Sleepy Hollow

[lucie]

Tim Burton fans everywhere are rejoicing, along with Hammer horror film fans. If you happen to be a big fan of both, like myself, you are simply in heaven. "Sleepy Hollow" is not a film for everyone however (what is?), and if you are put off by beheadings, New England-style witchcraft, heaving bosoms, or bad teeth, it may not be your style.

Based on the Washington Irving story "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow", the movie keeps some of the elements, but takes off on it's own from there, as if the original story were a seed planted in Burton's dark, twisted, inventive brain, sprouting in every possible direction. It is an hommage to the Hammer horror films of the 50's & 60's (those fabulous Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing flicks that revitalized the gothic monster movie genre and inspired Roger Corman's Poe adaptations), given the full A-movie budget and treatment.

Visually gorgeous, "Sleepy Hollow" features fine performances all around. Johnny Depp, one of the most versatile and fearless actors working today, plays an Ichabod Crane who is basically an intelligent coward, but determined to be brave because that is how he sees himself. Christina Ricci is the fey and voluptuous object of his affections. The men accompanying me to this film agree that she may single-handedly reintroduce the heaving bosom back to the movies. Miranda Richardson is splendid, as always, but you have to wait quite a while for her to really shine in this movie. Christopher Lee has a wonderful cameo at the beginning, playing a New York judge (the visual set-up of his bit is genius). Christopher Walken finally goes all the way over the edge as the Hessian, and those of us who saw "Phantom Menace" more than once in order to study Ray Park's sword work will be delighted at the way he wields ax and sword as the Headless Horseman (note to sword enthusiasts: yipee! They actually gave him real head-chopping-type broadsword, not a cavalry sabre!).

The pacing is more reminiscent of a Hammer horror film than what many people have become accustomed to, but most of the college students in the audience didn't have any problem with it. I read a couple reviews in which the reviewers thought the language a bit stilted, but it sounded perfectly correct for the period (1799) to me. More formal, certainly, but that was simply good history. As was the fact that everyone had pretty bad teeth (including the hero and heroine - a bold decision I applaud but which some may find offputting).

Anyway, I waited a couple days to write this, rather than rushing to the computer as soon as I got home. I wanted to see if it faded overnight, but nope, if anything, I feel more enthusiastic about it than I did Friday night. On my personal Movie-Meter, I give it a 9.75 out of 10 and I plan to see it again over Thanksgiving weekend.

Warning - this is not a movie for young children! There is gore galore (although none of it was, in my opinion, gratuitous), what with flying heads, stakes through the heart, and someone getting cut clean in half (or it might have been three pieces), as well as other disturbing images. Toddlers should stay home, and no child less twisted than I was should be allowed to the theatre.

[cladmartin]

I saw "Sleepy Hollow" over the weekend as well. While most of what lucie says is right on the money, the film isn't perfect.

The acting was excellent. Johnny Depp turns in a fantastic performance and Christopher Walken is quite menacing without uttering a word, though part of me was disappointed that he didn't have any dialogue. On the other hand, Christina Ricci's appearance was her performance: her full-figure and porcelin doll face. But her character wasn't that interesting.

Ray Park is not the only Star Wars vet to appear in this film. Ian McDiarmid, the Emporer himself, appeared as the town doctor.

What I enjoyed most about the film was how Burton didn't abandon Crane's use of deduction, even though it was obvious that the supernatural was involved. It made for a nice mix of beliefs. I loved the scene when Depp was thinking aloud and writing one or two words at a time in his journal while his young assistant watched with confusion.

WARNING: DON'T KEEP READING IF YOU HAVEN"T SEEN THIS FILM!


The criticisms that follow increase in magnitude. Don't misunderstand me, the film was not a disappointment, but it was not perfect.

My first criticism: I felt that the Horseman appeared in full glory far too early in the film. Glimpses would have made him seem more menacing.

My second criticism: Too many decapitations. It became tiresome. I realize the importance of them, and seeing them in full detail has some importance when the villian is revealed, but my reaction too them became dulled, hence dulling my reaction to the Horseman. It isn't until Walken returned that the Horseman became menacing again.

My third criticism: A third act revelation that any avid filmgoer could deduce. If there is a major actor with a seemingly minor role, that person will be your villian or killer. When "Seven" came out, there was no mention of Kevin Spacey in the opening credits or in the ads. I had no idea he was in the film. So when he shows up in the third act, it's a chilling, exciting surprise. On the other hand, most of the people I attended the film with had no idea who any of the actors were, with the exception of Depp, Ricci, and Walken. They shot down that complaint.

PLEASE DON"T KEEP READING!

My final criticism: Why in the hell does our villian show up during the climatic scene carrying the one object that can save our heroes? My wife tried to shoot this one down, saying that the villian wanted to relish victory and it was not farfetched for the villian to be there. But why bring the key object along? I was quite pleased with the predicament Depp was in, but it was too easy for him to get out of it. I think the writers wrote themselves into a corner and needed a way out.



[This message has been edited by cladmartin (edited 11-22-1999).]

[lucie]

I think a lot of the criticisms don't hold for the simple reason that Burton was openly making a film in a particular style - the same used by the Hammer horror makers. this isn't an assumption. he has openly said it. Much of the style is deliberate, and if you have seen a few of these films, you will recognize the story style, including the villains-bringing-about-their-own-downfall-through-hubris ending, are common to this sub-genre. Really, Burton deliberately wrote a B-movie and gave it an A-movie treatment. Yes, the story is very "Tales From The Crypt"-ish, it's supposed to be.

Ricci's character was not developed nearly as well as Depp's, but the growth and change was all his. That was an important element of the story and all the other characters existed to support that. Again, I did not regard this as poor plotting.

I agree one or two fewer decapitations would not have hurt, but they were not excessive enough to bother me. And I did not have a problem with the horseman showing up so soon.

Maybe I went with different expectations. I knew what Burton was trying to achieve with the film; he was creating a period horror movie in a period style. Being familiar with both 1799 and the movie style he was adapting, I had a pretty good idea of what to expect, and was not at all disappointed. I'm not saying it was perfect, but it did a wonderful job of achieving it's stated goal. I would certainly not recommend it to everyone, but for some of us, it's a reason to go to the movies again.

[cladmartin]

There are "Sleepy Hollow" action figures in stores now. Let me modify that: I found five of each Sleepy Hollow action figure (four in all) in a local department store last Thursday. Today (Tuesday) I bought the last one. Fortunately, it was the one I wanted: A $20 Headless Horseman, complete with horse, broadsword and cloak with a gnarled tree base. Fantastic! It was made by McFarlane Toys, so it is quite realistic. They also have (for $10) a Headless Horseman sans horse (this one carries an axe and three heads, including the Hessian's), Ichabod Crane (with detective tools), and The Crone (with bulgy eyes and tongue). The Horseman rests on my mantle, but will probably be moved to make way for something a little more Christmasy. Or I'll just put some mistletoe on it.

[Favetti]

sorry but this movie only merited a 5.6375 out of 10.25.

extremely superficial.