Robert Zemeckis has helmed his share of modern classics. “Disney’s A Christmas Carol” is not one of them.

There’s so much in the film rife with potential and I frequently caught glimpses of what it could have been. But, sadly, it just didn’t amount to much.
For one thing, it’s operating at cross-purposes. The contents of the story as well as the vernacular employed throughout are not child-accessible. And you know what? I appreciate that. It’s consistent with Dickens’ tale of a man being haunted by various spectres on Christmas Eve that essentially frighten him into festive compliance.

But that serious narrative approach winds up being completely undermined by the visual and sonic strategy, which is, apparently, “more is more.” More shrieks. More thuds. More bright lights. More flying, swirling, twirling scenes. More falling from great heights. More chases. All that time spent assaulting us could have been used to build up necessary emotion.

Jim Carrey is a perfect fit for this material. He plays Ebenezer Scrooge at every stage of his life exceedingly well and the motion-capture is startlingly realistic at times. And I was pleasantly surprised when it occurred to me that Gary Oldman was the man imbuing Cratchit with all that neurotic humility.

However, in Carrey’s case, Scrooge becomes nothing more than a rag doll to be thrown around and dropped on his head and chased through city streets. Instead of being invested or amused, I spent most of my time wondering how a man his age could endure such tremendous physical strain. How about a subdued optical and aural experience to leave room for some Christmas spirit?

All this begs the question: Who exactly was this supposed to appeal to? Certainly not adults. For us, it’s akin to seeing your favorite uncle drink too much at a wedding and embarrass himself on the dance floor. For kids, it’s a gloomy, frightening experience fraught with purposeless eye candy (one family at my screening actually left within the first half hour because their kid got spooked).

The people that were apprehensive about “Where the Wild Things” because it was a bit despairing are the same people that are going to come out in droves to see this thing. And that’s really disappointing. “Where the Wild Things Are” was profusely soulful and heartfelt and honest. Whatever was dark or scary about it had its roots in a very authentic place. This behemoth, on the contrary, has all the emotional honesty of an elaborate fireworks display.

Look, I know it’s a 3D flick. I saw it IMAX and was as unimpressed by 3D as I’ve ever been. Dare I say that Charles Dickens wasn’t the right authorial choice for a big-budget Disney adaptation to be shot in 3D and play on IMAX screens? Zemeckis directed “Forrest Gump.” You’re telling me he couldn’t have made a delightful live-action version of this?

I actively wanted to like this movie. It certainly has some qualities. The themes are intact and the recreation of mid-19th century London is really captivating. Also, the animated characters are extremely expressive. But, again, why did they have to be animated in the first place? The only justification for that is the visual freedom permitted by animation, but that freedom is utilized in such a way that it robs the tale of its spirit almost entirely.

I’m a sentimental pushover and it doesn’t take a lot to put me in the Christmas spirit. This film didn’t. For all its sound and fury, it’s pretty forgettable.

Tags: 2009, 3-D, 3D, carol, carrey, christmas, christmas carol, jim, zemeckis

Nothing I write in this movie review will convince you whether or not you should see the new Jim Carrey comedy “Yes Man.”

Let me explain.

I’ve seen the film, so let me tell you this much: You already know whether you want to see it because you’ve learned everything you need to know from its ad campaign.

You’ve already guessed correctly that it’s a lot like “Liar Liar,” except this time he suddenly has to say “yes” to everything instead of being magically forced to tell the truth all the time. After seeing clips of Carrey bungee jumping and saying yes to learning Korean, you probably thought this development would lead to all kinds of fish-out-of-water situations. You were right!

You also may have noticed that his romantic interest in the film, Zooey Deschanel, looks a whole helluva lot younger than him. Right again. Weirdly—uh oh, I’m about to tell you something you don’t already know here—she’s exactly 18 years younger than him. (They have the same birthday.) She’s not the only one. His two best friends in the movie, played by Bradley Cooper and Danny Masterson, are also inappropriately young. The whole thing’s a little creepy, as if director Peyton Reed (“The Break-Up,” “Bring It On”) were trying desperately to hide Carrey’s age rather than incorporate it into the story.

If Carrey’s repressed loan officer Carl has trouble saying yes to anything in his life, then Deschanel’s free spirit Allison will surely help him. She rides a scooter, sings in a silly avant-garde band, and teaches a photography class while jogging. You can see where this is headed.

The movie has its typical moments—many of them quite funny—where Carrey throws himself into a new experience, but this is the kind of film where one montage makes him an expert at everything he tries so that he an use it later with hilarious results. All of a sudden he’s a good guitar player and he can speak Korean—I wonder if any later scenes will call for anyone who can do those things well?

Carrey can do other things. He doesn’t have to always play the manic slapstick role. He proved that in “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.” Now he just needs to choose better roles and find a way to age gracefully—to keep his comic style intact and keep his integrity. He may want to look to Bill Murray for inspiration.

The biggest problem with “Yes Man” is that it never feels even remotely real. It’s a series of sketches (the ones with New Zealander Rhys Darby as his nerdy boss are usually the funniest) that never add up to anything. The formula says that Carrey can’t have fun saying yes to everything forever, but when it comes time for the big realization, it’s especially hollow. Not only does the wedge that’s driven between he and Deschanel border on ridiculous, but Carrey’s big lesson is “You can’t say yes to absolutely everything all the time, but you should say yes to life.” Since that little nugget of wisdom was apparent from the beginning of the movie, “Yes Man” feels, in its final moments, like something you wholly expected and maybe even wanted, but now that it’s over, why did you bother?

In other words, nothing I wrote in this movie review will convince you whether or not you should see “Yes Man.” Either you’re in the mood for some mid-nineties Jim Carrey comfort food that’s high on sugar and low on content, or you’re not. It’s as simple as that.

Tags: carrey, darby, deschanel, jim, movie review, peyton, reed, rhys, yes man, zooey