CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Sleepy Hollow (1999)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sleepy Hollow (1999)

post #1 of 56
9/26/07 at 7:56am
Thread Starter 
This movie is shit. It's also the moment I realised I had irreconcilable differences in taste with my roommate. I suspected it when he told me his favorite movie was Titanic and I was almost certain when he came back from Across the Universe talking about how "beautiful" and "amazing" it was, but that he is so blinded by his love of everything Burton that he thinks a piece of shit like this is "amazing" is where I draw the line. Fuck this movie.

Boring, with dull characters and a dull story. It's not scary, it's not exciting, it's a chore to sit through and the only reason I did is because I wanted to fuck the girl that brought it over. Even Johnny Depp isn't interesting to watch. The only thing I can positively say about it is that it's very bloody.

Why is it that Burton inspires this kind of fanaticism in people who are otherwise rational and well-meaning? I say this as a person who loves Beetlejuice (well I loved it as a kid. Parts of it have worn on me since then.), Batman and Ed Wood. It's like it's a cult or something. So the guy did Nightmare Before Christmas and it was the coolest thing ever when you were 7 years old. That doesn't mean you have to look at mediocre shit like Corpse Bride and pretend it's anything other than mediocre shit. Sleepy Hollow is crap and just because it's got the Tim Burton flavor to it's art design doesn't mean it's not completely empty and, well, hollow.

I weep for Sweeney Todd because, regardless of it's quality, I'm going to have to listen to how "amazing" and "beautiful" it is for months. Goddammit.
Reply
post #2 of 56
9/26/07 at 8:07am
Did you at least get a handjob out of the ordeal?
Reply
post #3 of 56
9/26/07 at 8:13am
Thread Starter 
No, but it would have been useless anyway. Bad films make my penis soft.
Reply
post #4 of 56
9/26/07 at 8:23am
"Sleepy Hollow" has four good things going for it:

1) A great use of color and some of the best Cinematorgraphy in a Burton film.

2) Christina Ricci's Décolletage

3) Johnny Rico's scissor sword beheading

4) Christina Ricci's Décolletage
Reply
post #5 of 56
9/26/07 at 8:33am
The only Burton film I can honestly say I loved - and still love - is Ed Wood. It has a human dimension and depth of feeling that's lacking in most of his output. The rest of his films are pretty much variations on a theme of all style, no substance.
Reply
post #6 of 56
9/26/07 at 8:49am
I've got to agree with Death Surge, Sleepy Hollow is a great looking film.

It also has the most natural line-readings of Christopher Walken's career. "HAHHH!"
Reply
post #7 of 56
9/26/07 at 8:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Death Surge
"Sleepy Hollow" has four good things going for it:

1) A great use of color and some of the best Cinematorgraphy in a Burton film.

2) Christina Ricci's Décolletage

3) Johnny Rico's scissor sword beheading

4) Christina Ricci's Décolletage
You forgot the bleeding tree full of heads. Man, I loved that bleeding tree full of heads.

And yeah, Ricci didn't wear a hotter outfit untill Black Snake Moan.
Reply
post #8 of 56
9/26/07 at 9:02am
I dunno, I didn't find it boring the two times I've seen it. Granted, it's been a few years.
Reply
post #9 of 56
9/26/07 at 9:27am
I'm going to go ahead and say that Sleepy Hollow is my favorite Tim Burton film. It's not dull by any means though I agree that it's not scary but how many "horror" movies are really scary these days? And I loved the scene towards the end in the church when Dumbledore, Palpatine, and the fat priest all buy it.
Reply
post #10 of 56
9/26/07 at 9:31am
It is indeed a very pretty movie to look at. It's also one of the least engaging movies to sit through. I've never been a member of the 'Cult of Burton' as I find most of his films to be tedious. I have to admit to loving 'Ed Wood', and parts of 'Mars Attacks!', but that's about it.
Reply
post #11 of 56
9/26/07 at 9:35am
Thread Starter 
I don't need to scare me. I need it to interest me. Johnny Depp could have done it, if he was given an interesting character, but Ichabod is just there. The art design could have done it, if this was Tim Burton's first movie and it didn't merely deliver EXACTLY what I would expect from a Tim Burton movie (except without the sense of playfulness that makes a movie like Beetlejuice enjoyable). The story could have done it if it was told in a suspenseful and intriguing manner, but he sorta just hands it to you in chunks.

It's like Tim Burton dispassionately going through the motions, his mind focused on other things, like seeing how bloody he can make his first R-rated fantasy film.
Reply
post #12 of 56
9/26/07 at 10:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabriel Williams
The only Burton film I can honestly say I loved - and still love - is Ed Wood.
And Pee-Wee's Big Adventure, for me . . . However, the rest of his films (at least his live action ones . . . haven't seen Nightmare) don't really hold up on repeated viewings.
Reply
post #13 of 56
9/26/07 at 11:47am
I love the film, but that's largely because it's an Homage to/Pastiche of the old Hammer Horror films that I grew up with as a kid. Burton's Dark Fairytale style is really in abundance in this film, but it's a more traditional fairytale (The Brothers Grimm before they got edited) in its depiction of nastiness and cruelty.

I think visually the film is breathtaking and on a visceral level it's one of the most joyfully blood drenched films in years, but I can understand why people wouldn't like it. It's a ludicrously camp film at times (owing to the homage to Hammer) and as such the effect is to create a brutally disjointed film at time. It's hard to buy into the gothic fairytale trappings when the headless horseman is harpooning people out of churches.
Reply
post #14 of 56
9/26/07 at 12:19pm
It's not that great in fact it's very boring, but I agree with Spike regarding it's merits as a semi-homage to Hammer films and stagebound sets filled with old Brits.

I do think it's about ten times better than Big Fish, Apes, and Wonka.
Reply
post #15 of 56
9/26/07 at 12:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall
I love the film, but that's largely because it's an Homage to/Pastiche of the old Hammer Horror films that I grew up with as a kid. Burton's Dark Fairytale style is really in abundance in this film, but it's a more traditional fairytale (The Brothers Grimm before they got edited) in its depiction of nastiness and cruelty.

I think visually the film is breathtaking and on a visceral level it's one of the most joyfully blood drenched films in years, but I can understand why people wouldn't like it. It's a ludicrously camp film at times (owing to the homage to Hammer) and as such the effect is to create a brutally disjointed film at time. It's hard to buy into the gothic fairytale trappings when the headless horseman is harpooning people out of churches.
I love the camp factor. It's what makes the film for me.
Reply
post #16 of 56
9/26/07 at 12:47pm
Sorry, Patrick, I'm gonna have to admit that I love this one for all the reasons Spike and others have listed. Hope I don't lose too much face.

Love the Hammer-vibe, love the production design, love Ricci's cleavage, love the cast of odd Brits (Lee cameo!), and I love Elfman's "expected" score. I even think Depp's performance is charming.

If you can't find any joy in Walken as the headless horseman, the bloody head tree, Ichabod's girly screams, or in the sheer amount of decapitations, I don't know what to say.

I know Devin hates this flick as well, but I'm surprised that people can have that extreme negative POV on this one. Sure, the mystery's a little bizarre and the performances are over the top, but I think it adds to the quirkiness. I just can't see the sheer hate.

I have to admit, I'm a fan of Burton's style sensibilities, in spite of his story shortcomings.

Try the Kool-Aid, it's delicious. The flavor? "Statutory Grape"...
Reply
post #17 of 56
9/26/07 at 12:48pm
Thread Starter 
I see. Were all Hammer films as dull as this one, or was that not part of the homage?

EDIT: Walken has lost all respect from me, so his mere appearance, I could care less about. If he did a performance worth praising, I'd praise it. But he grunts.

As for campiness, it's so fucking dreary and slow that all the fun is sucked from it. Campiness - fun = bad acting. Maybe if some of the attempts at humor (or any of the attempts at humor) hit the mark I'd feel differently.

The one part I did like was that he made sure to decapitate the pregnant woman's fetus. I kept waiting for the money shot of a headless fetus spilling out a corpse. I think that alone could have pushed it into a "campy fun" place for me, and would have held me over for a while.
Reply
post #18 of 56
9/26/07 at 12:52pm
This is the second time i've been told that this movie sucks. *shrug* well what can ya do.
Reply
post #19 of 56
9/26/07 at 12:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll
I see. Were all Hammer films as dull as this one, or was that not part of the homage?
Ouch.
Quote:
it's so fucking dreary and slow
Different Strokes, I guess. Personally, I was never bored. I like the atmosphere. Course, I'm also a Hot Topic Goth chick in the chatrooms.
Reply
post #20 of 56
9/26/07 at 1:40pm
I enjoyed the movie. That's all I've got to say.
Reply
post #21 of 56
9/26/07 at 1:45pm
I really like this one...probably the last Burton film I can say that about. And, yes Patrick, period Hammer films are stuffy and boring (thank the gods for that)...try watching CAPTAIN KRONOS if you need further proof. Maybe some acid would help?
Reply
post #22 of 56
9/26/07 at 1:54pm
I didn't care for this at all the first time I saw it, though a second viewing softened that stance a bit. Visually it's impressive, I enjoy the atmopshere, and the story, while not great, is a decent attempt to add a bit more to a pretty lean concept.

Which leads me to the statement that I have never really understood why Burton's is considered one of these directors whose latest film should have us brimming with anticipation. He's been very hit and miss, especially in the last decade, and even his best films are usually lean on story, high on style. "Sleepy Hollow" just continues the trend. It's not great, but it's Burton, and it was exactly what I expected.
Reply
post #23 of 56
9/26/07 at 2:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DARKMITE8
If you can't find any joy in... Ichabod's girly screams...
"It was a horseman... and he's headless. It was a headless horseman." So cheesy, yet makes me laugh every time.
Reply
post #24 of 56
9/26/07 at 2:11pm
Burton is at his best when he's basically doing a thinly-veiled autobiography, which would be Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, and Big Fish.
Reply
post #25 of 56
9/26/07 at 2:22pm
Watched this last night coincidentally (the first half anyway). I really like the pretty pictures & more than a few of the attempts at humor, but the story is too lean. It might work better as a silent film. This was the 5th or 6th time I've seen it.
Reply
post #26 of 56
9/26/07 at 2:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson
Burton is at his best when he's basically doing a thinly-veiled autobiography, which would be Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, and Big Fish.
Even Crane has Burton's 'Oh So Sensitive Genius, wooing the girl with his inventive kookiness whilst the world looks on in scorn' thing going on. It's one of the few elements of the film which I really don't like.
Reply
post #27 of 56
9/26/07 at 3:01pm
He's also got father issues. Burton just can't help giving his protaganist some sort of past grievence/issue with their father. He does it in almost every movie--even Wonka, which pretty much killed that film for me.
Reply
post #28 of 56
9/26/07 at 3:24pm
My favorite part of the film is the too-brief Christopher Lee cameo, what with the finger pointing, and that glorious booming voice ("And now it is YOU....ICHABOD CRANE...")...for all of 30 seconds.

After that, it's a gorgeous, stylized bore.
Reply
post #29 of 56
9/26/07 at 3:44pm
Thread Starter 
I wish they went all out in making Ichabo a coward and having fun with that. As it is, it's all jumbled up. Our introduction to him, he's playing around with a dead body, but later when a bug crawls out of a corpse, he freaks out. The struggle between the coward Ichabod and the Ichabod who's searching for truth in the name of science could have been a lot of fun.

Instead it's like "Oh yeah, this guy gets scared, let's make him faint now." It seemed so random.

And if there were SOME interesting supporting roles it would have done a great deal to help this work for me. Instead it's superstitious villager 1-25 with Christina Ricci and that fucking kid helper thrown in.

Speaking of kids, the kid version of Ichabod freaked my shit out. He was adorable and terrifying looking all at once.
Reply
post #30 of 56
9/26/07 at 4:30pm
Yeah, this is only one of two Burton movies that I just don't like (POTA obviously being the other).

The photography and art direction are super-duper pretty, but there's just something completely lacking at the center. Oh yeah, interesting characters and a decent story. Yes, the Headless Horseman is cool but this flick made it dull.

I actually tried to watch it again on TNT last month and it couldn't even hold my attention for two short hours. Thumbs-down on this one.
Reply
post #31 of 56
9/26/07 at 4:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll
Speaking of kids, the kid version of Ichabod freaked my shit out. He was adorable and terrifying looking all at once.
Doesn't that pretty much sum up Tim Burton's vibe right there? It would explain the whole Goth kid facination with his stuff.
Reply
post #32 of 56
9/26/07 at 4:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll
...and that fucking kid helper thrown in.
I thought he did a good job. I liked him.
Reply
post #33 of 56
9/26/07 at 5:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall
I love the film, but that's largely because it's an Homage to/Pastiche of the old Hammer Horror films that I grew up with as a kid. Burton's Dark Fairytale style is really in abundance in this film, but it's a more traditional fairytale (The Brothers Grimm before they got edited) in its depiction of nastiness and cruelty.

I think visually the film is breathtaking and on a visceral level it's one of the most joyfully blood drenched films in years, but I can understand why people wouldn't like it. It's a ludicrously camp film at times (owing to the homage to Hammer) and as such the effect is to create a brutally disjointed film at time. It's hard to buy into the gothic fairytale trappings when the headless horseman is harpooning people out of churches.
Spike got there first, but yeah- the film is basically a love letter to Hammer.

It's not a great film, by any means, but I find it makes for reasonable light viewing if I'm out of ideas.
Reply
post #34 of 56
9/26/07 at 6:14pm
I never agreed with that Homage To Hammer bullshit. The only similarities between this and Hammer productions ws the time period. IT's full of cool colors and modern characters. It's based on an American folktale, for Cushing's sake!
And Ripoll's right. The thing is dull dull dull. I tried to watch this twice and fell asleep both times. Then I caught that scene at the end where the horse jumps out of the tree. Yeah.
Reply
post #35 of 56
9/26/07 at 6:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobClark
I never agreed with that Homage To Hammer bullshit. The only similarities between this and Hammer productions ws the time period. IT's full of cool colors and modern characters. It's based on an American folktale, for Cushing's sake!
I don't know how you can't see the similarities (despite the geography difference). It's an Americanized (or Burton-ized) "Hammer" flick. Filled with Old Brits (including Lee), color pallette (including the exaggerated "Hammer red" blood), Gothic production design (including the foggy stylized woods/countryside and corsets with heaving busoms)...

and Burton's own admission that was his intent.

The color choices were merely Burton's filter on what he saw as the Hammer style. It's much warmer and much less German Expressionist than his usual stuff.

EDIT: From http://www.timburtoncollective.com/articles/sh2.html

From the outset, Burton harped on how he wanted to evoke the Hammer Films style--that is, the artifice-heavy look of low-budget horror movies produced by the English studio in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. He urged Heinrichs to check out examples like the 1968 Dracula Has Risen From the Grave, though the designer says he's never seen another influential work, Italian director Mario Bava's black-and-white Black Sunday. The look of Sleepy Hollow is somewhere between the lurid color of the typical Hammer product and the moodier style of Black Sunday--the palette is muted, almost black and white in color, with autumnal tones stressed in Colleen Atwood's costumes. "I think if Tim had his choice, he would make black-and-white movies," says Heinrichs of the director who has already made two, Frankenweenie and Ed Wood. "I'm glad the movie's in color, because it does make a range of emotions possible. But the limited palette is good, because if you start to have stronger primary colors, all of a sudden you've got elements pushing into the foreground that don't really belong."

...Nevertheless, the director's affection for those foggy soundstage environments was one of many elements that drew the production in the direction of London.
Reply
post #36 of 56
9/26/07 at 7:23pm
Yes, I know that was his intent. They promoted that heavily when the film was released. But as far as I'm concerned, he failed.
Reply
post #37 of 56
9/27/07 at 12:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobClark
Yes, I know that was his intent. They promoted that heavily when the film was released. But as far as I'm concerned, he failed.
ah.
Reply
post #38 of 56
9/27/07 at 3:25am
The Horseman is extremely badass. Ricci is at about peak hotness. The film looks gorgeous. Everything else manages to at least stay the fuck out of the way and not ruin it.

I like Sleepy Hollow.
Reply
post #39 of 56
9/27/07 at 3:35am
Thread Starter 
I really don't see anything "badass" about the character. There is no character. It's a guy that chops heads off. And the whole decapitation thing is waaaaaaay too forced for me to really care. When the movie opens with a double decapitation and doesn't ever escalate, I get bored quick. Especially when it's all CGI beheadings.
Reply
post #40 of 56
9/27/07 at 9:04am
I think the bridge fight, harpoon kill, axe decapitation and the final coach chase fall into the category of escalation. The film is absolutely crammed with setpieces, and a lot of them are really well crafted. It's kinda hard to discuss the film, when the opposing arguement is that a film is boring. I can understand getting upset with the Burton fanboys and getting upset at the Burton tropes, but I can't understand finding the film boring.
Reply
post #41 of 56
9/27/07 at 1:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll
I really don't see anything "badass" about the character.
Guy, did you SEE him twirl his weapon(s) around after every kill? I was all "HOLY FUCK, HORSEMAN KNO'S KARATE."

Also, what Spike said.
Reply
post #42 of 56
9/27/07 at 1:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll
I really don't see anything "badass" about the character. There is no character. It's a guy that chops heads off.
Worked for Jason Voorhees. For ELEVEN (alright 10) flicks. SH is like a slasher flick disguised as Gothic horror.

And yeah, what Spike said.
Reply
post #43 of 56
9/27/07 at 7:35pm
I wish Burton would do more films in black and white.
Reply
post #44 of 56
9/27/07 at 7:45pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DARKMITE8
Worked for Jason Voorhees. For ELEVEN (alright 10) flicks.
Come on, DARKMITE, that's a bit of a stretch. I'd say it worked for maybe 2, possibly 3 of them.
Reply
post #45 of 56
9/27/07 at 7:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll
Come on, DARKMITE, that's a bit of a stretch. I'd say it worked for maybe 2, possibly 3 of them.
Fair enough.
Reply
post #46 of 56
10/7/07 at 11:12pm
Love this movie. Aside from the appearance of unnecessary, overcomplicated gobblygook revelations explaining the murder conspiracy, I'm a fan. I can completely understand why most people found it to be boring, but as is usually the case with Burton, the presentation and the quirky-goth (or 18th century goth) sensibilities save the film for me.

+ Christina Ricci looking delectable as always... post age 17.

+ Depp as Crane. Still thankful for his "It was a horseman, he was headless" ramblings.

+ Elfman's typical but dependably great score.

+ Excellent sets all around, all of which really enhanced the foggy and claustrophobic atmosphere.

+ Best "directed by Tim Burton" card ever, complete with a spooky house on a spooky hill, with a spooky scarecrow with a glowing jack o' lantern for a head. Spooky.
Reply
post #47 of 56
10/9/07 at 5:33am
^ agreed, and also the horse disappearing inside the tree was some nice special effect ...
Reply
post #48 of 56
10/9/07 at 5:54am
Burton's best movie is still BATMAN. I blame/thank the interference of Jon Peters, who probably forced him to scale back on all the Burtony bullshit. Studio interference is sometimes a good thing. Would SLEEP HOLLOW have been improved by a Prince soundtrack? We shall never know.

I did get bored halfway though this and stopped watching it, which is a rarity for me. In fact, BATMAN is the only Burton film that isn't completely tedious.
Reply
post #49 of 56
10/9/07 at 6:48pm
Batman his best movie? Are you smoking crack, my a-ha hating friend?

I have four words for you:

EDWARD D. WOOD JR.

Batman my ass.
Reply
post #50 of 56
10/10/07 at 1:38am
Seriously, Paul. Thats like saying your favorite Beatle is Ringo. Ed Wood is the ONLY great film the man has ever made, and most of his films look good, but are just shit.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › Sleepy Hollow (1999)