|
Pretty good review. From what you say, it's a great departure from the cute and charming "Mickey's Christmas Carol" to something entirely different. Not just great, but enormous, because it seems like the opposite (Mickey's Christmas Carol was silly enough to elicit belly laughs, but kept the original plot the same).
However, I would have to disagree that the "archaic" English talk is lost on most kids today. Only those who have never seen but a mere nursery rhyme at the least. If you expose them to nursery rhymes and fairy tales when they're kids, even oldies such as "The North Wind Doth Blow", they'll understand that kind of talk. That kind of breadth of knowledge of the English language will benefit them in the future. Knowing words like the singular pronouns (thee, thou, thy, thine) and usages (such as thou hast vs you have), and of course words like "bequeath", "alas", "sundry", "henceforth", "fremd", and how to use them can always add a nice touch to something they write. For example, you could tell from context with "great" I meant "big", not "very good" because of your knowledge of English. You'd be surprised how fairly simple it is to teach old fashioned English to the youngsters. They absorb stuff like a sponge up until they're about 9 years old, but people still learn fairly quickly until they're about 23-24 years old, with a steady decline between age 9 and 25, which is why 12 and 13 year old kids are encouraged to learn a foreign language. It's much easier when you're that age than mid-20s and up (but still possible, I'm not exactly a spring chicken and I'm doing okay-ish learning Spanish, not great, but okay). Wonder if you can teach them Old English (like in Beowulf)...I would say probably yes.
One thing interesting that you said is that in many ways it's true to the novel, but many of the things you mentioned, such as the lack of focus on the Cratchit family, kind of contradicts that. Sounds like the director was going for a focus on the psychology of Scrooge, which although a central part of the story, completely misses the point of the original Dickens idea. Sounds to me like the movie gets it wrong by not really showing HOW it changed Scrooge to encounter the ghosts, not just the implication of change. I think due to that, and the focus on special effects, it may be classified more as a modern take on it. I can understand that Jim Carrey doesn't want to be typecast, but something like this doesn't sound like him at all. However, I may be wrong, after all, Robin Williams showed his ability to be serious (even though we all know he's every bit as zany as Jim Carrey naturally is). However, sometimes actos and actresses are one-dimensional enough that they only way they can do really well is to be typecast, so I have mixed feelings about the whole situation.
__________________
Click on the beautiful Altoona skyline to go to my website about central Pennsylvania.
Last edited by Altoona Man; 11-08-2009 at 05:06 AM.
|