A Christmas Carol

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 17
Joined: July 5th, 2007

the scrooge movie looks UGLY

Post by Sid Philips » January 19th, 2009, 2:02 pm

Boy--those images from scrooge look awful. I'll never understand why those people keep choosing to make things look so unappealing and virtually unwatchable. I'd like to believe all of this bad taste comes from Zemeckis, but after 3 films and now this, I'm not so sure.

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 3197
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by Josh » May 8th, 2009, 11:33 pm

Christmas Carol is getting a train tour, according to USA Today. I've already marked my calendar for the event. Still, I might wait to read some reviews of the exhibit, before traveling about an hour and thirty minutes to attend it.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 40
Joined: April 5th, 2008

Post by Wolf » May 18th, 2009, 12:39 pm

check out the first clip here:

http://joblo.com/christmas-in-cannes

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19948
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » May 18th, 2009, 2:28 pm

Well, I can't wait to see this properly, as judging by that it not only looks worse than The Polar Express but looks like an unfinished direct to video effort.

Call me distinctly unimpressed (so far) :(

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 70
Joined: March 16th, 2009

Post by Locall » May 18th, 2009, 3:44 pm

So far unimpressed here aswell... the animation looks unfinished, I don't like the way the characters move and speak, it seems a bit forced.
The conceptional artwork looked great, but this is pointless

Don't think this technique of creating movies has anything to offer to the film industry :?

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19948
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » May 19th, 2009, 5:30 am

Characters like Gollum and Kong, created by WETA, yes.

Motion capture by we-can't-do-humans Imageworks? No.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 63
Joined: September 21st, 2008

Post by robster » May 19th, 2009, 5:45 am

The concept art looked rich, warm and wonderfull, this looks cold, plastic and AWFULL! Just plain AWFULL! This doesn't give me ANY christmas vibes what so ever. I suspect a LOT of criticism and a possible flop!

I had expected SOOOO much more!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 821
Joined: July 9th, 2008
Location: Australia

Post by Bill1978 » May 19th, 2009, 6:57 am

Obviously I'm not that attuned to the finer details of animation as I don't mind what is shown in the 19secs. My main problem with the movie is that I don't think we need another interpretation of it.

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19948
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » May 19th, 2009, 11:47 am

...And the second <I>Disney</I> interpretation (or third <I>OR</I> fourth if you're being technical).

I just checked it out again with the sound off, and it's even worse. The "look at me, I'm 3D!" shots are going to be pretty in your face by the looks of things: "hey, Bobby Z has discovered 3D", and not in a good way.

The two shots that really look sub-par are Marley's close up, and Scrooge's "I'd rather not" line...both looking like steps <I>back</I> from The Polar Express.

Echoing the general sentiment, the concept art for this looked so promising, and I've been saying for ages that if there's one performer that can break the mo-cap spell it's Jim Carrey, but it seems even his physical exhuberance is being kept in check.

Okay, so this is <I>only</I> 19 seconds from a possible two hours, but it's certainly not the most awe-inspring 19 seconds that is going to satisfy the naysayers.

I wonder how John Lasseter takes all this, personally. Here we have a film being marketed as a "Disney" picture, and it's "animated" to all intents and purposes to the general crowd. Surely, even though he'll put on a brave face at the premiere - if he goes, which will be interesting - and sell it as well as ever, he must be cringing inside, knowing that this will look like something he's overseen or endorsed as head of "Disney Animation".

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3683
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Post by EricJ » May 19th, 2009, 4:56 pm

Ben wrote:I wonder how John Lasseter takes all this, personally. Here we have a film being marketed as a "Disney" picture, and it's "animated" to all intents and purposes to the general crowd. Surely, even though he'll put on a brave face at the premiere - if he goes, which will be interesting - and sell it as well as ever, he must be cringing inside, knowing that this will look like something he's overseen or endorsed as head of "Disney Animation".
Only the same undiscerning dopey-people who thought "Bolt" and "Meet the Robinsons" were Pixar movies. :P

Zemeckis still has too much "Beowulf: the Video Game" clinging to his reputation, and as noted, Disney may have thought the opposite factor was in play:
People still look at Other People's Crappy CGI and think Dreamworks is making all of it, and avoiding it accordingly...
And now Disney may be realizing they may have been stuck with another unsellable white elephant when they tried to cash-in/salvage Z's need for a "home" studio, and they may be trying to attach their name on this one just to tell the audience, "It's OKAY!--You can go see it, it's not one of those crappy other guys!...Well, okay, it is, really, but--ohh, you know what we mean!..." :wink:

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 415
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by PatrickvD » May 20th, 2009, 5:42 am

I love how it's pure gimmick. The way the ghost enters scrooge's room, that whole scene is made with 3D in mind.

It's awful. Jim Carrey is the only thing I'm sort of looking forward to. I'm sure he'll be great playing different characters. But the overall look is.. so far.... terrible.

It definitely looks unfinished.

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 3197
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by Josh » May 20th, 2009, 2:54 pm

Here's a pretty cool new featurette on A Christmas Carol. No matter how the animation is, I have a feeling Jim Carrey is going to be fantastic in this film.

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19948
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » May 20th, 2009, 3:54 pm

Gawd, I <I>love</I> the look of this, and the <I>idea</I> of taking Carrey and making him all the different permutations of Scrooge and the ghost spirits, but I just hope the animation works.

Carrey could be great, but it doesn't matter when his performance is being robbed and short-changed by a technique that can't convey the full extent of his talents the same way as live-action and make-up could.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3683
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Jim Carrey's Christmas Carol

Post by EricJ » September 22nd, 2009, 7:53 pm

Since I didn't see a dedicated thread for it that anyone's touched since May, thought I'd just mention--

Caught the full trailer for it this afternoon with the usual 3-D suspects, and it looked okay, with, um...one exception:
I can take the Bob Z. mocap, since it's right at the human point between the stylized Monster-House design that doesn't work, and the why-bother Beowulf replication that does, or even his attempt to fit more Polar Express "roller coasters" into the story to sell the 3-D...
I can take Jim Carrey, as he's obviously indulging his Peter Sellers idolatry for multiple voices, and seems to fit here...
And the look of the film certainly sells the London that live-action studios used to build for Albert Finney...

That said, erm...I don't recall there being an Incredible Shrinking Scrooge in the Dickens, let alone the Alastair Sim or the George C. Scott.
Perhaps it's a new interpretation. :?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 164
Joined: April 13th, 2009
Contact:

Post by ELIOLI » September 22nd, 2009, 9:03 pm

The trailer was pretty good...but I hope there aren't many gimmick looking parts just for the 3D. It looks like a nice film though. remember..just a trailer. you don't know until you watch it. keep high hopes and I am sure anyone will enjoy it.
http://www.elioliart.com/

Post Reply