A Christmas Carol (1984 TV Movie) User Reviews

The power of George C. Scott

[Vartiainen · 8/10 · 6 March 2017]

Once again a retelling of the classic Charles Dickens novella. This time made directly for television, yet starring George C. Scott in the role of Ebenezer Scrooge. And over the years it has become one of the most well-known adaptations of the original tale. And for a reason, I say.

The original story is of course wonderful. An old miser gets haunted by his old partner, who in turn warns that he's about to be visited by three ghosts in the course of the night in order to teach him about the perils of his miserly nature. The ghosts of Christmas Past, Present and Yet-to-Come are once again brilliantly represented, managing to drive the point of giving and sharing in, but the real star of the show has to be George C. Scott as Scrooge. The sheer talent and charisma of this man is by itself enough to carry a movie. The scene where he meets his remaining family after he has repented is easily one of the most poignant in the entire film and made possible solely through the talent of Scott.

Not to say that the rest of the film is in any way inferior. Quite the opposite. Despite being made directly for television, it impresses with its technical aspects and with the talents of its actors. Just goes to show that the spirit of Christmas brings out the best in all of us.

Quite worth seeing.

Wonderful Adaptation.

[hitchcockthelegend · 9/10 · 27 December 2014]

The 1984 TV version of Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol is a joyous thing. Fronted by George C. Scott as the infamous Ebenezer Scrooge, Clive Donner's movie pays great respects to the source material and garners a multi stranded piece of brilliance out of Scott. The characters of course remain the same, but headed by Scrooge having a complex and painful background and a persona of confused emotions, there's meaty substance holding the movie up high. Donner and writer Roger Hirson retain the black heart of the source story, with the horror elements suitably effective to bother the children, while the Victorian atmosphere always feels – crucially – authentic.

If you haven't seen this version of the often filmed tale, put it on your list for next yuletide. 9/10

Handsome version of the classic story

[Leofwine_draca · 7/10 · 27 December 2020]

This 1984 TV movie doesn't sound like it's going to be up to much - especially given the wealth of previous adaptions which have achieved classic status - but it turns out to be surprisingly good. It's spooky, as it should be, and with lots of atmosphere, and clever little touches that make it feel more like a '70s movie than an '80s one. The cast is also incredible. George C. Scott gives a typically tough performance as Scrooge, but it's the rest who are so entertaining - genius to cast the likes of Frank Finlay, Angela Pleasence and Edward Woodward as the Christmas spirits, and to have the likes of David Warner showing well in support. A handsomely mounted production that you wouldn't even know to be a TV movie in the first place.

My favourite version of a classic tale

[Sisiutil · 10/10 · 25 December 2001]

I know many people have a special fondness for the Alistair Sim version of Dickens' story, but for me, this 1984 version is the one to beat. My wife and I own a copy of this film on VHS, and we watch it together every Christmas Eve. I often remark that we could watch it on Halloween too, because it's a very creepy ghost story.

Scott--typecast as Scrooge--is shudderingly mean and nasty, making his transformation all the more miraculous and moving. I think it's up there with his performance in Patton. The spirits are all effective, each one creepier than the last. Watching the dark, floating, skeletal form of the Spirit of Christmas Yet to Come sends shivers down my spine every year. And what a supporting cast! David Warner, in particular, is in top form as Bob Cratchit, as is Susannah York as his wife.

I seem to recall that this version sticks closer to the original story than most others--but I may be mistaken, as it's been several years since I read it. Regardless, this is a terrific Christmas classic.

Hard to imagine a better version.

[TOMASBBloodhound · 10/10 · 17 December 2006]

So this made for TV film scores only a 7.6 on this site? Bah! Humbug! Without question this 1984 version of Dickens' classic tale is the best ever made. And yes, the Hound has seen the 1951 version which was also good, but not good enough. The lack of color is perhaps the biggest shortcoming of that version, although the acting was wonderful.

George C. Scott is simply incredible as Ebenezer Scrooge. We all know the story of this stingy businessman who is haunted by the ghost of his dead partner, then by three other spirits later on that evening. Scott is properly gruff as Scrooge. Too gruff in fact for some critics who claim he is unable to project the new-found glee that he awakens to on Christmas morning after the spirits teach him a valuable lesson. But hey, this is George C. Scott. He's never going to go dancing down the street in a fit of joy. He has too much dignity, and his Scrooge projects his emotion in a realistic manner.

The supporting performances are uniformly excellent, as are the costumes, music, and scenery. 19th Century London comes to life in Clive Donner's visionary style. The film even borders on frightening in several scenes involving the spirits. The important tale of morality shines through in every frame, though.

You won't often find this version aired on television anymore, and that is a disappointment. The 1984 version of A Christmas Carol should be a required part of every household's celebration of the holiday. When the decorations come out of the basement, this film should find its way into the DVD player at least once during the season.

10 of 10 stars.

The Hound.

Probably the most faithful re-telling.

[Tug-3 · 26 October 1998]

This underrated version of the Dickens classic is, if not the most faithful to the book, the most faithful to the truths of Victorian England. This version draws less from the jollity of Dickens' earlier Christmas works, and more from his later, darker works (such as "Bleak House"). It is packed with details which ground it in a sort of reality that the earlier, more fanciful versions ignore. The streets are dirtier, the people are more miserable, and for perhaps the first time in film history, you can understand why people hate Scrooge so much. George C. Scott is outstanding in this version: his Scrooge is spiteful, cruel, and virtually irredeemable. Tiny Tim looks like a choleric orphan who could literally drop dead at any given moment. My favorite aspect of this production is how people react to Scrooge's transformation at the end. Rather than following the standard "Hooray, he's nice now!" change of heart, all the characters regard Scrooge with understandable suspicion and disbelief. While it may not be the best to warm your cockles on a cold Winter's eve, this version is at least the closest to Dickens' view of humanity.

The life of mean

[Prismark10 · 7/10 · 2 February 2016]

The striking thing of the 1984 television movie starring George C Scott as Scrooge is the faithfulness to the text, not only in the lines spoken by the cast but in director Clive Donner bringing it in the visuals such as the door knocker changing to the face of Marley and bringing to life the sparse Victoria setting of Scrooge's lifestyle.

Of course there is no issue that an excellent actor such as Scott will have no issue playing the miser Scrooge and there are excellent turns from Frank Finlay as Marley and Edward Woodward as the gigantic Ghost of Christmas present with a touch of malevolence.

Maybe the casting of David Warner did not feel right as Bob Cratchit, an actor who spent most of the 1980s playing villains and maybe was a little too old for the role.

The film is filled with British character actors, sadly many of whom along with Scott are no longer with us. However if you want to see a traditional adaptation of Dicken's festive tale then you cannot go wrong with this one.

the best version of this timeless classic

[planktonrules · 10/10 · 19 July 2005]

I have seen many different versions of this story and I think that after the 1984 version with George C. Scott they should have stopped making remakes. I am not saying subsequent versions are bad (the Patrick Stewart version is excellent), but that the Scott version is so perfect and well-crafted that there is simply no need to try again! Scot is the best Scrooge--with malevolence and selfishness in spades! In addition, despite this, there is a deeper humanity about his character and the writers were brilliant to focus so much on the societal aspects of the story as well. The hungry masses were only alluded to or shown in a cleaned up way in other versions, but here starvation and desolation are ugly and important to the plot and are just as Dickens had intended. Other stories have tended to focus too much on Scrooge while sometimes ignoring the important allegorical aspects of the tale. Dickens felt it was not so much a Christmas story but a story of the responsibility the rich have to their fellow man.

A Christmas Carol (1984) ***

[JoeKarlosi · 7/10 · 27 December 2012]

This telefilm, along with the cherished 1951 Alistair Sim version, are the two finest I have seen, yet I just might give the edge to this one as my personally preferred. It's a tough call to make, as both are wonderful. For this adaptation, George C. Scott is multi-dimensional in a moving performance as the embittered tightwad Ebinezer Scrooge, whose longtime lost love and resentful father have blackened his own heart throughout his life. What Scott brings to his Scrooge is more of a realistic humanity, rather than just some cartoonish caricature. In addition to Scott, the rest of the cast here is splendid as well. And little Anthony Walters as the crippled but optimistic and lovable Tiny Tim is my favorite of any variation of this character. The film is shot in striking color and settings which benefit the Christmas festivities (though Sims' '51 version also worked nicely in black and white for its moody holiday atmosphere). It seems that every version of the story both includes or omits certain details, thus making so many of them worth seeing. *** out of ****

The Definitive "Christmas Carol"

[jhclues · 10/10 · 19 December 2000]

This 1984 version of the Dickens' classic `A Christmas Carol,' directed by Clive Donner, stars George C. Scott as Ebenezer Scrooge. By this time around, the challenge for the filmmaker was to take such familiar material and make it seem fresh and new again; and, happily to say, with this film Donner not only met the challenge but surpassed any expectations anyone might have had for it. He tells the story with precision and an eye to detail, and extracts performances from his actors that are nothing less than superlative, especially Scott. One could argue that the definitive portrayal of Scrooge-- one of the best known characters in literary fiction, ever-- was created by Alastair Sim in the 1951 film; but I think with his performance here, Scott has now achieved that distinction. There is such a purity and honesty in his Scrooge that it becomes difficult to even consider anyone else in the role once you've seen Scott do it; simply put, he IS Scrooge. And what a tribute it is to such a gifted actor; to be able to take such a well known figure and make it so uniquely his own is quite miraculous. It is truly a joy to see an actor ply his trade so well, to be able to make a character so real, from every word he utters down to the finest expression of his face, and to make it all ring so true. It's a study in perfection.

The other members of the cast are splendid as well, but then again they have to be in order to maintain the integrity of Scott's performance; and they do. Frank Finlay is the Ghost of Jacob Marley; a notable turn, though not as memorable, perhaps, as the one by Alec Guinness (as Marley) in the film, `Scrooge.' Angela Pleasence is a welcome visage as the Spirit of Christmas Past; Edward Woodward, grand and boisterous, and altogether convincing as the Spirit of Christmas Present; and Michael Carter, grim and menacing as the Spirit of Christmas Yet To Come.

David Warner hits just the right mark with his Bob Cratchit, bringing a sincerity to the role that measures up well to the standard of quality set by Scott's Scrooge, and Susannah York fares just as well as Mrs. Cratchit. The real gem to be found here, though, is the performance of young Anthony Walters as Tiny Tim; it's heartfelt without ever becoming maudlin, and simply one of the best interpretations-- and the most real-- ever presented on film.

The excellent supporting cast includes Roger Rees (Fred Holywell, and also the narrator of the film), Caroline Langrishe (Janet Holywell), Lucy Gutteridge (Belle), Michael Gough (Mr. Poole) and Joanne Whalley (Fan). A flawless presentation, this version of `A Christmas Carol' sets the standard against which all others must be gauged; no matter how many versions you may have seen, watching this one is like seeing it for the first time ever. And forever after, whenever you think of Scrooge, the image your mind will conjure up will be that of George C. Scott. A thoroughly entertaining and satisfying experience, this film demands a place in the annual schedule of the holiday festivities of every home. I rate this one 10/10.

Not bad

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 29 November 2020]

The story is familar - miserly Ebenezer Scrooge is visited by 3 ghosts who profoundly change his attitude towards Christmas.

This version is well cast, handsomely mounted, well acted and adapted with intelligence. And it stars George C Scott as Scrooge.

Scott was a fine actor, but he wouldn't have been my obvious choice for Scrooge. I have always seen Scrooge in my mind's eye, as stooped, wizened, wrinkly, callow, mean-spirited - in short, exactly like tge cliche multiple tellings have made of him. But Scott plays him as strong, hale, and intelligent, whose attitude towards Christmas is at least partly born of reason. It is an interesting interpretation, and it works.

Thiversion is worth watching.

The Best of all the Christmas Carol movies

[johnrworldwide · 10/10 · 23 December 2006]

Far richer in texture and character than even the classics from the 30's and 50's. George C. Scott was born to be Scrooge, just as he was born to be Patton. Mr. Scott will be known as one of the greatest actors of the 20th century. The character of Scrooge as played by Mr. Scott seemed to jump off the screen. Scott as Scrooge brought an richer, more robust, yet a more deeply moving Scrooge to the screen than any of his predecessors in the role of the meanest man in 18th century London. Mr. Scott seemed to bring Scrooge to a more personal, understandable yet highly conflicted level; his role was acted with the great authority Scott always bring to the screen: yet his usual bellicose voice would sometimes be brought to a whisper, almost as a soliloquy, as he would berate the Christmas holiday in one breath, yet reveal his own human frailty in his next line. He could portray the sour and crusty Scrooge, and a misunderstood, sympathetic Scrooge all in the same scene.

Truly a remarkable performance by a giant of his generation.

Worth watching

[davyd-02237 · 7/10 · 24 December 2019]

George C Scott is a fine actor and this particular version of the well known story is worth watching for his contribution. he is hardly ever "off camera" and is the centre point of the entire production. This is as good as any version of Dickens story and filmed in Shrewsbury, which came as a surprise to me!

Sombre version, lacking sparkle

[enochsneed · 5/10 · 23 December 2014]

Other reviews had led me to believe this was the closest film version of 'A Christmas Carol' to the Dickens book, but just as many liberties have been taken here as in earlier versions, particularly in Scrooge's relationships with his father and fiancée. However, these additional scenes do not develop the characters or add to our understanding of them.

The film is well-cast but their talents are often wasted. Susannah York has a throwaway role as Mrs Cratchit and is far too glamorous to be a believable downtrodden housewife struggling to support her family on her husband's meagre salary, while David Warner is such an assertive personality you feel his Bob Cratchit would just tell Scrooge to stuff his job, Christmas or not, and succeed in finding work elsewhere.

On the subject of Mrs Cratchit, I have often wondered how she really reacted when Scrooge's prize turkey turned up in the middle of Christmas morning: "You expect me to have that thing ready for three o'clock? It won't even go in the ****ing oven!" But I digress...

George C Scott's Scrooge? Perhaps a more believable whole than others, not a staggering change from hateful skinflint to ebullient lover of life, just more thoughtful about what really matters in life and more open to making the best of his time on earth. Unfortunately, that staggering change is what the character needs (and what Alastair Sim, of blessed memory, gave him). Dickens is showing us that if Scrooge can change so radically, surely we can change a little to make life better for ourselves and others.

The production values of the film are very good, but the photography is rather dark and murky a lot of the time, perhaps to contrast with the crisp sunshine when Scrooge reforms.

All in all a worthy effort, but not deserving of its reputation, and still far short of the great 1951 Alastair Sim version.

This is one of the best versions out there!

[elizabeth-schrader · 10/10 · 24 August 2006]

and possibly closest to the Dickens story line. Although I find the young Ebenezer hard to watch (who's idea was that period hair, surely they could have done better than that!), Scott does an incredible job as Scrooge. His delivery of some of the lines from Dickens finally brought it to life for me. Edward Woodward is everything we expect and more of the Ghost of Christmas present. I find G.C. Scott's Scrooge much more of a believable miser than the more current version done by Patrick Stewart. The scene Christmas Morning when Scrooge realizes he hasn't 'missed it', is enough to convince one that Scott knows how to act versus overact. He's phenomenal here. Nearly the entire cast is incredible. The Tiny Tim in this version of The Christmas Carol is a little tough to look at, almost too sweet. Still the music and the scenery make this a must watch every holiday. Enjoy!

Classic, a Christmas Jem of a must see for the season

[barrwatts · 8/10 · 18 December 2015]

Exceptional acting. George C. Scott's center stage personality wasn't overcoming nor weak. Rarely does a TV movie get so many points of movie artistry correct. Some camera movements were wobbly, however they were not objectionable. Family safe, some of the graveside scenes are a little dark, but not in visual or any language, just in a screeching sound with the last sprit. This story flows with the excellent editing and support actors. It is on my 5 movie list for the Christmas season. I have not seen this movie in the blue ray section, would consider the superior picture versus a typical DVD. Somehow I couldn't place the actress playing Mrs. Cratchet, her voice was familiar, Susannah York. Read in the IMDb she died of cancer, a real loss.

Classic

[Michael_Elliott · 28 February 2008]

Christmas Carol, A (1984)

**** (out of 4)

George C. Scott plays Scrooge in this made for TV version of the classic Dickens story. I've seen quite a few of these films based on the famous story and I think this one here has become my favorite. This is an incredibly beautiful, eerie and very touching version of the story, which is pitch perfect from start to finish. What really separates this film from other versions is the terrific look, which really feels authentic and sets up the story well. Every single scene is full of wonderful detail and the colors, cinematography and lighting are perfect throughout. Another wonderful thing are the performances, which are all brilliant from Scott to the smallest person in the film. Scott really does a great job in the role and he perfectly captures the coldness of the character and he brilliantly pulls off the final act of his breakdown and new life. The supporting cast is equally great with Frank Finlay as Marley's Ghost, Angela Pleasence as Ghost of Christmas Past, Edward Woodward as Ghost of Christmas Present, David Warner and Susannah York as Bob Cratchit and his wife and Michael Gough as Mr. Poole. The film has an incredibly warm heart and captures the morals of the story very well but it's also quite creepy during the ghost sequences.

VIEWS ON FILM review of A Christmas Carol

[burlesonjesse5 · 7/10 · 10 December 2023]

George C. Scott is a legendary actor who left us over twenty years ago. In 1984's A Christmas Carol, Scott gives a naturalistic, underplaying performance as Ebenezer Scrooge. Yeah it's in the lamb chop facial hair, the moderate plumpness, and the gruff, sort of coarse vocal delivery. He's perfectly cast as is everybody else, updating then closely, the 1951 version of Charles Dickens's classic novel. "God bless us everyone". For sho.

Now is "Christmas Carol" a perfect film to hark in the holidays, all amended to make George C. Scott look like the new Alastair Sim? No but it comes close. This flick is richly textured, dark, and genuinely scripted, giving enough streamlining as the mid-80s would solely allow. And is A Christmas Carol just another redrafting of the ten or so offerings that came before it (remember Albert Finney, Sim, and Reginald Owen?)? Yeah but so what. There are some nice touches, some new songs, troupers that look like the characters that you envision in your head, dusky hues, and a hazy, white light look that's ready-made for the almighty silly season. If it's five degrees outside and you happen to be brewing some hot cocoa, '84's smoke is the way to go.

The story of "Christmas Carol" is the same don't you know. An old curmudgeon gets visited by three ghosts on December 24th bent on getting him to change his ways and embrace the heartwarming swipe that is Xmas. A Christmas Carol clocking in at 100 minutes, well it does the whole deal in style, with scenes that are drawn-out but still faithful to what Dickens probably conceived. Sure the pic is mournful, dejected, and less giddy than its predecessors but I digress. Considering the contemporary production values, the barren looks on the actor's faces, and director Clive Donner's fascination with the fronts of caskets, I figured it was the right avenue to pursue. "Ho ho homebound."

One of the best television movies ever

[Agent10 · 8/10 · 25 April 2002]

"Telefilms" tend to fall under the pitfalls of a low budget and a hasty shooting schedule, which is why this film always tends to buck the trend.

George C. Scott embodies Ebenezer Scrooge perfectly, fully encompassing all of his cold tendencies, and still makes him a simpathetic character. The production value for this film was exceptional, never relying on boffo special effects or soundstage set-ups, yet relying on the depth and clarity of on-site shooting and strong backdrops. A movie that certainly stands alone.

Another Adaptation of a Classic Book

[auskooper · 7/10 · 2 December 2023]

I feel like the 1980 A Christmas Carol is an alright book adaptation. It is more visually appealing than the 1951 version. It is about 20 minutes longer, so the story seems a little more developed. I feel like I enjoy this version more. I paid attention more to this one. It seems just like the 1951 version just with better visuals and some parts are extended. That's mainly what I have to say about it. A Christmas Carol is a classic book, so I don't have to explain it much, a rich guy who hates Christmas gets visited by 3 ghosts and then completely changed his mind on Christmas (he was also visited by ghost of his business partner, though he isn't as recognized as the other 3)

Along with Scrooge(1951), this is my personal favourite adaptation of the timeless Christmas story

[TheLittleSongbird · 10/10 · 5 October 2010]

I was interested in seeing this version of A Christmas Carol for two primary reasons. One is that I am a huge fan of the timeless story and of the 1951 classic Scrooge with Alistair Sim. Two is that I consider George C. Scott a fine actor, having loved him in Dr Strangelove, Anatomy of a Murder and Patton. I will admit I initially worried about Scott being Scrooge, and it has nothing to do with his acting but that I worried he was too American for the role.

No fear of that really, Scott is simply brilliant as Scrooge. As fond as I am of Sim, Scott is on towering form with a perfect balance of being gruff and cantankerous and being honest and sympathetic. And he is splendidly supported by a great supporting cast, with Roger Rees outstanding and Frank Finlay a splendid Jacob Marely. But I say the standouts of the supporting cast are Edward Woodward in robust form as the Ghost of Christmas Present and David Warner perfect as the humble Bob Cratchitt. That said, it is Scott's film all the way. It is not only the cast that impresses though. The story here is beautifully told, and I agree that this is the truest adaptation to the book and I also think this is the version with the most touching Tiny Tim.

Then there is the period detail. I have seen my share of films and TV programmes that do a brilliant job recreating the Victorian atmosphere and this is no exception. The costumes are beautifully tailored, the make up is very nice, the photography is excellent and the sets and scenery are breathtaking. Nick Bicat's music is both beautiful and haunting, and gives real emotional weight to the scenes that need it, especially in the scenes with the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come. Directing wise, Clive Donner does a much better job directing than he did with his 1982 version of Oliver Twist(also starring Scott as Fagin, surprisingly good he was too seeing as Fagin is not really an easy character to play), though he directed decently then too. Here he seems more at home, and manages to create a realistic yet somewhat homely atmosphere. Plus the script was very good too and sticks to the story remarkably well.

Overall, this is a pretty darn good adaptation of a wonderful story and a wonderful film in general and well worth watching for George C.Scott's superb performance alone. 10/10 Bethany Cox

Not as sublime as I remembered

[MissSimonetta · 7/10 · 29 November 2020]

Everyone has their favorite A CHRISTMAS CAROL. This George C. Scott version is among the most beloved. Praised for its darker take on the story, many rank it the best of the hundred or so adaptations of this classic story.

When I first saw this version years ago, I enjoyed it, but rewatching it again, I found myself disappointed. For one, the arc of Scott's Scrooge feels off. People often joke that Scrooge only changes because he sees his own pitiful end should he remain a misanthropic miser, but the best versions of the story show Scrooge changing from the moment he speaks with Marley. Moments like Scott's Scrooge complaining to the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come about no one pitying him after his death just rings petulant and untrue to the character-- by that point, he's supposed to be beyond self-pity. As fine an actor as he usually is, Scott is on the whole rather one-note and gruff here, showing little of Scrooge's vulnerability beneath his misanthropy (a quality portrayed far better by Alastair Sim and Albert Finney in their respective versions), making his ultimate transformation seem less a natural outgrowth of the character and more like a given because, hey, it's A CHRISTMAS CAROL.

I also found the treatment of the story excessively grim-- it's like the distaff counterpart of versions which are too sticky sweet and sentimental. It is true that Dickens' novella is quite gothic and has its eerie moments. However, there is still a sense of festive joy to certain scenes, and this is a quality totally lacking here. Even Scrooge's redemptive glee, a scene which tends to make me grin from ear to ear in most versions, felt muted here. (However, I will add that I have to give this version props for actually presenting a Tiny Tim who looks mortally ill.)

Despite my criticisms, this isn't a terrible version. It is watchable and well-produced for a TV movie. Scott does have some inspired moments, such as his delivery of the "stake of holly in his heart line" or his interactions with the Ghost of Christmas Past. However, I just don't agree with the accolades-- for my money, the Sim version strikes that balance between gothic terror, psychological nuance, and holiday sentiment far better than this one does.

A Christmas Classic

[JRMcNelis · 10/10 · 15 December 2004]

This is simply one of the finest renditions of Dicken's classic tale. The script very accurately follows the story originally penned by Dickens, and captures a perfect balance between a film atmosphere and a play atmosphere. Viewers fond of either format will find enough of the story rooted in their presentation style of choice.

George C. Scott brings a delightfully realistic approach to the character of Scrooge, and is very convincing in the character development instigated by the visits of the ghosts. I found that he was able to win me over to the point where I sympathized with the old miser, something rarely done in other versions. The superb job done by the supporting actors add greatly to this production, which is simply the most enjoyable of all the Christmas Carol versions I have seen.

Typical lush 80s production

[ppennell2863 · 6/10 · 8 January 2022]

I have seen many versions of Scrooge/A Christmas Carol and this one is one of the better ones... Apart from one thing.

EVERYONE is so Well-fed and healthy looking.

Even 'poor' old Bob Cratchitt and his family in their clean bright and spacious home look virtually glamourous. And not as much as a patched shirt or frayed collar among them.

Even the down and outs in the tunnel look like they've never missed a meal.

Just a touch of, or nod towards, realism would have made this version so much better IMO.

misses all over the place

[zgystard · 4/10 · 3 January 2010]

There doesn't seem to be a coherent vision uniting all the performances.

Dickens' story is NOT some nuanced, psychological portrayal of Scrooge; it's closer to a fairy tale. Dickens initially paints Scrooge as totally hateful and feared by all. This is a dramatic necessity; without it, the disclosing of his past and the accomplishing of his redemption do not have anywhere near the same force. Scott interprets Scrooge TOO realistically, too early. Still worse, rather than cringing when speaking to Scrooge, Cratchit doesn't seem to be very afraid of him. The same goes for Tiny Tim when he meets Scrooge early in the film (and the novel does not explicitly describe any meeting between them).

On the other hand, Scott NEVER really seems afraid, even when he tells the last spirit he fears him more than the others. He seems perhaps dazed instead.

Roger Rees gives an annoyingly wooden performance. Tiny Tim looks not like he's weak and ill, but more like he had died and was resurrected as a zombie. The Ghost of Christmas Present berates Scrooge too early and far too much. The sound effect for the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come is over the top. And so forth.

I've only seen the entire film once, when it was originally broadcast. But I went back and checked some clips on YouTube.

One thing I came across was the dialog with Cratchit as Scrooge leaves the office. Warner's portrayal is not very good, but Scott's interpretation is subtle and well done. It would've been excellent in the context of a Scrooge previously consistently shown as much angrier if it were just a little bit harsher. It's an ultimately frustrating glimpse of what his overall performance and this film could have been.

The Sim version is my choice. It's a standard, classic interpretation.