MovieChat Forums > A Christmas Carol (1984) Discussion > Excellent version!

Excellent version!

posted 11 years ago by jmarkoff2
24 replies | jump to latest

I didn't think anyone other than Alistair Sim could hold my belief in the role of Scrooge, much less an American, but George C. Scott proved me wrong. His performance as Eb is nothing short of marvelous, with the only shortcoming being that he's not Sim, which he couldn't help. Not once did I think of him as George Patton or Buck Turgidson. Frank Finlay matches Michael Hordern as Marley. In most Christmas Carol adaptations there is new material added onto the Dickens story, and the add-ons in this one are brilliant and witty, if not as inventive as the ones in the Sim version. For once, Tiny Tim really does look small and in jeopardy of health, in contrast to the too-healthy Tims of 1938 and 1951. The only weakness is the casting of the strong and regal David Warner as the meek and maltreated Bob Cratchit. Were it not for that, this would match the 1951 version.

[–] Big_AL-96 11 years ago

It's not so much the add on's that spoil this version for me but the glaring omissions.

I agree Scott is terrific in the role, but the so is Finney. I would have liked to have seen Finney in a 'serious' dramatisation.

Where they burn books, at the end they also burn people. Heinrich Heine

[–] Traianus 11 years ago

The 1951 version sucks, but that's just my opinion.

[–] Lenny64 11 years ago

I loved this version.
George C Scott is brilliant as Scrooge.
Plus as the OP said the rest of the cast help make the film a cut above the rest

[–] northernlad 11 years ago

This is my favorite version of A Christmas Carol. I love it.

Life ain't easy when you're a Froot Loop in a world full of Cheerios.

[–] GretLocks 11 years ago

I have a few versions of "A Christmas Carol" but this is the one I tend to watch. If I have time over a given Holiday season...and run out of movies to watch, I might pull one of the others out and watch it. It's not that the others are bad in any way, it's just that I think GCS does such a great job.

[–] eljaykay1219-310-146082 11 years ago

I totally agree. I love this version. I have many different versions on DVD and I enjoy them all but the George C. Scott and Alistair Sim versions are my favorites. I just finished watching it for the second time this month. I may watch it again.

[–] Taylorfirst1 11 years ago

I agree. This is by far my favorite version. The 1951 version is second.

With great power comes great responsibility.

[–] zunzun 11 years ago

I agree it is an excellent version.

It also goes to show that the much-dreaded 'Remake', usually anathema to the film lover, can actually be an entirely positive thing which does nothing to detract from its sources, and only adds to them.

[–] crakatoot 10 years ago

To me there is no comparison. I think Scott is a million better than Sims. sims was wY to goofy. Scott seemed more like a real person

[–] First_Epistle_of_John 9 years ago

This last post is the heart of it. All other versions show the actor over playing the proverbial, shuffling old man hissing "bah!" (with the exception of Patrick Stewart, who sounded too articulate, refined and Shakespearean for Scrooge) but Scott played an actual Ebeneezer Scrooge, believably harsh, his miserly ways presented believably as shrewd business thinking.

And at the end, his change is equally believable - his change of heart and his gratitude for the second chance. The '51 version was not believable at all on this point. Scott's version is virtually the only one where I feel I'm watching an actor seriously portray a character rather than just having fun doing a metaphoric cliche.

To me, there really is no serious comparison. George C. Scott IS the definitive Ebeneezer Scrooge. Other versions are for lighthearted Christmas season warmth and fun. Scott played Scrooge at a high level.

[–] boll-weavil 8 years ago

Well actually, the reason others play Scrooge as the proverbial shuffling old man is because that's exactly what he is in the book. They are just attempting to stay faithful to the original source. When you start creating a pantomime villain like Scott's portrayal you end up missing the whole point of the book which is that Scrooge is not a nasty man by nature but a normal guy who has just gone wrong in the way that anyone could.If films insist on portraying him as a two dimensional big bad wolf you miss the gradual change in his character (or 'softening' as Dickens calls it). I appreciate why they do it. It's because it makes the final transformation more satisfying but it does then throw up problems that make the character of Scrooge look ridiculous.Why would Scrooge wander around in nice clothes if he begrudges spending money on absolutely everything ? George C Scott is done up very nicely.The real Scrooge has let himself go as greed takes hold of him. He hasn't made a conscious decision to chase wealth but just to put himself beyond the reach of the poverty he started out in.He understands the world and the iniquities in it but he is fixated on saving himself.He doesn't deny what's out there he just wishes to escape from it.Finney understood this, so did Hordern and their presentation of the character is superb and bang on what Dickens intended.Scott does well enough but by portraying the character incorrectly it dilutes the whole message of the book and reduces it to a simplistic level.

[–] Thomas-White2 9 years ago

This is my favorite version. It's the most faithful to the plotline of the book, and so much dialogue that is left out of the other versions appears here. There are some plot adjustments that help to show Scrooge's character -- such as his going to The Exchange at the end of the day -- but I appreciate them for their value.

One "character" that is missing from all the other versions that I've seen is the fog. This is an element in the book which for some reason is always left out in film and which really lends to the atmosphere of this version.

Also, I love Scrooge trying to suppress the Ghost of Christmas Past with her cap, which is actually illustrated in the book and is unique to the version (so far as I know).

The one thing I did not like was the attitude of the Ghost of Christmas Present. Bitter, cynical, even mean, angry -- he simply did not seem like Christmas personified as played by Edward Woodward.

[–] SamoanJoes 8 years ago

I think Albert Finney was the best Scrooge. He was most curmudgeonly. His curmudgeon was second to none.