Kirpianuscus A dark adaptation. far to be awful but not enough for seduce. for adults, it has many good details, from the status of political satire to the references to Christmas and Grinch, reasonable performances and good occasion to discover Sigmund and Albert in not expected context. for children, it is real difficult to say if the film could be useful. because the ambition of director seems chaotic. and the lead desire, after its end, is to read to child the book of Hoffmann. the basic sin of film - it is a Konchalovsky one. and not only the expectation is high but the desire to meet a decent adaptation. sure, 3D and special effects are good points. but not exactly the convincing arguments. for children it is a too dark movie, for adults is far to be the version of the well known tale. it seems a moment of circus. many illusions, no crumb of truth. or emotion. and that is a real sad detail.

igorrogov This is one of those movies that are extremely hard to criticize, because to write anything truly meaningful and deep one has to watch it from the start to an end, to get the message, to touch the elements of cinematography etc etc etc.All this I found quite an impossible task. This movie is not simply bad, but it seems to take itself extremely seriously, so to take it lightly and poke some fun at it would be like to laugh at retarded kid on a wheelchair.Any self-respecting person simply wouldn't do that.I tried watching honestly, and ended up getting the first 12 minutes, cringing and moaning, zooming to the middle, moaning, zooming further, another half-a-minute cringe worthy bit...As you zoom at 4x speed, you may find some screens worth your attention, but as you slow down to a normal speed and sound and acting starts coming through... Nope. Impossible.I would rather open up a medical encyclopedia and enjoy some garish gangrene pictures.Thanks

MockeryD Okay, I'm all for taking a classic tale and retelling it. It has been done extremely well (e.g O Brother Where Art Thou) and Disney has made millions on taking classic tales and giving them a different spin.Then you have the Nutcracker in 3D.I'm not sure where this idea came from. The original story seems to be glossed over completely. Yes, there is a Nutcracker in the story but he isn't really much of a hero. It's not that this idea couldn't have been done will but it gets bogged down with some much uselessness.First, Albert Einstein is in this movie. Yeah, that makes sense! Kids love German-born theoretical physicists! Then, we get the beautiful Nutcracker music that is given extremely awful lyrics. Add some racist caricatures, a heavyset character that is only there for fat shaming, Nazi rats (not joking) and loads of plot points that go nowhere.Now this is suppose to be a kids movie right? Well I don't know about you but I wouldn't show this too kids. In fact, I wouldn't show this too anyone. It's way to dark and terrifying for kids to enjoy while it also too nonsensical and pointless for adults. Maybe if they had tried to do an original story inside of tacking on the Nutcracker characters, it could have been somewhat decent.So in short, skip this CGI, surrealist nightmare.

tiy135 Yeah, reallyThe Hoffman's classic is for the first time in hi-tech style (and in some pseudo 3D), with Tchaikovsky and even Dr. Albert. One would be pleased to see the favourite story albeit in a new rendition, but... You can't please them all. One says "too rush", another "too slow". One says "music is nice", another "dumb music" (meaning Tchaikovsky, perhaps). And so on.Cutting long story short, people with mechanical mindsets do always want a wetter water. Ratdogs certainly do not like toys...