it's set to tour the dinner theatre circuit next season. Must see, if you ask me.

---

Nothing could ever hold a candle to Vanessa Williams as Ebony Scrooge in "A Diva's Christmas Carol".

---