Film Reviews: Christmas Edition 17: A Christmas Carol 2009

“If I could work my will every idiot who goes about with 'Merry Christmas' on his lips, should be boiled with his own pudding, and buried with a stake of holly through his heart!”

So my final verdict of the various versions of A Christmas Carol I have seen, in order from my favorite and what I consider the best, to the worst:

1984, 1970, 1938, 2003, 1951, Muppets, 2009

I finally watched the 2009 Disney version of A Christmas Carol. By now, I have nothing to say about A Christmas Carol, but plenty to say about this version

This version was hailed for being verbatim—word for world from the original dialogue. This is somewhat true; it is not 100% verbatim, close, but not fully. There are also a few things thrown in that did not happen in the story.

What follows is a list of everything wrong with Disney’s A Christmas Carol 2009.

First off, the main complaint that the movie was made too zany and silly is true—well, it is not very zany, but it does have the Disney feel. Also like Disney, all the children’s faces, except for Tim’s, are like fat little Cherubs and because of the CGI, I got to say, I found most of the faces really creepy and disturbing because normal people don’t look like that. Another thing that I really did not like was when the spirits and Scrooge would be traveling thru the air—I do not know, maybe it is because a few minutes before, I had had a poptart and some Coke, but those scenes made me slightly nauseous. I didn’t feel like I was actually going to vomit, but I definitely did not like how these scenes made me feel.

The best part—the real WTF moment of the film, is when Scrooge is listening to the business men casually talking about his death and one of them clearly just did some cocaine—I am not even kidding. Now I know that this was common and not even illegal at the time but what the hell was the point of putting that in there? It is completely unnecessary to the film in every way. I know that the kids watching the film will be totally oblivious to this most kids don’t know what cocaine is and it is only for a brief second but this is a kids movie, so who was it for? I understand putting subtle adult humor in kids films so that the parents will be able to enjoy it more, but this wasn’t humorous it is just “oh look, that guy just did cocaine”, I mean it is really out of nowhere.

Another thing that is totally unnecessary is the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come chasing Scrooge around the poor parts of London and then zombies come out of nowhere while he is being chased by Death, and then he shrinks for no reason! What the heck is going on?

Furthermore, the Ghost of Christmas Present dies in a really creepy way: while he is still laughing he starts to turn to dust even when he is just bones and eyeballs, he keeps laughing.

I will give the film some credit, it certainly had a few creative ideas—most of them I thought sucked—but it was creative. Jim Carrey actually does a good job portraying Scrooge; of course, he portrays practically half the characters as well. I did not like how when the ghosts would mock Scrooge for things he had said, they would imitate his face or the faces of others—it was somewhat stupid. I also feel that Zemeckis took the description of the Ghost of Christmas Past excessively literal because he looks like an actual candle. Again, creative but I did not like it. Or how the Ghost of Christmas Present traveled around with Scrooge in a spirit form of part of his house—just stupid.

I feel that even though the CGI made it easier to do many things, I think this version would have been better if it had been live action or even animated.

Overall, it is not that bad of a film—it is not my least favorite adaptation of A Christmas Carol, just the one that has the most things wrong with it and the most things I thought were bad. Therefore, in the end I give it 2.5 out of 5 for A Christmas Carol adaptation and 2.9 out of 5 as a film in general.



I guess at this point I should briefly mention another A Christmas Carol I recently watched—the 2003 version.

Not much to say about this one. Patrick Stewart plays Scrooge and he does a fairly decent job. This version is unique because like the 2009 version, it starts with Marley’s death just like in the book. I thought the affects were shoddy but the scene transitions were nice. Marley’s spirit was also different this time and I liked the portrayal of Scrooge and Isabelle’s love story. Scrooge is shown as a more sympathetic character from the beginning, more bitter and rude than an ass. The Ghost of Christmas Present showed Scrooge a prison which I have never seen in another version—I really liked the 2003 version’s Ghost of Christmas Present as well as The Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come and the scenes about death.



Film Reviews: Christmas Edition 9: Doctor Who Edition: Christmas Specials

Hello and welcome to the first of the Doctor Who storyline reviews. Each entry reviews a certain story of Doctor Who. The stories from the classic series average out to around an hour and a half each making it easy to review them like movies. The newer ones will be a bit shorter however. That is what I am doing today: the Doctor Who Christmas specials. I’m not doing the End of Time one because that one is long enough to have its own review and Christmas is barely a theme at all in that one. I will be assuming that the audience has some basic knowledge of the series and I will not go into every detail about new companions and such. When I make this blog series more official with its own page, I will add in the introduction about the series.

Doctor Who: The Unquiet Dead (Series 2, Season 1, Episode 3)

“Since when did an undertaker hold office hours? The dead don’t die on schedule”

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvDlYppRZS0

I love this episode; then again, I love most of the episodes. This is not my favorite Christmas Episode but it is one of the top three thus far. This first one actually did not air any time near December. However, it was still in the beginning of the season and I think this set that tradition of Christmas and Doctor Who as being synonymous—there are by now anyway.

The premise of this episode is that the Doctor, decided to give Rose, his latest companion, a trip to the future and a trip to the past. He tries to take her to Christmas, 1860, Naples, but as always gets it a bit wrong and ends up at Christmas, 1869, Cardiff Whales.

 Turns out that it is all right because there is trouble afoot. Gaseous creatures called the Gelf whose bodies and planet were destroyed during the Time War, have found a rift (crack in time and space that generates massive energy) which happens to located conveniently at an undertakers. The gas creatures need bodies to live properly and so try to take the dead ones. Seems harmless enough. Also along for the ride is Charles Dickens. Yes, I know, Charles Dickens at Christmas with ghosts.

That is all I am going to say on that because I do not want to give away any real spoilers to people who may have not seen it but are interested in seeing it and have come to these reviews for just that purpose.

Charles Dickens is played by Simon Callow (not Simon Cowell) who is known for his outstanding acting—in fact, counting this episode; he has played the role of Dickens five times in various films. I love his performance and he really steals the show.

The episode is sad, heartfelt, does have a happy ending, and as with most Doctor Who episodes, has its comedic moments. I especially like these Christmas episodes which take place in the past because there is something fundamentally nostalgic about the holidays where people typically look back and go back to very old traditions, most which come from Victorian England.

I am not sure how to rate episodes of show like this one that I love so much. The camera work is done like a Masterpiece Theatre episode which I think is rather clever. It would be hard to rate them by how much I like them, it is much easier to rate the Classic Series or whole seasons so I guess I will not rate the new individual episodes. This episode is written by long time Doctor Who writer Mark Gatiss who for years wrote several Doctor Who books, since the reboot has written several fantastic episodes, and has even acted on several of them.

Doctor Who: The Christmas Invasion (Series 2, Season 2, Episode 1)

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxnUWiRchGk

“Don’t you think she looks tired?”

This is the first official Christmas special and I love this episode, mainly because I love David Tennant as the Doctor, I liked Christopher Eccleston as well, but there is just something about Tennant, also I find it ironic that the tenth person to play the Doctor has the last name of Tennant.

The doctor has just regenerated and for those of you who don’t know, regeneration is something that Time Lords can do to cheat death that mostly revolves around a specific technology that harnesses the power of their world. Typically, a Time Lord can only regenerate twelve times. However, the Doctor can regenerate hundreds of times more because when his planet was destroyed, he acquired all of the regenerative powers of the all the dead Time Lords. When a Time Lord is dying every cell in their body will change and so they will have a new body. However, the process does not change who the person is and they retain all their memories. The first few hours or more after regenerating, a Time Lord will be disorientated, not know who or what he is, and have fluctuations in personality. However, the Time Lord is essentially the same person. While watching the show you can sometimes act out the scenes in your head with previous actors who played the Doctor and they still fit. The Doctor may change slightly or greatly depending, but some things about him will never change. Regeneration is allegorical for the changes that people constantly go thru as a result of their experiences, even though they are the same person underneath, they have different attitudes towards things and different likes and dislikes. The nature of the death also determines the regeneration because it is also advanced evolution where the next body should be able to more easily survive the thing that caused their previous deaths and the nature of a death can alter personality slightly.

Moving on to the episode. The Doctor lands on earth Christmas Eve and is not himself, like always, something has gone wrong with his regeneration and so he is confined to bed for most of the episode. Britain has sent out a probe to Mars that has plaque of various samples of Earth life and culture. However, it does not make it to Mars because it is intercepted by a giant ship. Turns out these aliens are hostile and much steeped in tradition fighting and war styles. However, the Doctor as always rises to save the day.

This is certainly one of the more Christmassy episodes. It has Christmas music (Slade—Merry Christmas Everybody) and even a Christmas Song written for the Doctor (Song for Ten). There are robot Santas and even a killer Christmas tree. Also, let us not forget that no Christmas is complete without a Christmas dinner.

I really enjoy this episode and this is the one that really made Doctor Who a part of British Christmas.

Doctor Who: The Runaway Bride (Series 2, Season 3, Episode 1)

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_He_esJqWg&feature=related

This episode really does not have much of a Christmas element to it….I honestly do not know why I am reviewing this one now. Well, it does have the robot Santa’s again.

The Doctor has gone lost his\first companion since the reboot of the show, that is reboot not remake, all of the Doctor from 1963 and up is cannon with the new series…even that horrible 90’s movie…but I will review that for New Years. The co-star for this episode is none other than Catherine Tate, the comedian, who is playing Donna Noble.

Last season ended with a bride standing in the TARDIS (Time And Relative Dimensions In Space) for no known reason. This is cleared up in this Christmas special. Donna has been being fed a liquid over the course of several months that is an outdated form of energy that is only found these days in the Doctor’s TARDIS. That is how she was sucked into it—the particles of the energy magnetized. Turns out it was so last of an old race of anthro-spider-creatures could rise out of the earth. Donna ends up saving the Doctor from himself once again proving that he is better off when he is not alone

The episode is fun but season three is my least favorite season of the new series.

Doctor Who: Voyage of the Damned (Series 2, Season 4, Episode 1)

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcqHcXAuhsQ

“Of all the people to survive, he's not the one you would have chosen, is it? But if you could choose, Doctor, if you could decide who lives and who dies that would make you a monster”

This episode is tragic but also fun and heartwarming which I suppose is typical if Doctor Who. Now gone thru two companions he is paired up with the very cute Kylie Minogue. Kylie was actually originally planned to be the Doctor’s next companion for season 4. However, after Tennant and Tate did a little comedic special together that did really well, the producers decided to bring back Donna as a full time character. This disappointed me. Don’t get me wrong, I love the character of Donna, however, the show hadn’t had an alien companion (Minogue plays the character of Astrid Peth from the planet Stowe) since the early days of the fifth Doctors (Peter Davison) reign and it would have been cool and creative to have an alien companion again after so long.

The premise of this episode is that like last time we ended with a cliffhanger except instead of a bride in his TARDIS, large cruise liner crashes into it and is sticking thru it because the doctor forgot to put up his shields. We also see that a life preserver reads “Titanic”

Come to find out it is not the actual Titanic but a space ship cruise liner that has the intended purpose of exploring cultures of lesser-advanced worlds, like the earth and their traditions, like Christmas.

There is an evil scheme to sink the ship, crashing it onto the earth, killing everyone on board and all the people on the Earth. This really is not a spoiler since this is somewhat obvious to anyone over 15, that the person behind all this is the owner of the cruise line company, Max Capricorn.

Also, an interesting fact, the actor who plays Mr. Cooper (Clive Swift), who is known best for his character on Keeping Up With Appearances, has been on Doctor Who before. He played Jobel in Revelation of the Daleks back in 1985.

(Funny how, Fox has a problem with the Muppets portraying capitalists as evil villains but no problems with this—probably because it is British but still,  Doctor Who each year has been getting steadily more popular in the USA specifically there has been a huge rise in the last three years.)

This episode is more Christmas themed than Bride and even has a Christmas song like Invasion called The Stowaway. This song is actually quiet old. If I am not mistaken, it is an old traditional Christmas song from Ireland that until Doctor Who had not had an actual recording. There are also killer Christmas Angels. The episode is powerful for lovers of Tennant and lovers of the classic series as this episode has many elements from the old days, most of which are subtle but a few really hit you in the face.

Doctor Who: The Next Doctor (Series 2, Season 4.5, Episode 1)

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqhKwTlfsls&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL31A9D5AF12CCB25E

“Ladies and Gentlemen! I know that man— that Doctor on high! And I know that he has done this deed a thousand times. But not once, no sir, not once— not ever!—has he been thanked. But no more as I say to you on this Christmas morn, "Bravo, sir! Bravo!"”

This is another of my favorite Christmas episodes, again, I think it has something to do with it being in Victorian times—taking place almost two decades before Unquiet Dead in the year 1851.

The premise is that the Doctor runs into someone else calling himself the Doctor who knows of a few things only the Doctor who know, so the Doctor assumes this is one of his future regenerations—the next doctor. The enemies they face off this time are the Cybermen.

The Cybermen were originally allegorical for the 50’s western concept of communism but evolved past that. Cybermen have had several shapes and designs. The most recent one is a robot body with a human brain. Like the original alien Cybermen, the concept was laid out with good intentions: to take away the pain and suffering of emotions, physical pain and differences. Cybermen take away gender, class, religion, race, and age so that everyone is equal. However, they are a hive mind typically and have an emotional inhibitor so that they do not realize what they are because if they did it would drive them insane.

They are up to their old tricks trying to “upgrade” the world and this time are building a giant Steamman to make it easier to take over the world. If you are a fan of steam punk, this episode is for you!

I particularly like the ending.

Also, if you notice, every Christmas episode thus far, has at one point played God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen in the background.



Doctor Who: A Christmas Carol (Series 2, Season 5, Episode 1)

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_KJG5w91cE

“Half way out of the dark”

You all know how much I love the story of A Christmas Carol and this version is no exception, in fact, it is a very clever and creative reimagining of the story.

Amy and Rory (the doctor’s latest companions) having gotten married at the end of the previous episode, are on their honeymoon. Problem is, the cruise space ship that they are on, called the Orient Express, is having a bit of trouble crash landing on the nearby planet because there is a machine that controls the cloud layer for some reason and it is owned and operated by a very mean and bitter old man called Cazran Sardic, our sci-fi Scrooge equivalent. The reason he is such a warped man is that his father beat him and was a cruel, shrewd, power hungry man. Now, something else about this episode that is exciting other than the fact it is a play on A Christmas Carol is that Cazran is played by none other than the great Michael Gambon. For those of you who do not know, Gambon has had many great roles big and small. Off the top of my head, I can think of: a Vogon in the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy movie, Dumbledore in the Harry Potter movies 3-6, Bean, in Fantastic Mr. Fox, the newspaper editor in Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, the crazy general in Toys, and a cannibal in The Book of Eli.

Since the Doctor has a time machine, it is very easy to change and show Cazran his past, present and future. The past is primarily the Doctor going back to Cazran’s childhood and being there as a role model since he had none and giving him good memories and fun adventures in the TARDIS with a girl, Abigail who was frozen, alongside others in Sardic’s basement. Cazran’s father runs a loan business just like Scrooge, a business that Cazran will take over, and for collateral, he takes people. The Doctor unfreezes her every Christmas to spend time with Cazran. Eventually, Cazran’s age catches up to Abigail’s and they fall in love. However, an unfortunate circumstance keeps them apart and undoes all the good work the Doctor had done.

The present is a hologram of Amy showing Cazran what is happening on the ship and all the lives that will die because of him. For the future, the Doctor shows the child Cazran the future Cazran and how he has almost become exactly like his father.

The episode of course ends the way A Christmas Carol does with Cazran a new man and a relatively happy but slightly sad ending with a fantastic song.

This is my favorite Doctor Who Christmas special. It is very creative, the cinematography is fantastic, Gambon is amazing as usual, and the affects are great.

Doctor Who Christmas Special 2011:

This year’s episode is another Doctor Who adaptation of a classic story. Last year it was A Christmas Carol, this year it is The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The episode is titled The Doctor, The Widow, and the Wardrobe, and the trailer can be found here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSiULL4wCKg

You can be sure I will be watching it and will immediately add a review for it right here.



Film Reviews: Christmas Edition 5: A Christmas Carol Musicals: Scrooge (1970) + The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992)

Hello all. Today I am doing two movie reviews that are very related and will probably be relatively short—in fact I had planned to combined them into one blog post but I’m not sure yet I want to do that. The movies I am reviewing are the two musical versions of A Christmas Carol. The 1970 version called Scrooge, which is my dad’s favorite version, and The Muppet Christmas Carol.

Scrooge:

I just watched this, this morning on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fLB0vmCoPU)

I have fallen in love with this version. Why can’t life be like a musical where everyone just breaks out into song and dance any time anything happens or needs to be explained?

As I said, this is my dad’s favorite version and I can see why. This version does have a few minute differences such as little things happening in different orders, things like that. It is around two hours long but since it is a musical that is understandable. All the actors play their characters to the letter and are all convincing as well as highly accurate portrayals of those characters. I particularly love this version’s Ghost of Christmas Present, but then again he was always my favorite spirit. The actor who plays Marley seems to also have some background as a dancer—I am basing this off how he moves on screen. The movie took some creative liberties as well such as, while on the subjects of ghosts, the Ghost of Christmas Past is female in this version as if usually, however, she does not resemble the angel that she is usually depicted as. She is more dressed like someone’s wealthy great aunt. The movie even jokes about its own creative decisions by giving Scrooge the line “you don’t look like a ghost”

In addition, The Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come has one of the greatest scenes. First off, the song “Thank You Very Much” is great. But also, the movie real plays with the idea of this spirit being the Grim Reaper. We never see what he looks like under the cloak except for the hands which several times are also wearing black gloves, but here we actually at one point see the skeletal face of Death. This is also the version in which Scrooge is sent to Hell as part of his possible future. This is the only version I have ever seen this in. There is a reference to this scene in the Disney Characters version of A Christmas Carol that my girlfriend saw a few weeks ago but other than that, this scene is rare. I really enjoyed this scene for its entire creativeness. Also, at first while watching this movie I had low expectations—i thought that turning this story into a musical would take a great deal of the seriousness away from it bur my skepticism quickly vanished and was replaced by giddiness—that is the best way I can describe the feeling. After watching this, I was humming and skipping my way thru the morning!

I really recommend this version—I cannot really compare it to the others since it is a different type of film but I love it and thus far, my least favorite version—but still good film, is the 1951 version. The musical version gets 5 out of 5 for a musical (there was not one song I didn’t enjoy), 4.9 for A Christmas Carol adaptation, 5 out of 5 for a Christmas movie, and 4.75 out of 5 for a film in general.



There is less to say about the Muppet version. It came out not to long after the unfortunate end to Jim Henson’s death at a relatively young age. Now I love the Muppets, I really do, in fact, I am going to see the newest movie tonight and I might do a blog post on it.

I like most of the songs in this but frankly, I feel that for once the Muppets kind of take away from the actual plot. Don’t get me wrong, I mean the message of A Christmas Carol is still delivered effectively, but for me it is slightly too silly—I like silly and I like the Muppets but I don’t think it worked as well as Muppet Treasure Island or The Great Muppet Caper. However, this version way better than the Muppet Wizard of Oz.

Scrooge is played by the great Michael Caine, which does give the movie points; however, it is not the greatest interpretation of Scrooge I have ever seen. I know this is meant to be a fun version and it is. I mean I still like the movie and think it is entertaining. There are some really funny moments in it such as Sam the Eagle playing young Scrooge’s headmaster and great puns abound.

Most of the Muppets performances in this however, do not live up to the characters they are portraying except of course for Kermit. Kermit plays Cratchit and does a wonderful version—I mean fantastic! He actually, in my opinion, steals the show even from Michael Caine.

There is really nothing more to say and I have to get ready to head out for dinner early so we can get to the movie. Here is my rating:

As a Muppet Movie: 3 out 5

As a Musical: 3.5 out of 5

As a Christmas Carol: 2 out of 5

As a Christmas film: 3.25 out of 5

As a Film in general: 3 out of 5

Film Reviews Christmas Edition 3: A Christmas Carol 1984

“There’s more of gravy than of grave about you”

Well I watched the 1984 version today and this was the first time I have ever seen the whole thing—usually I just catch bits and pieces of it on AMC each year. I have decided that this at the very least ties for my favorite with the 1938 version.

These reviews of A Christmas Carol are getting more and easier to write because there is less and less to say on the actual story and more just on the various differences in each film.

The 1984 one seems to be nigh verbatim and it is also a bit longer than the other versions I have reviewed. 1938 clocks in at 79 minutes while 1951 adds seven extra minutes of Marley back-story subplot that did not appear in the book, as well as touching on Belle (Scrooges true love) briefly, making it 86 minutes. However the 1984 version gives us another extra 14 minutes of amazing.

George C. Scott does an outstanding performance as Scrooge. Like with Sim, the reactions are very realistic but there are no examples of over acting the dramatic scenes. Scott is one of the most convincing Scrooges I have ever seen and he really steals the show.

This version focuses a great deal on the character of Scrooge as was with the 1951 version, but it also touches on Cratchit as well.

1984 version is much darker and serious than the previous two versions—it is going for realism and trying to be true to the original story. The cinematography in this version is also wonderful—and I mean all of it: sound, lighting, camera angles, affects, etc. The most impressive part about all of this is that this version was a made for TV version!

There is not actually that many differences between this one and the other two I reviewed. It is as if they took the best things from both those versions and all the verbatim elements from both those versions and put them together to make this one.

In addition, I do love the 1938 one and it makes me feel happy to watch it but the one that really pulls me in and gets me fully emotionally invested in the characters as well as the plot. This one moved me and a few times almost brought me to tears even though I know the story by heart and have seen several versions of it many times over the years including the last two weeks.

I do want to say one thing on some socio-political redeeming value other than the obvious we all know. If you notice, almost every year that a popular version of this tale comes out, it is during an economic crisis in a major first world country of either a corporate nature or government nature, which I think is fantastically ironic and beautiful if it is simply coincidence.

I give A Christmas Carol 1984 5 out of 5 stars across the board just like with the 1938 version except this version is better in my opinion even if only by a little.

Film Reviews: Christmas Edition 2: A Christmas Carol 1951

“Christmas is a poor excuse to pick a man’s pocket every twenty-fifth of December”

I went to the mall today to finish my Christmas shopping and I also picked up a few things for myself such as A Christmas Carol 1951 and A Christmas Carol 1984—like I said in the last review, I love this story!

I wanted to start with some more in depth looking at parts of the story that I did not go over last time. I want to take a moment to further examine the ghosts. I stated in the last review that the ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future, are represented by an angel, Santa Claus, and the Grim Reaper respectively. However, they also represent a few other concepts. The ghost of Christmas Past represents “thankfulness”, Present represents “giving”, and the future ghost represents “guilt”. These three concepts are important to humanity and to lead a good life according to Dickens and so Scrooge must learn these concepts in order to change. Speaking of change, we all know that the ghosts are there to help Scrooge change but if we break it down the only spirit really important to making him change is that of Present and a bit of past. However, as stated, Scrooge must learn all the lessons to change fully and for good. That is why each spirit has a job to do other than give Scrooge their concepts. The ghost of the past is intended to prepare Scrooge for the change and to tell him he needs to change. The job of Present is to also tell him he needs to change and to cause him to change. Finally, the spirit of the future solidifies this change and makes it permanent—seals the deal, if you will.

Next, I would like to touch briefly on the characters of Bob Cratchit and Fred. These two characters are shown as the most decent human beings out of all the other characters who truly have to spirit of Christmas within them. Both of them take the time to be kind to Scrooge in their own ways despite Scrooge not deserving their kindness. Cratchit asks to bless and pray for Scrooge during their Christmas dinner’s Grace. His whole family (except for Tim) thinks this is stupid and that Scrooge should not be mentioned on Christmas, as he is such a fowl creature. However, Cratchit reminds his family that everyone needs love especially those with none in their hearts. Fred likewise, at his Christmas party, gives a toast to Scrooge. Like Cratchit’s family, the guests all boo at this idea. Fred then explains how they should feel sorrier for Scrooge than disdain even though he is wealthy because he does not utilize any of his wealth, not even for himself and is therefore sadder of a man than a poor one in the end. These actions show us that it is important to care for all of humanity even those jerks that are rude, disrespectful, and obnoxious.

We all know the story so the only kind of review I can do of this movie is to point out differences and the good and bad things.

This version is very focused on Scrooge as a character, which is great because it is after all, all about him. Even the original title of this version was Scrooge. However, unlike th1938 version, it focuses way less on Cratchit and though it was not pertinent to the plot per se, I did enjoy that. This version is widely seen as the greatest primarily for Alastair Sim’s (Scrooge) performance. Here is what I have to say about that. Sim was typically a comedic actor, this was his first serious role, and so he was probably quite nervous. He did the comedic parts really well, such as when he awakes of Christmas morning. In addition, Sim’s reactions to events are more realistic than Owens were for example, compare Scrooge’s reactions during the Marley ghost scene in both the 1938 and 1951 versions. However, that being said, though his reactions are more realistic, they are often over exaggerated as if this was the theatre production of A Christmas Carol. That is not too big of a problem though and many people enjoy a performance like that. Also, as I said, this was his first dramatic role so Sim deserves a bit of grace.

Here are some differences to look out for in the film, some are creative, some are silly, and some do not really matter. These are all at least different from the 1938 version. When the bells ring to announce Marley’s appearance, the bells only ring on the spiritual plain rather than the physical world. The ghost of Marley is preceded by lion roars, which I have never seen before. Fred is already married when he goes to visit Scrooge Christmas Eve rather than being engaged. Scrooge is much more of a bastard in this version than I have ever seen him—he is almost evil in the beginning. Scrooge is usually just meant to be bitter, resentful, judgmental, angry, and rude. The Ghost of Christmas Past in this version is played by a man when I have always seen it played by a young girl. The time travel montage is a bit silly but very creative considering the year this was made. Scrooge and his true love are actually married in this version for a time where in all the other versions I have seen she leaves him before they get married. Finally, Tim is slightly older in this than in the 1938 version.

This version has a slower pace even though it is only seven minutes longer than the 1938 one. However, this a several of the differences are there because this film is really trying to focus on Scrooge the man and on the great deal of character development he goes thru—this film makes it a total polarized character, going from the worst type of human being to the world’s greatest philanthropist and humanitarian. Now that is the story of course but like I said Scrooge usually does not start out as someone nigh evil.

The DVD I picked up is the 60^th Anniversary Diamond Edition which means it is backed with special features and so after watching those I may return and add a bit more to this review.

Overall, I did enjoy this version but I personally like the 1938 one better. I can see why this one is considered so great, however. I give it 4.5 out of 5 stars for A Christmas Carol adaptation, 4.0 out of 5 as a Christmas movie, and 2.75 as a film in general.

Film Reviews Christmas Edition: A Christmas Carol 1938

“If they are going to die then they should go ahead and do it and decrease the surplus population!”



I am starting the month of my Christmas film reviews with the 1938 version of A Christmas Carol. I know mostly everyone knows the story and the many film adaptations spanning from 1901-2009 are all more or less the same, but I just love A Christmas Carol in all its forms I have seen thus far. This one is my favorite out of the ones I have seen, however my roommate informs me that the 1951 version is the best, which I have not seen.

For those of you who know the story, you can skip down to the review of the film, for those of you who are unfamiliar with the story; I will give a brief summary. Unless you would like to read my summary, feel free to do so.

Charles Dickens published A Christmas Carol December 17^th, 1843 and is widely regarded as one of his best works, personally my favorite.

The story follows Ebenezer Scrooge who is a miser that has lost all the meaning of life. He is relatively the wealthiest man in the area but never spends a dime. His perspectives are out of whack and his life circumstances turned him bitter, rude, and mean. One could say it is mostly the fault of his father. To save soul, the ghost of his long dead business partner Marley, visits him to tell him that he will be having an out of body experience during the night (Christmas Eve) via the visitation of three spirits. The first spirit, of Christmas Past, is an angel who comes at the stroke of 1 AM, the ghost of Christmas Present is essentially Santa Claus who comes at the stroke of 2 AM and embodies the spirit of Christmas. The last ghost is of course the ghost of Christmas Yet to Come who is the Grim Reaper. He comes either at the stroke of 3 AM or when he decides to.

This may be the first time that the representation of death also symbolizes the death of an old life and the birth of a new one. Since then, Death has been seen in other mediums as helping to give people who need a wakeup call, a bit of perspective. This can be clearly seen most popularly in the movie Click and in an episode of Family Guy.

So, what makes the 1938 version different from the rest? Obviously not much. However, there are a few noticeable differences. One key difference is that the Ghost of Christmas Past does not show Scrooge his old love that did not come to marriage because of starting of his miserly ways, which back fires sending him into more bitter resentment for the world at large and caused him to be more reclusive. Another difference in this adaptation is that Cratchit is fired for accidentally\throwing a snowball at Scrooge, which I have not seen in any other version yet.

The movie is quite creative in keeping the realism and magic in the film. The affects are top notch for the day and some of the cinematography is ground breaking. The message of the story is easily understood. Though many of the lines deviate from the original dialogue, much of it is kept in. Furthermore, the only movie\version that is verbatim (line for line from the original story dialogue wise) is the most recent Disney Version by Robert Zemeckis starring Jim Carey.

I really love this version (1938); a big reason is that it is the oldest version that is over an hour and quite entertaining. In addition, it is the closest version to being a hundred year anniversary since the story came out. I do enjoy old movies and this is by far ones of the oldest favorites of mine.

Interesting fact: The first time I saw this version was on TCM years ago, TCM loves to do introductions for their movies. In the introduction for this one, we find out that Reginald Owen was not the first pick for the lead role. In fact, it was intended to star Lionel Barrymore who for years had played Scrooge in several radio broadcasts. However, by the time the movie was in production, Barrymore was confined to a wheelchair. He did however get to host the trailer for the movie. Reginald Owen does do a fantastic job and does the character of Scrooge justice. Also, in my opinion, Peter Boyle is a dead ringer for Reginald Owen and ironically, Boyle has a small role in a different Christmas movie, The Santa Clause. Six degrees of separation works for everything I guess.

I rate this movie 5 out of 5 stars. It is classy, it is pretty, it is fun, entertaining, comedic, dramatic, and of course heartwarming. This rating sticks whether we are talking A Christmas Carol adaptations, Christmas movies in general, or film in general. No matter how I look at it, this film gets 5 for 5.