A Christmas Carol

There are many fine versions of "A Christmas Carol" out there to chose from, but this one is my favorite. Patrick Stewart is excellent (as always) in the role, sweeping you up and into the story. A great version for both young and old. The rest of the cast shined as well, especially Joel Grey.

It has been estimated that there have been over 1,000 versions (since the first 1910 silent one) of this timeless classic, and I know that a lot of people credit the Alistair Sim version as being most faithful to the original text--while factually it is far-and-away among the LEAST faithful to the Dickens' tale. I don't say that to disparage Sim's version as I find it a thoroughly enjoyable and well done classic. That said, however, its divergence from the original text begins with the title "Scrooge" instead of the actual name "A Christmas Carol". It changes Belle's name to Alice, it has her ending up as a lonely spinster working in some poorhouse for sick elderly instead of happily married and mother to the children Scrooge might have called his own; Fan is anything but "little" and the abandoned boy at school is hardly a "boy"... the list of other deviations goes on and on for this alleged "truest to the original" version; but that is NOT what this critique is about--it's about Stewart's version; yet I felt it necessary to mention that to make my point. I am a Dickens purist, and while I enjoy ALL of the versions of this classic (and the Sim, and Reginald Owen and George Scott versions are among my favorite --as is the Mr. Magoo version among the many animated ones), THIS one (with Patrick Stewart is far and away the very BEST if you want to see it as close to the way Dickens wrote it as possible. That said, it DOES have its senseless deviations. For one inexplicable thing the producers saw fit to change the name of his sister Fan, to "Fran" (I really think that is the silliest thing they did and by far the most egregious infidelity with no justification beyond using a more common name). At least she IS a little girl... and Scrooge a little boy at the time. The book DOES begin with a brief snippet from Marley's funeral but only to get in the lines about Marley being "dead as a doornail" followed by a reference to it's not being the "deadest bit of ironmongery" (directly from the text)... then quickly changes to the scene in Scrooge's counting house, with Cratchit busily at work in his little tank while the mercenary Scrooge watches greedily. From this point on the movie follows the actual story with remarkable accuracy. It even shows the ghost of Christmas Present as a MALE!!! as opposed to the Politically Correct penchant of so many producers to make one of the Spirits a female (despite the FACT that the Ghost of Christmas Present refers to his 1800 plus BROTHERS). Joel Grey is perfect as the diminutive Spirit who looks both old and young at the same time. The Spirit of Christmas Present also is great, and takes Scrooge to all those places, (the lighthouse, the ship at sea, down in the "bowels" of the Earth, to the almshouses and prisons), and later we actually see him AGE... something NO other version I've seen depicts. After his frightful trek with the Ghost of Christmas yet to Come (NOT the Ghost of Christmas Future--never mentioned in the book)... he more accurately reacts... we see him go to church (not shown in any other)... and his pacing in front of the nephew's house before dashing for the door. Little things like this make it just perfect among ALL versions. -- OH! And Cratchit actually DOES live in a hovel... truly a poor residence, and is skinny and looks the Cratchit we envision while reading the tale. And again unlike all other versions, depicts Bob going upstairs to say one last farewell to Tiny Tim who is obviously waked in his bed after his demise--another thing NO other version I know of shows. Okay... I'm not going to go on any further and doubt many will have read this far; but I was only too happy to critique this version simply because I'm always excited when I see a movie that, unlike most, is truly faithful to the actual text. Beyond the irksome moniker of "Fran" and a few changing of words to a more modern lexicon hither and yon... this made for TV movie is without peer as a screen adaptation of the most filmed and most timeless Christmas Classic ever put to pen--or on screen. No doubt -- Five stars and a big thumbs UP! Loved it!

I had almost finished my original, in-depth attempt at this review when my computer crashed. So I will try again. I own more than one version of Dickens' classic, A Christmas Carol, and the 1984 version with George C. Scott has always been my favorite. I'm happy to say that this version is at least an equal to that. I can't say that it is better (for reasons I will discuss below), but it certainly adds a competitive flair to my Christmas movie library. Positive points include: First off, Patrick Stewart is, as one might expect, positively brilliant as Ebenezer Scrooge. He doesn't just *play* the part. He IS the part and, for 70 glorious minutes, you forget that he has ever been anyone but Scrooge. The supporting cast is well chosen, from the most seen to the "minor" roles we could not do without. Richard Grant is everything one could ask for in Bob Cratchit, and Ian McNeice's Fezziwig made me smile uncontrollably. David Hugh Jones showed remarkable restraint by not clouding the story with Hollywood's obsessive need for overwhelming special effects. The scene-to-scene transitions are relatively flawless, and definitely not the cheesy transitions of yesteryear (although I personally enjoy some of those cheesy reels every bit as much now as the first time I saw them). Less positive points (not necessarily negative, just my own preference) include: Bernard Lloyd's Marley appears much more human than Frank Finlay's 1984 rendition (and much less chilling), but I found him wanting in the ghostly visitation department. I think that Finlay's portrayal was more touching, more desperate to help Scrooge find his misplaced humanity. That is not to take away from Lloyd's performance. He is quite good, but his words ring a little hollow for all the emotion in his expression, like a career criminal trying to convince the parole board he is a changed man. Likewise lacking is the Ghost of Christmas Present. Of course, I don't believe that anyone will ever top Edward Woodward's portrayal. From the booming laugh and gaiety marking his arrival to his prediction of Tiny Tim's future to the moment he lifts his robe to display the children of mankind, Ignorance and Want, Woodward nailed it. In this version, the Ghost of Christmas Present (portrayed by Desmond Barrit) becomes gaunt and hollow-eyed, a wheezing harbinger of doom. Here is Christmas Spirit with one foot in the grave and the other on ice. Yes, I realize that the Spirit of Christmas Present grew noticeably older as the night wore on, but this version went to the extreme. Ignorance and Want, the "children of mankind" hidden under the robe of the Ghost of Christmas Present, were also extreme. There was something compelling about the way the pair stood - silent, abject, and defeated - in the 1984 version. Dickens wrote: "They were a boy and girl. Yellow, meagre, ragged, scowling, wolfish; but prostrate, too, in their humility." The hissing, pawing pair of this new film are a bit over the top for my liking. As at least one other reviewer mentioned, this version is a bit too clean. The scenery lacks the grittiness of the earlier versions.

My favorite Christmas Movie: Cable has not shown it this year and it's not on Demand either, so I bought it. Patrick Stewart is perfect for this Movie. I recommend it and a great Gift for any Christmas Movie enthusiast!!

I'd like the movie. It's a little different the '38, '51 and '84 versions but the same. Sir Patrick Stewart does a great job. The movie come in on time and in good condition. It's the 4th one I have and I enjoy each and everyone and them

Christmas carol DVD with Patrick Stewart was excellent.

I've always loved Dickens' Christmas Carol and this filming is my absolute favorite among all the filmings.

Una delle versioni più belle mai fatte, ma non capisco come sia possibile che non viene venduto anche in lingua italiana. Fino a pochi anni fa veniva trasmesso su Canale 5 in italiano, ma non capisco la mancanza di una versione in italiano. Se mai venisse venduta consiglio chiunque di acquistarla, è veramente un film da vedere.

Whilst watching I kept thinking there is something not right about this version of Dickens Classic story. The simple fact is that it was made for an American audience and unfortunately it comes across in the film. Stewart's performance is reasonable, but for someone who has played the part of Scrooge over a number of years I anticipated better. The Ghost of Christmas past looks more like a camp fairy on a Christmas tree rather than a phantom from a bygone Christmas. I don't think I'll be going back to watch this version, which is a pity as the story is great.