A Christmas Carol

I don't even know where to begin. The whole production is very amateurish, and though most lines are directly from Dickens, they are edited quite heavily so that many passages are almost unrecognizable. I'm not sure if it was a question of budget, or talent, but this came off quite badly. It was only $2 online, so I streamed it. And now I want my $2 back.

Dickens titled his novella A Christmas Carol in prose Being a Ghost Story of Christmas and that is exactly what this atmospheric adaptation delivers. Sure its cinematography is a tad dark, so was London in 1843. Yes the dialog is Shakespearian. At least the filmmakers tried something new. The acting is excellent throughout and the script is probably the most faithful to the original manuscript of any incarnation heretofore produced. In time this little gem will be re-appraised. And God bless us everyone for being opened minded enough to give it a chance.

This adaptation tries so hard to me avant garde and full of "atmosphere" that misses out on effectively actually telling the story. It quotes much of the original novella, even including the narration (much rewritten), but and with so many cut-aways to fast moving storm clouds (much overused in overlays as well) and echoed voices in Scrooge's visions, that it is obvious that the director is trying to remake this 150 year old story with the atmosphere of a modern ghost/horror story. He does not pull it off effectively.

Too much emphasis on atmosphere, not enough on the story. While the acting is respectable, the direction and cinematography are awful...a great story poorly retold.

I've seen many versions of this story and was encouraged by the description of this being one of the darker treatments. But it was like they weren't really trying. Important lines were skipped, dialog was only one-sided, many details were missing, such as Marley's ghost talking about the chains he wore, but you couldn't see any. Or bed curtains being confused with window curtains. Way too many parts were clips shown earlier in the movie to fill the space. So much more could have been made by the creepy parts. The small cast didn't help either. No parties, no rooms of people, Fezziwig's and Fred's had just 3 people. The acting was wooden and everyone's eyes were unemotional, with the one exception of Bob Cratchit. Scrooge wasn't transformed except he stopped acting so angry. So disappointing.

The music was good, though, so that was appreciated.

Where do I begin? First, nobody like a good Christmas Carol better than I do. I've read the book, Alister Sim, Seymor Hicks, Reginald Owen have good movie versions. Fredrick March.. eh.. Geo. C. Scott's was pretty good. Did not care for the musical, or the 're-imagining' versions. I like my Carol English and Dickensian. The Muppets was pretty good, too. I even like the motion capture Jim Carry version. But, my personal favorite is Captain Picard's Christmas Carol. Fabulous! This one? It has several problems. It has a real feel of a film made in the 1970s. Effects are awful, the music is WAY to loud, sometime drowning out the acting. Which is not difficult, because most of it is performed without any feeling at all. It's difficult to even pay attention. Any scene that might require and actual crowd is shot as rolling clouds and narration from the book. BBC and FX is doing a miniseries with Andy Serkis that looks really interesting. Do yourself a favor. Watch this if you must see every version out there, otherwise, skip it and get a copy of Patrick Stewert's Christmas Carol.