Mouse Extra

This week I had the opportunity to see Disney’s A Christmas Carol, the new Robert Zemecki’s film shot in the same “performance-capture” animation used in The Polar Express.  The hype surrounding the film’s release is pretty typical of the Disney marketing machine, and it often leads to expectation that can be nearly impossible to measure up to.  But in this adaptation of the timeless Charles Dickens classic, Disney and Zemeckis have come pretty close.

copyright ImageMovers Digital/Walt Disney Pictures

First, let me give you a little full-disclosure.  I am a certified fanatic of “A Christmas Carol”.  It is, in my opinion, one of the best stories ever told in the history of English literature.  Every December, I make it a point to watch just about every version I can squeeze into the holiday season.  So when it comes to sitting down for a new take, either on television, the stage or the big screen, it is more than likely that I would tend to see it through a different lens then those who view it as simply a quaint little yarn told for Christmas. 

When I heard that Disney, Zemeckis and Jim Carrey were teaming up to produce this latest version, I truly expected a watered down borderline kids film made accessible for those who may not otherwise find yet another Scrooge movie all that exciting a proposition.  But that is not what we get at all in Disney’s A Christmas Carol.  Instead we are presented with a film that holds firmly to the greatness of Charles Dickens while offering enough visual eye-candy to keep anyone interested, something many previous versions have failed miserably at.

The Ebenezer Scrooge found in the pages of the written story is one of exaggerated features, emotions and words.  Dickens describes him as a “tight-fisted hand at the grind- stone, Scrooge! a squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous, old sinner!  Hard and sharp as flint, from which no steel had ever struck out generous fire; secret, and self-contained, and solitary as an oyster.  The cold within him froze his old features, nipped his pointed nose, shriveled his cheek, stiffened his gait; made his eyes red, his thin lips blue and spoke out shrewdly in his grating voice.  A frosty rime was on his head, and on his eyebrows, and his wiry chin.  He carried his own low temperature always about with him; he iced his office in the dogdays; and didn’t thaw it one degree at Christmas.” 

copyright ImageMovers Digital/Walt Disney Pictures

So you can see how old Ebenezer was tailored made for animation.  While some of Hollywood’s greatest actors have done wonders portraying Mr. Scrooge, this version is the first to take these words to heart and presents us with a character that seems almost too twisted to believe, exactly what Charles Dickens had in mind.

Much of the original dialogue is kept, as well as nearly every scene, and they fit perfectly into this multi-million dollar version.  But the important aspect of Dickens that is most often lost by Hollywood is his wonderful sense of fantasy.  If all you have ever known about “A Christmas Carol” is the standard screen adaptation, and have never read the original story in its entirety, then some of what Zemeckis offers may seem almost too outlandish to belong.  But Dickens devoted pages to turning a scene into an exaggerated fantasy, and this film plays on those ideas.  Technology has finally afforded us the chance to see this classic presented closer to the original story as ever before, and for the most part Disney and Zemeckis have done this. 

The visuals of this new animation technique can be absolutely brilliant.  The detail is often so well presented that one can easily wonder if the real-world is somehow being blended into the animation.  But at the same time, it never goes too far into realm of reality so as to make it less a fantasy.  Just when you think you are actually seeing an actor walking the streets of London, some character or some action brings you back into the world of animation.  The best example of this is in the contrast between Scrooge and Old Fezziwig.  While Ebenezer can be extremely life-like especially in the expression and details of his face, his old master looks almost like a Pixar-style cartoon character.  It is a strange contrast, not unlike the strange contrasts that Dickens himself employed, and it works on many levels for the story.

I have two basic problems with this film, which keeps it from standing alongside the really great versions adapted for film and television.  The first is the same problem that has scuttled many a version of A Christmas Carol, the lack of truly establishing Scrooge as a sympathetic human figure.  In order to truly appreciate the tale of redemption that makes it a classic, you must feel empathy towards Ebenezer fairly early on in the Ghost sequences.  The viewer needs to learn quickly that beneath the twisted body and mind of the old miser there is a struggling and pained person who has been beaten down by life and bad decisions.  But that never really happens here, or at least not to the degree needed to make it a standout adaptation.  We are rushed through his life, and almost distracted from these emotions by the power of the visual effects.  So even though the story’s conclusion leaves you with a warm and fuzzy feeling, it doesn’t have the powerful emotion that many other versions have managed to express.

copyright ImageMovers Digital/Walt Disney Pictures

The second is another common trap for films that rely so heavily on visuals, especially 3-D movies.  There are a few lengthy sequences in this film that were obviously shot for the purpose of enhancing the 3-D experience.  Scrooge blasts-off aboard the cap of the Ghost of Christmas Past and soars above London and into space.  Then later during the visitation of the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come, Scrooge is chased by a horse-drawn hearse through the streets and eventually turns into the size of a rodent as the chase continues through the sewer and between the cobblestones.  Now, as I said before, I like the idea of playing on the Dickens way of exaggerating scenes into the realm of fantasy, but these sequences felt forced and not necessary to telling the story.  In years to come when people are watching this without the assistance of 3-D glasses they will be far less impressive and almost pointless.

Over the years, I have come to the conclusion that there is exists no prefect way to adapt “A Christmas Carol” for the stage or screen.  Only the words of Dickens himself have ever achieved perfection in portraying this story, so it is important to expect something in a new version that may not be just right.  But Disney has done remarkably well here.  They have taken one of the world’s best ever stories and adapted it for the modern audience without stripping it of the charm and prose that make it so special.  Disney’s A Christmas Carol is a film I would recommend to anyone.