An effective & moving adaptation of Daniel Wallace's wonderful novel.

Rating: 7/10 (16 December 2006)

I've been a fan of Tim Burton since "Pee Wee's Big Adventure" in 1985, and although his choice of both narrative ("Ed Wood" vs. "Mars Attacks") and presentation ("Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" vs. "Nightmare Before Xmas" or "Corpse Bride") vary wildly, his courage to tackle unusual and challenging projects is a large part of his appeal. There are consistent elements to a Burton project that stamp it as uniquely his vision.namely: rich and unusual characters, a dark, dry sense of humor, and vivid and imaginative use of color, all of which work beautifully in the film.
Burton's sense of humor is dark, dry and very intelligent. He doesn't pander to the 'lowest denominator' when creating films - he respects his audience enough not to talk down to them. There is often a good deal of subtext to his dialogue and repeated viewings are often rewarded with humorous details that went unnoticed the first time around. He treated "Big Fish" with a lighter, loving hand than in certain of his other films  respecting both the importance of the "tall tale" and the delicate bond between father and son.
Burton took a few liberties in adapting Wallace's narrative (as is to be expected, due to the limitations of the different genres.) His decision for Edward to convince Carl the Giant to run off to the big city, and take him along, provided him the opportunity to introduce a whole new colorful setting to work with: the circus. This gave him a springboard for several plot points (Edward meeting his future wife, the giant and Edward both finding visually-interesting employment), and condensed many of the novel's stories into one for the sake of time constraints. It also provided Edward with a 'sidekick,' a common convention in a quest fable (or 'roadtrip movie'.) The basic theme of the movie centers around a father & son with very different personalities attempting making peace and find a connection. On one level, Will resented his father for denying him what he felt was his right to know the 'real' man behind the myths. But the reality is, the "fables" Edward created to describe his life were as "real" as the facts themselves  contained within the 'fish stories' were the truths, the lessons, Edward wanted to impart, and conveyed the overall image of his own life as he wished to be remembered.
One of the messages of the film is that it is impossible to truly know anyone completely. Our perceptions and assumptions (whether accurate or not) inevitably color our impression of who a person is. We can't ever know the truth of a person's life  all we have to work with are the parts they reveal to us, and the fictions we unconsciously generate to fill the gaps.
William always resented his father for what he considered 'avoiding reality' by 'inventing tall tales' about his own life history. But Edward has his own perspective: "You're not necessarily supposed to believe it. You're just supposed to believe in it." The process of the father trying to communicate to his son the importance of living "larger than life" and not allowing himself to be constrained by the petty restrictions of mundane life makes for a very moving, and wonderfully told, tale.