Mainlining Christmas

I'll start by acknowledging what I assume is obvious: Elvis is not, by any reasonable definition, a Christmas movie. Despite that, there are aspects of the movie that use holiday imagery and associated plot points in ways that are unusual and interesting enough to be worth exploring here. That said, there's a reason this is getting written and posted in the "off-season:" this film is Christmas-related, rather than Christmas media. I'll start where I usually finish: with an assessment. The movie is good, though I'm not convinced it's quite in the same league as most of this year's best picture nominees. I found the movie technically impressive and intellectually interesting, but not at all emotionally engaging. I should probably acknowledge I'm not a huge fan of Elvis - this might play much differently to someone with more of an initial attachment to the singer. More importantly, I don't think this was trying to engage emotionally. Its approach

As soon as I heard this existed, I knew it had to be the last version of A Christmas Carol I watched and reviewed for this project. Twelve Hundred Ghosts is, at least in theory, a supercut of more than 400 adaptations, homages, and reimagined spins on a Christmas Carol, arranged and edited by Heath Waterman, who completed the project over a year and a half. So that certainly puts the fifty-some-odd versions I covered here this year to shame. I do want to return to that "supercut" moniker. Strictly speaking, it's not inaccurate, but I don't think it does justice to the experience of watching this. Waterman isn't simply cutting between scores of adaptations across multiple mediums; he's creating a montage that explodes both the original narrative, as well as the incredible breadth of media it's inspired. He uses split screens to combine versions from different eras and styles, he plays audio tracks over incredibly different films, he includes audio plays, re

This is a one-hour musical adaptation where the lead actor, writer, director, producer, and songwriter are the same person. That's kind of impressive, regardless of how the movie came out, but it tells you a great deal about the budget. Or lack thereof. Yes, this is one of those cases where I spend a lot of time trying to decide what kind of curve to grade on. The production values aren't in the same league as the stuff I usually look at. This doesn't have elaborate sets, intricate costumes, expensive digital effects, and the like. In short, it doesn't look or feel like a "real movie." And that's okay. I try and approach things like this as test runs for ideas and talent. Frankly, after watching dozens of these, I'm more interested in whether original elements of these offer anything of value than I am in whether they rank among the top 30 best adaptations. So, with that in mind, let's explore Anthony D.P. Mann's take on A Christmas Carol. The

This low-budget Irish production sells itself as the "darkest" adaptation ever made, which is what put it on my radar. Before we even touch on that - or anything else about this - I need to take a moment and focus on another adjective in my opening sentence, namely "low-budget." Because when I say this looks as though it was made for very little money, I'm not exaggerating. The phrase "independent movie" covers a large range of films, from student projects to elaborate arthouse pieces that look as good or better than Hollywood productions. Sadly, this is closer to the former. Much closer. Honestly, I wondered if it might be a school project for a while. That's not to say it's bad, exactly. When you're looking at movies made under these kinds of constraints, that term loses significance. This is an ambitious movie, and without fully understanding the filmmakers' goals in undertaking the project, I can't even begin to offer insight on

Let it not be said this British TV version is short on ambition. Set in what was then modern-day London, it centers on "Eddie Scrooge," played by Ross Kemp. Eddie is a loan shark whose partner, Jacob Marley, was gunned down years earlier. The movie actually opens with a flashback to that event, though we don't learn who the killer is yet. We then follow Eddie through Christmas Eve, as he collects on debts, harasses people, is dismissed by his ex, Bella, and is a jerk to his employee, Bob Cratchit. He also ignores his nephew's pleas to attend Christmas dinner, though there's at least a reason for their falling out: his nephew is a cop. That night, Eddie sees an image of Marley appear in a poster asking for information about Marley's murder. Then Marley shows up in Scrooge's apartment. The meeting is brief, but - as you'd expect - he warns Eddie he'll be visited by three ghosts. The first of said ghosts is Eddie's father, who punches his way out

I'm not going to go in depth into the intricacies of the Romanian New Wave movement, mainly because I know absolutely nothing about the Romanian New Wave movement, aside from what I can glean from Wikipedia. The short version seems to be a focus on realism and grounded storytelling - those are certainly qualities on display in "A Month in Thailand," a film which is set neither in Thailand, nor over the span of a month. Instead, the movie takes place over approximately 24 hours starting on the morning of New Year's Eve. The title refers to a theoretical vacation the movie's main character wants to go on with a girlfriend that also serves as a sort of stand-in for the kind of person he aspires to be and the sort of relationship he wants to be in. By design, the plot here is fairly sparse. The movie opens with the main character, Radu, in a relationship with Adina. It's clear early on that Radu isn't completely satisfied, but things really take a turn after t

This animated TV/VHS adaptation is mainly notable for its cast, which includes Tim Curry as Scrooge, Ed Asner as Marley, Whoopi Goldberg as the Ghost of Christmas Present, and Frank Welker as Scrooge's pitbull, Debit. Oh, yeah, also I should probably warn you they gave Scrooge a pitbull. It's that kind of animated adaptation. On top of everything else, it's also a musical, and not a particularly good one. The music itself isn't too obnoxious, but the lyrics are pretty idiotic. Let's talk about the changes to the story, of which there aren't many. Surprisingly, this sticks relatively close to the plot of the original, though the dialogue is somewhat modernized and simplified. The biggest change is (surprise, surprise) the aforementioned dog, Debit, who plays a fairly substantial role. I should probably specify the dog can't speak: Welker's making cartoon dog noises, not Scooby-Dooing in the middle of Dickens's work. Still, it's a very unwelcome ad

Ms. Scrooge was a made-for-TV Hallmark movie from the late 90s that attempted to update Dickens' classic while modernizing the setting and casting Scrooge as a black woman. To be clear, though, this isn't a case where the underlying situation and character are different: the main character is Ebenita Scrooge, and - while her backstory is a little different - the plot and most of the side characters are the same. This is still an adaptation of A Christmas Carol, rather than an homage or pastiche. I want to start out stating the obvious: this isn't at all good as a movie. But if you're approaching a Hallmark TV-movie from 1997 expecting cinematic excellence, you're going to be disappointed. This was never going to have the production values, time, or vision needed to turn it into something worthwhile. The effects are cheap and gaudy (though, for what it's worth, they're better than those in the 1999 TV adaptation with Patrick Stewart). That said, I think some

This is the second animated Australian adaptation I've seen where Scrooge was voiced by Ron Haddrick, the first being released thirteen years earlier . I was actually a little surprised to find they were made by different studios: in addition to Haddrick, the animation is relatively similar. All that of course invites the question of why this was made at all. The answer, it seems, has less to do with A Christmas Carol and more to do with Charles Dickens. Burbank Films Australia, the studio behind this, produced a series of films based on various works from the author, and this is part of that collection. I suppose that puts it in similar company with the 1959 episode of Tales from Dickens . Of course, that doesn't answer a more pressing question: namely, why should anyone watch this? Unfortunately, the answer there is they probably shouldn't. That's not to say there's nothing good here, but to be frank it doesn't really stand out in any meaningful capacity. It&#

I want to state up front I'm extremely torn on this movie, and I don't even want to touch on why until I've hopefully scared off a few people who should see this unspoiled. One of my goals in writing reviews is to avoid spoiling worthwhile experiences. On this site, that's usually easy, because a lot of what I'm looking at is pretty old, and quite a bit... well... just isn't good enough to worry about. The Lodge, however, is extraordinarily well made, extremely well acted, and effective at what it's trying to do. It's really just a question of whether "what it's trying to do" is going to impress you or leave you feeling like you wasted two hours of your life. And I really can't offer a single detail as to why  without rendering the point moot by spoiling literally every significant twist and turn this takes. So... I guess it's time for as oblique a spoiler warning as I can offer. If you like horror - particularly atmospheric horror

As you can see above, this has had a couple different titles, depending on the country. The original US release was "Christmas Eve," while it was released in Britain under the less generic, "Sinner's Holiday." The British version sets a more accurate expectation for what you're getting. I'm not sure if the US version went with "Christmas Eve" to avoid confusion with a movie from 1930 called "Sinners' Holiday" or to appear more upbeat and festive in the hopes of attracting holiday audiences. If it was the latter, it didn't seem to work: the movie wasn't all that successful and didn't leave much of a cultural footprint, which is a little unfortunate. I had a lot of fun with this one. There's part of me that wants to tell you to just stop reading and watch this movie. It's not so much that this is good - aspects are great, while others are lacking - as it is... well... bonkers. This movie is bonkers. And more than

There are two main problems with A Christmas Karen, a new streaming adaptation of Dickens's classic set in modern-day Florida with a stereotypical "Karen" replacing Ebenezer. The first problem is that the premise felt dated before the movie even came out - the whole "Karen" thing has mostly come and gone. The second problem is that the movie is kind of good. Conceptually, this should basically be a farce in the vein of comedies from the early '00s and before. The first fifteen minutes or so embrace this, with over-the-top exaggerated humor designed to distract the audience rather than draw them in. But as the ghosts start showing up, the jokes become more and more sporadic, so this can focus instead on character and story. Because - and here's what's surprising - this really is an adaptation of A Christmas Carol, rather than a parody or homage. Sure, the names are different and there are quite a few changes (we'll get to that in a moment), but a

Okay. Going to need a big old disclaimer for this one. I'm Jewish. Also, I'm not Jewish. Depends on what you mean by "Jewish", really. My mother is Jewish and grew up in a Jewish household. My father was raised Christian, though I don't believe he ever identified as such in my lifetime. I was raised celebrating Hanukkah and Christmas, both in a secular context. I grew up thinking of myself as Jewish. I even got to experience some antisemitism in grade school in rural Maine (lucky me). I never learned to speak Hebrew, I didn't have a Bar Mitzvah, I wasn't raised in a Jewish community, and I've only stepped into synagogues for weddings and funerals. When I was a kid, I didn't think these were relevant as far as my identity was concerned. And depending on who you ask and what the term means, they may not be. However, from a cultural perspective at the very least, I am most certainly not Jewish. The reason I'm bringing all this up is I'm about