trowle-78816

I've watched this version on about five occasions now, trying to understand just what it is that all those gushing 8, 9 and 10 star reviewers are seeing. I've come to the conclusion that most of them are probably American and have probably never read the book and therefore have a different idea of how the characters should be portrayed.

George C. Scott's expensively dressed and well fed Scrooge is just kind of unengaged for most of the movie, it's very difficult to be interested in his story arc (which is more of a slight bump really).

Warner's Cratchit has the same, almost bored vibe, I never care about him, or his wife, played by the far too glamorous, Susannah York. Roger Rees' Fred has the same likability problem, he's just too stuffy for the role.

Frank Finlay's Marley doesn't look at all like a ghost. Christmas Past has a strange 80s hairstyle but is otherwise fine. Edward Woodward's Christmas Present is too stern too soon and he looks like a circus performer on stilts when walking about with Scrooge. The ghost of Christmas Yet to Come is accompanied by an annoying sound effect but is otherwise well done.

A group of Carollers who appear at various points throughout the film singing the same song, also becomes annoyingly repetitive. All in all I find this version just too staid and insincere, it always leaves me cold. My advice, seek out the excellent Alastair Sim version instead. Patrick Stewart's 1999 version is also a lot better.

There really are no words to describe just how bad this movie is. You'd really have to wonder what Edward Drake and Corey Large have on Bruce Willis for him to keep starring in their indescribably awful efforts at filmmaking. Maybe we should be notifying the FBI or something the man's family might be in danger.