Director Tim Burton's hands are all over SLEEPY HOLLOW, a century-ending update of Washington Irving's classic ghost story of a headless horseman who terrorizes a small New York town. The story is set in 1799 and even uses some quips about the coming of the 19th Century to tie it together with our time. Its visually delicious, sometimes chilling, but unevenly odd and bloody. Heads sure do roll and the murders are surprisingly displayed as bloody massacres, all beheadings considered.
SLEEPY HOLLOW is fun. There is no doubt about it, however Depp is mis-cast and the screenplay is amazingly thin. The appearances of the headless horseman are not done as well as Burton is capable of doing. Sure there is mist, vapor, and howling winds. We are never truly scared by his attacks. They are brutal to say the least.
Burton's villain is reminiscent of "Batman" in appearance sometimes and he, of course, uses Depp as "Ichabod Crane" as his own alter ego. Do you ever notice Burton's main protagonists look like Burton himself (EDWARD SCISSORHANDS, ED WOOD, even BEETLEJUICE)? I like the small doses of Burtonesque filmmaking, but a full length feature it cannot make. Danny Elfman's (another Burton regular) exciting score adds much to the sometimes dreary flick. Depp never seems entirely comfortable as "Crane" and more humor was needed to flesh out his character.
Its funny how some people complained about the early BATMAN films not being cartoonish enough, only dark and even depressing. Here is a dark picture literally that may have worked better with a more cartoonish touch. I know this is horror but isn't the original spirit of Irving's "Legend of Sleepy Hollow" more colorful and comical? Yes and this picture needed more spirit and less schlock.
An important note: SLEEPY HOLLOW contains one of those scenes that make you want to split - when the "bad guy" tells his or her venemous story about how they were able to reak evil verbatim, leaving less to the viewer's imagination and more lines of dialogue. Why not run some title cards explaining it all? These points must be thought of, but I must say SLEEPY HOLLOW is fine, simple entertainment from a master filmmaker who I thought would provide a lot more.
Rating: **1/2
SLEEPY HOLLOW is fun. There is no doubt about it, however Depp is mis-cast and the screenplay is amazingly thin. The appearances of the headless horseman are not done as well as Burton is capable of doing. Sure there is mist, vapor, and howling winds. We are never truly scared by his attacks. They are brutal to say the least.
Burton's villain is reminiscent of "Batman" in appearance sometimes and he, of course, uses Depp as "Ichabod Crane" as his own alter ego. Do you ever notice Burton's main protagonists look like Burton himself (EDWARD SCISSORHANDS, ED WOOD, even BEETLEJUICE)? I like the small doses of Burtonesque filmmaking, but a full length feature it cannot make. Danny Elfman's (another Burton regular) exciting score adds much to the sometimes dreary flick. Depp never seems entirely comfortable as "Crane" and more humor was needed to flesh out his character.
Its funny how some people complained about the early BATMAN films not being cartoonish enough, only dark and even depressing. Here is a dark picture literally that may have worked better with a more cartoonish touch. I know this is horror but isn't the original spirit of Irving's "Legend of Sleepy Hollow" more colorful and comical? Yes and this picture needed more spirit and less schlock.
An important note: SLEEPY HOLLOW contains one of those scenes that make you want to split - when the "bad guy" tells his or her venemous story about how they were able to reak evil verbatim, leaving less to the viewer's imagination and more lines of dialogue. Why not run some title cards explaining it all? These points must be thought of, but I must say SLEEPY HOLLOW is fine, simple entertainment from a master filmmaker who I thought would provide a lot more.
Rating: **1/2