Since first being published in December 1843 Charles Dickens’s story of Ebenezer Scrooge’s emotional transformation from hoarder to Ho Ho-er has been presented in many forms. A Christmas Carol has been adapted into opera, ballet, a Broadway musical and even a mime show starring Marcel Marceau. On film there have been at least 28 versions of the story and dozens more for television. This week the Reel Guys have a look at the best big screen versions of the classic story.
Richard: Mark, there is only one must-see out of all the dozens of film and TV versions of the Charles Dickens classic and that’s the 1951 Alastair Sim version. Nearly perfect in every way, it is a tale of redemption that confirms the fundamental spiritual nature of Christmas itself. In other words, it makes us feel good. Accept no substitutes. If, however, you’ve already seen it this year or you’re allergic to black and white movies, there are alternatives.
MB: Richard, you are so right. The movie HAS to be in black and white to make us feel the spirit of Dickensian deprivation. It’s the classic. But growing up in a Jewish household, it didn’t have any importance to me as a child. I discovered it much later, and was transfixed by its narrative power and perfectly gloomy mood. May I contrast this with the Jim Carrey version? Now that’s a movie with no sense of mystery, and a buffoonish interpretation of the lead character. I feel sorry for children who grow up with this bloated, CGI-laden excuse for a classic. Richard,please don’t tell me you like it!
RC: Before I saw the Jim Carrey version of A Christmas Carol I wondered why remake a story that has been done so often and so well in the past. I’ve seen it and I’m still wondering. The weirdly lifeless animation was creepy, akin to a Christmas story performed by zombies.
MB: Let me praise Bill Murray’s version “Scrooged”. It’s far from authentic, light years away from Dickens, but it makes its points in a very modern way. Bill Murray is great in it, and the writing is sharp and satirical. Setting it in the milieu of the television industry obviously changes the mood of the original, but as long as you see the movie as an interesting and successful riff upon the original story, and not as a substitute for it, it’s a great movie for the season.
RC: I agree. It’s become a must see for me every year. Although i don’t have to see The Muppets Christmas Carol every year, it is a treat to see Michael Caine as Scrooge. I also like the musical Scrooge with Albert Finney in the lead.
MB: I’ve never seen it! I sure hope they gave Tiny Tim a tap solo.
Before I saw the Jim Carrey version of “A Christmas Carol” I wondered why remake a story that has been done so often and so well in the past. I’ve seen it and I’m still wondering.
There have been at least 21 versions of the story made for the big screen and dozens more for television. Director Robert Zemeckis and his high tech bag of motion capture tricks don’t add anything to the story, in fact, occasionally his CGI actually gets in the way.
Zemeckis wisely hasn’t toyed around with the 166-year-old story. Ebenezer Scrooge (Jim Carrey) is a miserly bah humbugger who doesn’t believe in the spirit of Christmas until he is visited by three spirits—the Ghosts of Christmas Past, Present and Future—and finds salvation in their terrifying visions.
“A Christmas Carol” is Zemeckis’s third attempt at creating a film using motion capture—filming the actors and using their motions as a template to create a computer generated film—following “Polar Express” and “Beowulf.” “Polar Express” was meant to be a heart warming Christmas tale but exposed the problem with Zemeckis’s technique—dead CGI eyes. The weirdly lifeless animation was creepy, akin to a Christmas story performed by zombies. “Beowulf” was an improvement but like “A Christmas Carol” there are still kinks to be worked out. Chief among them is: Why bother with this at all?
On the plus side the CGI allows for camera moves that would otherwise be impossible—endless dolly shots through a Dickensian cityscape for example—and the Ghost of Christmas Present death scene is a spectacular scene of gothic creepiness, and is actually enhanced by the use of computer animation. On the minus side the Ghost of Christmas Future, a stand-out in the 1951 Alastair Sim version, is reduced to a show-offy platform for Zemeckis’s 3-D CGI magic.
My main complaint though, is the medium itself. Much of the animation looks great—the texture of Scrooge’s leather chair for instance—but there are enough artificial looking things—the flame in the fireplace or the steam from people’s mouths—that remind us that we’re watching flashing binary code and little else. Some of the characters are well animated but the work is inconsistent, occasionally looking photo realistic, but often not. Unlike live action or even hand drawn animation, there’s nothing that feels organic about motion capture, so the moments that are supposed to strike an emotional chord—like young Ebenezer dancing with his beautiful bride to be, or old Scrooge watching Bob Cratchit’s family deal with the loss of Tiny Tim—have little resonance.
Whatever impact the movie has, and it does have the occasional moment that engages not only the eye but the heart, could have just as easily achieved with a live action cast.
Perhaps Zemeckis should have taken the lead from one of the more famous lines from the story, “Mankind was my business,” and made the movie’s business more about mankind and less about technology.
Since first being published in December 1843 Charles Dickens’s story of Ebenezer Scrooge’s emotional transformation from hoarder to Ho Ho-er has been presented in many forms. A Christmas Carol has been adapted into opera, ballet, a Broadway musical and even a mime show starring Marcel Marceau. On film there have been at least 28 versions of the story and dozens more for television. This week the Reel Guys have a look at the best big screen versions of the classic story.
