Comparing Ebenezer Scrooge in 1930s cinema -- Britain versus the USA

By Steve D. Stones

SCROOGE, 1935

During Christmas time in the mid-1980s, I walked into a Musicland store at my local shopping mall to look at Led Zeppelin cassette tapes. As I passed the VHS movies section, I was drawn to an image of Sir Seymour Hicks on the front cover of a video box. The image looked worn and hand-colored. It was contained on a VHS print of the 1935 version of Scrooge, put out by Goodtimes Home Video.

Although I have never been much of a fan of Christmas movies, the image on the VHS box made me want to purchase the film. Instead of buying a Led Zeppelin cassette tape (I didn't have enough money), I decided to buy the Scrooge video. Not being knowledgeable at the time of when sound films were first made, I assumed Scrooge was going to be a silent era film with intertitles and music.

When I got the video home and began to watch it, I was greatly intrigued by the worn out appearance of it. The print was slightly out of focus and very dark in contrast. Nothing on the screen was sharply focused. This did not disappoint me in any way or take away from my experience of enjoying the film.

I loved how the 1935 film portrayed 19^th century London as dark, gritty and poverty stricken. Most exterior shots of the film show London as dark, overcast and foggy. This made me think I was watching a classic Universal horror film, and not a Christmas film.

The full length version of Scrooge (which was not the version I bought) runs one hour and eighteen minutes and uses elements of German Expressionism. Sharply defined shadows cast on solid, flat walls, and even on Scrooge's face, often frame and emphasize a character in the scene. The ghosts of Jacob Marley and of Christmas past and future are not shown, but greatly implied for the viewer to imagine, which adds to the intrigue I felt as I watched the film for the first time.

Sir Seymour Hicks (seen above) has the perfect droopy old face to communicate his crusty, selfish character, but at the same time show a genuinely frightened and fearful expression when confronted by the ghost of Jacob Marley. Reginald Owen's depiction of Scrooge in A Christmas Carol (1938) shows us a taller and younger Scrooge. He's just as grumpy and hard nosed at Hicks' Scrooge, but he is missing more hair and his appearance is less poverty stricken. He dresses well and presents himself as prim and proper.

A CHRISTMAS CAROL, 1938

The 1938 version of A Christmas Carol shows us a more upbeat, hustle and bustle depiction of 19^th century London in the opening sequence. The Cratchit children play a game of sliding on an ice sheet in the streets of London and throw snowballs at other children. The 1935 Scrooge shows us a bleak view of London that discourages children from playing out in the streets. We wouldn't expect to see children out in the streets in the 1935 version.

Scrooge's home in the 1935 version is a run down, untidy one bedroom apartment with few furnishings and minimal lighting. In the 1938 version -- starring Reginald Owen, seen above -- he appears to live in a mansion with fancy furnishings and lots of space – giving us the impression that he is much better off financially than the 1935 Scrooge. The viewer gets a sense that the 1935 Scrooge is a more isolated and introverted man who avoids people completely because of his living environment.

The 1938 A Christmas Carol relies less on expressionist elements of sharp shadows and dark interiors and more on well lit interiors, helping to clearly define each ghost that visits Scrooge. The ghosts are not implied, but clearly shown to Scrooge and the viewer. More screen time is spent with each individual ghost in the 1938 version.

The 1938 film was the first Hollywood sound version of A Christmas Carol – produced by MGM studios, so the much larger budget is clearly apparent in the film. The lower budget and minimal elements of the 1935 Scrooge helps to communicate the poverty stricken atmosphere contained in the Charles Dickens story.

Whatever version of A Christmas Carol you choose to watch this holiday season, Charles Dickens' story will remain a great classic of Christmas entertainment. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! 

A Christmas Carol and its many adaptations

Review by Doug Gibson

(I first released this several months ago but am re-posting it for Holidays Season's reading) If you are A Christmas Carol fanatic, like me, who reads Dickens' novella every year and watches seven or eight film versions of Ebenezer Scrooge's ghostly visitations every year between Thanksgiving and Christmas ... you have found Nirvana. It's "A Christmas Carol and its Adaptations: Dickens's Story on Screen and Television," by Fred Guida, McFarland, 2000 (800-253-2187). You can also get it via Amazon here.

You don't have to be a fanatic like me to love the book too. If you enjoy Dickens, A Christmas Carol, or just Christmas you'll love what's to learn from author Guida. I have spent more than a generation looking for a really good book that highlights film adaptations of A Christmas Carol. For 25 years I've relied on the OK but slightly kitschy A Christmas Carol Trivia Book ... I've read it 20 times but it's second string to McFarland's offering.

Besides, extensively detailed, and sagely opinionated critiques of the various film adaptations, Guida presents readers with a history of fiction, in America and Britain, that preceded Dickens' and paved the way for the spiritual, moral and familial themes Dickens' utilized in A Christmas Carol. The author also provides short recaps and analysis of Dickens' Christmas-related works including "Cricket on the Hearth," and discusses Christmas in other novels, such as A Pickwick Papers. This deepens readers' understanding of Dickens' motivations and his state of mind when penning these tales.

I learned a lot about the history of 19th century adaptations of A Christmas Carol. Many were cheap pirated editions that kept Dickens in court trying to stop them and prevent losing royalties that he deserved. The first adaptations were stage readings, usually a shorter version written by the author. The journey toward "flickers" versions of A Christmas Carol" in the 19th century included the delightfully named "Magic Lantern" adaptations. They are the early ancestors of slideshows in which a lantern, projected against a painting or drawing, provided a screen that audiences could enjoy the tale. It would be fascinating to see a restored magic lantern version of the tale today. Early stage versions are covered. It was interesting to learn that Cricket on the Hearth was a more popular stage play for Christmas than "Carol" in the 19th century.

Although it's a scholarly work, the author has a relaxed, conversational tone. He breaks in often with firm but gentle opinions and I enjoyed his "on to the next"-type of transitions from adaptation to adaptation.

As for the theatrical versions, silent and talking, just about everything from 1900 to 1990 or so, when the book was published, is covered well. Many of the silents are lost but the author has retained still photos and film reviews when available. To understand Guida's assessments, it must be noted that he places great relevance of the moral changes of Scrooge from selfish, superior misanthrope to repentant, spiritual man. Guida also includes the familial warmth of the The Cratchit family as an essential part of any adaptation. There is one particular scene that he feels strongly should be included in adaptations (and I agree). It is Scrooge being shown the pitiable children "Ignorance" and "Want." There are versions that he likes that don't include it, but he's correct that versions should include it. The final scene with The Spirit of Christmas Present provides stark evidence of what Scrooge has callously neglected to assist. It shows him that smug self righteousness masquerading as "self reliance" is harming "millions like this child."

Guida's favorite theatrical versions are the 1951 "A Christmas Carol" with Alistair Sim and the 1984 version with George C. Scott. They portray Scrooge as a cold superior bereft of empathy, rather than as a pitiful crabby man (portrayals of which hamper the 1938 and 1935 talkies versions). His favorite cartoons are the early 1970s A Christmas Carol, again with Sim, and the 1960s Mr. McGoo's A Christmas Carol." Both are regretfully seldom seen today on TV.

I was surprised Guida likes the 1970 big-budget musical "Scrooge," with Albert Finney. It seems brassy to me but Guida argues that it's a successful version that captures well a big-budget musical of Dickens' tale. I'm willing to give it another shot. The author does sort of dismiss "A Muppet Christmas Carol," arguing that it will have less influence than other versions. I think time has proven that wrong, as probably 80 percent of young children are now introduced to A Christmas Carol through Kermit and Miss Piggy as Mr. and Mrs. Cratchit. And the songs in the Muppet version are better than the 1970 musical offerings.

However, despite versions that Guida considers second tier, he generally still enjoys the films and finds positive points in the films. He has a scholar's love for his topic and gets deep into the details of the planning and production of the films. And he finds gems that I had never heard of. I will be searching for a 1947 Spanish (Spain) version of "... Carol" called "Leyenda de la Navidad."

While I appreciate Guida's efforts to track down every TV version inspired by A Christmas Carol, it's an impossible task. We didn't need reviews of versions from "Beavis and Butthead" or kitschy sitcoms. The small-typed scores of pages devoted to this would have been better filled with maybe 20 select, superior TV adaptations, such as The Andy Griffith's Show's "The Christmas Story," with the Scrooge-like merchant Ben Weaver, covered in two-to-three pages of more detailed analysis.

It's a shame that the book stops at about 30 years ago. I'd love to see summaries of, say, A Christmas Carol with Patrick Stewart as Scrooge, and the big-budget Disney's A Christmas Carol, with Jim Carrey. But still, if you love Dickens' tale, or just like it, buy this book -- either to learn more abolut what's arguably our most famous fictional work or to just joyfully revel in the wonderful, inspired Christmas tale.

And just so you know, fans, a 2019 version of A Christmas Carol, with Tom Hardy, is set for release this year. We are only about eight months from the start of the Christmas season!

The best book on A Christmas Carol and its adaptations

Review by Doug Gibson

If you are A Christmas Carol fanatic, like me, who reads Dickens' novella every year and watches seven or eight film versions of Ebenezer Scrooge's ghostly visitations every year between Thanksgiving and Christmas ... you have found Nirvana. It's "A Christmas Carol and its Adaptations: Dickens's Story on Screen and Television," by Fred Guida, McFarland, 2000 (800-253-2187). You can also get it via Amazon here.

You don't have to be a fanatic like me to love the book too. If you enjoy Dickens, A Christmas Carol, or just Christmas you'll love what's to learn from author Guida. I have spent more than a generation looking for a really good book that highlights film adaptations of A Christmas Carol. For 25 years I've relied on the OK but slightly kitschy A Christmas Carol Trivia Book ... I've read it 20 times but it's second string to McFarland's offering.

Besides, extensively detailed, and sagely opinionated critiques of the various film adaptations, Guida presents readers with a history of fiction, in America and Britain, that preceded Dickens' and paved the way for the spiritual, moral and familial themes Dickens' utilized in A Christmas Carol. The author also provides short recaps and analysis of Dickens' Christmas-related works including "Cricket on the Hearth," and discusses Christmas in other novels, such as A Pickwick Papers. This deepens readers' understanding of Dickens' motivations and his state of mind when penning these tales.

I learned a lot about the history of 19th century adaptations of A Christmas Carol. Many were cheap pirated editions that kept Dickens in court trying to stop them and prevent losing royalties that he deserved. The first adaptations were stage readings, usually a shorter version written by the author. The journey toward "flickers" versions of A Christmas Carol" in the 19th century included the delightfully named "Magic Lantern" adaptations. They are the early ancestors of slideshows in which a lantern, projected against a painting or drawing, provided a screen that audiences could enjoy the tale. It would be fascinating to see a restored magic lantern version of the tale today. Early stage versions are covered. It was interesting to learn that Cricket on the Hearth was a more popular stage play for Christmas than "Carol" in the 19th century.

Although it's a scholarly work, the author has a relaxed, conversational tone. He breaks in often with firm but gentle opinions and I enjoyed his "on to the next"-type of transitions from adaptation to adaptation.

As for the theatrical versions, silent and talking, just about everything from 1900 to 1990 or so, when the book was published, is covered well. Many of the silents are lost but the author has retained still photos and film reviews when available. To understand Guida's assessments, it must be noted that he places great relevance of the moral changes of Scrooge from selfish, superior misanthrope to repentant, spiritual man. Guida also includes the familial warmth of the The Cratchit family as an essential part of any adaptation. There is one particular scene that he feels strongly should be included in adaptations (and I agree). It is Scrooge being shown the pitiable children "Ignorance" and "Want." There are versions that he likes that don't include it, but he's correct that versions should include it. The final scene with The Spirit of Christmas Present provides stark evidence of what Scrooge has callously neglected to assist. It shows him that smug self righteousness masquerading as "self reliance" is harming "millions like this child."

Guida's favorite theatrical versions are the 1951 "A Christmas Carol" with Alistair Sim and the 1984 version with George C. Scott. They portray Scrooge as a cold superior bereft of empathy, rather than as a pitiful crabby man (portrayals of which hamper the 1938 and 1935 talkies versions). His favorite cartoons are the early 1970s A Christmas Carol, again with Sim, and the 1960s Mr. McGoo's A Christmas Carol." Both are regretfully seldom seen today on TV.

I was surprised Guida likes the 1970 big-budget musical "Scrooge," with Albert Finney. It seems brassy to me but Guida argues that it's a successful version that captures well a big-budget musical of Dickens' tale. I'm willing to give it another shot. The author does sort of dismiss "A Muppet Christmas Carol," arguing that it will have less influence than other versions. I think time has proven that wrong, as probably 80 percent of young children are now introduced to A Christmas Carol through Kermit and Miss Piggy as Mr. and Mrs. Cratchit. And the songs in the Muppet version are better than the 1970 musical offerings.

However, despite versions that Guida considers second tier, he generally still enjoys the films and finds positive points in the films. He has a scholar's love for his topic and gets deep into the details of the planning and production of the films. And he finds gems that I had never heard of. I will be searching for a 1947 Spanish (Spain) version of "... Carol" called "Leyenda de la Navidad."

While I appreciate Guida's efforts to track down every TV version inspired by A Christmas Carol, it's an impossible task. We didn't need reviews of versions from "Beavis and Butthead" or kitschy sitcoms. The small-typed scores of pages devoted to this would have been better filled with maybe 20 select, superior TV adaptations, such as The Andy Griffith's Show's "The Christmas Story," with the Scrooge-like merchant Ben Weaver, covered in two-to-three pages of more detailed analysis.

It's a shame that the book stops at about 30 years ago. I'd love to see summaries of, say, A Christmas Carol with Patrick Stewart as Scrooge, and the big-budget Disney's A Christmas Carol, with Jim Carrey. But still, if you love Dickens' tale, or just like it, buy this book -- either to learn more abolut what's arguably our most famous fictional work or to just joyfully revel in the wonderful, inspired Christmas tale.

And just so you know, fans, a 2019 version of A Christmas Carol, with Tom Hardy, is set for release this year. We are only about eight months from the start of the Christmas season!

Scrooge, 1935, and A Christmas Carol, 1938 -- comparing and contrasting

By Steve D. Stones

SCROOGE, 1935

During Christmas time in the mid-1980s, I walked into a Musicland store at my local shopping mall to look at Led Zeppelin cassette tapes. As I passed the VHS movies section, I was drawn to an image of Sir Seymour Hicks on the front cover of a video box. The image looked worn and hand-colored. It was contained on a VHS print of the 1935 version of Scrooge, put out by Goodtimes Home Video.

Although I have never been much of a fan of Christmas movies, the image on the VHS box made me want to purchase the film. Instead of buying a Led Zeppelin cassette tape (I didn't have enough money), I decided to buy the Scrooge video. Not being knowledgeable at the time of when sound films were first made, I assumed Scrooge was going to be a silent era film with intertitles and music.

When I got the video home and began to watch it, I was greatly intrigued by the worn out appearance of it. The print was slightly out of focus and very dark in contrast. Nothing on the screen was sharply focused. This did not disappoint me in any way or take away from my experience of enjoying the film.

I loved how the 1935 film portrayed 19^th century London as dark, gritty and poverty stricken. Most exterior shots of the film show London as dark, overcast and foggy. This made me think I was watching a classic Universal horror film, and not a Christmas film.

The full length version of Scrooge (which was not the version I bought) runs one hour and eighteen minutes and uses elements of German Expressionism. Sharply defined shadows cast on solid, flat walls, and even on Scrooge's face, often frame and emphasize a character in the scene. The ghosts of Jacob Marley and of Christmas past and future are not shown, but greatly implied for the viewer to imagine, which adds to the intrigue I felt as I watched the film for the first time.

Sir Seymour Hicks (seen above) has the perfect droopy old face to communicate his crusty, selfish character, but at the same time show a genuinely frightened and fearful expression when confronted by the ghost of Jacob Marley. Reginald Owen's depiction of Scrooge in A Christmas Carol (1938) shows us a taller and younger Scrooge. He's just as grumpy and hard nosed at Hicks' Scrooge, but he is missing more hair and his appearance is less poverty stricken. He dresses well and presents himself as prim and proper.

A CHRISTMAS CAROL, 1938

The 1938 version of A Christmas Carol shows us a more upbeat, hustle and bustle depiction of 19^th century London in the opening sequence. The Cratchit children play a game of sliding on an ice sheet in the streets of London and throw snowballs at other children. The 1935 Scrooge shows us a bleak view of London that discourages children from playing out in the streets. We wouldn't expect to see children out in the streets in the 1935 version.

Scrooge's home in the 1935 version is a run down, untidy one bedroom apartment with few furnishings and minimal lighting. In the 1938 version -- starring Reginald Owen, seen above -- he appears to live in a mansion with fancy furnishings and lots of space – giving us the impression that he is much better off financially than the 1935 Scrooge. The viewer gets a sense that the 1935 Scrooge is a more isolated and introverted man who avoids people completely because of his living environment.

The 1938 A Christmas Carol relies less on expressionist elements of sharp shadows and dark interiors and more on well lit interiors, helping to clearly define each ghost that visits Scrooge. The ghosts are not implied, but clearly shown to Scrooge and the viewer. More screen time is spent with each individual ghost in the 1938 version.

The 1938 film was the first Hollywood sound version of A Christmas Carol – produced by MGM studios, so the much larger budget is clearly apparent in the film. The lower budget and minimal elements of the 1935 Scrooge helps to communicate the poverty stricken atmosphere contained in the Charles Dickens story.

Whatever version of A Christmas Carol you choose to watch this holiday season, Charles Dickens' story will remain a great classic of Christmas entertainment. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! 

A Christmas Treat -- the 1910 Silent version of A Christmas Carol

Rumor has it that there are more than 200 filmed variations of Charles Dickens' classic "A Christmas Carol." This may be the earliest one, at least surviving. It's the Thomas Alva Edison's 1910 film version of "A Christmas Carol," starring Marc McDermott as Ebenezer Scrooge. Take a break, enjoy it, it's less than 11 minutes long, and later watch a better version starring Alastair Sim or George C. Scott, etc. But enjoy this curio.
-- Doug Gibson

Alistair Sim is a great Scrooge, again, in animated A Christmas Carol

By Doug Gibson

The second time Alistair Sim played Ebenezer Scrooge was in 1971 in a 24 or so minute version of "A Christmas Carol." Sim is marvelous in this version, which is perhaps the best faithful cartoon version of Dickens' classic Christmas ghost story.

More than 20 years earlier, a much younger Sim had starred as Scrooge in the British Renown version of Scrooge, or a Christmas Carol. Despite strong competition from George C. Scott's 1984 Scrooge, I still hold Sim to be the best Scrooge ever captured on screen, and the Renown version the best. But, as mentioned, this short cartoon, which also has Michael Redgrave in it, is superb.

Enjoy it; take less than a half hour and capture the Christmas spirit in a manner it's meant to be captured.