Is this the best rendition? - A Christmas Carol (1984) Discussion

[–] BOandBarbecue (2264) a year ago

Yes.

If you had given this film the budget of Albert Finney's Scrooge film from 1970, then this film would be one of the best christmas film of all times.

Sadly its lack of scope harm it. but George Scott is best scrooge by far. he is perfect. he is perfect as bad scrooge, and he is perfect nice scrooge. many actor are convince at playing one scrooge, but not the most important scrooge - nice scrooge at end scene. scotts nice scrooge is what make the film.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) 5 months ago

I would not say that George C. Scott is perfect, but his performance is certainly interesting. I do enjoy this version but I think that Alistair Sim easily is the quintessential Scrooge in the 1951 film.

One issue I had with Scott's performance is that I didn't fully buy the JOYFUL version of Scrooge at the end of the movie.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) a year ago

You're definitely correct that it's ONE of the best. I actually have it in the top 3. But the best, in my opinion, is the 1951 version with Alistair Sim.

Scott's version may be #2, with Patrick Stewart's version coming in third place. Both, funny enough, have ghost problems. In Scott's version, the Ghost of Christmas Present comes of as a little too mean-spirited and not jolly enough. In Stewart's, the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come looks like something out of Star Wars and it's very distracting to me.

I enjoy all three and they are the only versions that I rewatch regularly during the Christmas season.

Scott's take on Scrooge was certainly interesting and has a flavor that is all its own.

reply

[–] andersonb85 (1589) a year ago

I certainly think so. I grew up watching it over the years and liked every cast member in it with the exception of Pleasance as the ghost of Christmas past. I would have enjoyed someone grandfatherly like John Gielgud in that role. Scott is an excellent Scrooge.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) a year ago

It's interesting how different the Ghost of Christmas Past has been portrayed over the years--as an old man, as a young woman, as a young girl, and as an ethereal being--and that's all due to Dickens' strange and ambiguous description of the character.

I like Angela Pleasance's take on the character, as well as the excessively 80s look.

reply

[–] strntz (10846) a year ago

Agree with all points.

I read the novella every year at least once, and Dicken's description of the Ghost/Past is all over the place on purpose. Either sex could have played the role, or any age. I also like Angela Pleasance's version.

The whole cast was actually great.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) a year ago

I agree on the cast.

My only complaint is that occasionally the characters who should be joyful and ebullient are a little muted. Roger Rees as Fred, for instance, plays the character pretty toned down. And the Ghost of Christmas Present seems a little too mean-spirited and angry at times.

But overall it's a great adaptation.

reply

[–] strntz (10846) a year ago

Yes indeed, in the novel Fred is a boisterous person with a huge laugh, but I get that every cast tries to put a different spin on the story. I kind of like this restrained version of Fred mostly for a different look because it makes each version seem like a different movie in a way.

I like the Ghost of CP in this version a lot. He's very jovial at times as the book describes, but he's also very direct with Scrooge, something no other version has. I'm glad they put in the dialog from the book about who and where the surplus population is, strange how many screenplays missed that.

I also think the scene where the young couple in debt to Scrooge learns of his death and are guiltily glad for it is a great and important scene, but this version doesn't have it as most don't - I think only the Patrick Stewart version has that scene which is too bad.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) a year ago

I do agree that it's good that each version does something a little different and that each has its own flavor. Otherwise, what's the point of re-adapting the story?

I think that the GoCP could be direct without seeming so angry at times. Like, he could say what he has to say but with a hint of compassion for Scrooge and his situation.

Is the scene with the young couple really left out of many versions? I would swear that I've seen it in every version that I've seen, but it's hard to remember specifics.

reply

[–] strntz (10846) a year ago

I can only remember one version with the young couple, and I think it was the Patrick Stewart one. Maybe some earlier '30s versions had it? LOL, there are a LOT of versions of this story to be sure!

I saw the Disney animated one once, and I don't recall if that one had that scene.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) a year ago

My favorite adaptations are '51 with Sim, '84 with Scott and '99 with Stewart. I would swear that '51 at least has it, though I can't remember the scene specifically.

reply

[–] strntz (10846) a year ago

The closest '51 comes to that scene is the beginning of the movie when a man meets Scrooge on the exchange steps begging for more time to repay his loan and Scrooge says no.

This *could* be the same guy I suppose who later in other versions is the husband of the couple who was going to ask Scrooge for more time but found out that he actually died.

BTW your top three are my top three..

EDIT: here is that scene in Stewart's version:

https://youtu.be/3BUb4WMjDjo?t=4437

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) a year ago

Indeed. I actually just rewatched the Stewart version before about a week ago. It was the first time I had seen it in a few years. I have to say that it's one of the best made-for-TV movies I've seen, and definitely was top-tier in the late 90s when high-quality television productions were a much more rare thing than they are today.

Speaking of the scene with the man on the steps in the '51 version, there's also an interesting discussion to be had around the invented elements for that film. The scenes with Mr. Jorkin especially are worth remarking on. They are nowhere found in Dickens, but I think they add a lot to the story.

reply

[–] strntz (10846) a year ago

I know most people don't read this far down a continual thread, but I'd like to comment on the additions to the story. You are right on the nose with some story additions.

What '51 really gets particularly right (that Dickens would have put in if he had thought of it) was that Scrooge's father was cold to him because Scrooge's mother died in his childbirth, and that Scrooge didn't like Fred for the very same reason. The book mentions that Scrooge was shipped off to boarding school, but doesn't mention the childbirth deaths. The scene where Scrooge watches his sister die really explains exactly *why* Scrooge became a cold hearted person, something Dickens never really got into.

What I didn't like was how they dropped the scene where Scrooge saw his fiance happily married and wondered aloud to the ghost that those kids could have been his. Instead, she doesn't marry but becomes what appears to be an old maid taking care of the sick and poor.

reply

[–] StrongRex (1288) a year ago

I’ve also noticed that Scrooge dancing with Belle at Fezziwig’s party was made up for the movies - Belle doesn’t appear until she breaks off her engagement with Scrooge in Dickens’ book. That’s one way I think the movies improve over the book.

reply

[–] strntz (10846) a year ago

True. I wonder if Dickens would have expanded this story if he only knew how truly timeless and loved this story would ultimately be.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) a year ago

I had intended to reply to this much earlier but somehow it escaped me. Just found the open tab, though. Been sitting open, I guess, for 21 days.

As you may know, Dickens wrote ACC in a frenzied six weeks as he was rushing to prepare the book for the Christmas season. One does have to wonder if the book would've been much different if he had had just a little more time. It is certainly a slim volume.

It has certainly gone on to immense notoriety. Is there even another Christmas story from the 19th century that is widely known? All I can think of is A Visit From St. Nicholas, which is a poem.

reply

[–] StrongRex (1288) a year ago

I think everyone in the cast is spot on here - I tend to agree with strntz in that I’m okay with Fred being restrained here, I think he comes across as more authentic and genuine because you still get an air of warmth and compassion from him. As far as the Ghost of Christmas Present goes…I think his “meanness” is very warranted. He may be harsh and at times pretty scary, but Scrooge deserved all of that. Sometimes you need to be very blunt with someone who needs a wake-up call.

I need to see more versions of A Christmas Carol, but I know the 2009 version with Jim Carrey definitely has the scene with the young couple in debt finding out about Scrooge’s death.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) a year ago

I suppose it ultimately comes down to a matter of opinion, but I would still prefer to see the GoCP approach Scrooge with a little more compassion. I will concede though that different people require different approaches in order to get through to them

In regard to seeing more versions of A Christmas Carol, if you haven't seen the '51 film you should make a point to watch it before the clock strikes midnight.

reply

[–] StrongRex (1288) a year ago

I’ve definitely seen the ‘51 version before, it’s just been once or twice and very long ago. I remember trying to watch it again on YouTube a couple of years ago or so, and stopping because the sound cut out in the video or something.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) a year ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex (1288) a year ago

YES.

reply

[–] Joogle83 (4147) a year ago

I think so Just my personal bias

reply

[–] PaladinNJ (20310) a year ago

This is a great version. However, the 1951 with Alastair Sim is probably the best version.

reply

[–] Darren (1134) a year ago

I've always liked this version the best, mainly for George C. Scott, whom I think is unsurpassed as Scrooge. As another commenter has already noted, he is equally convincing as pre-reform, bitter, miserly old Scrooge, and the post-reform Scrooge, who has chosen to re-embrace the human warmth and goodness he let go of long ago.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) 5 months ago

I'd be interested in knowing if you have seen the 1951 version with Alistair Sim. While I do like Scott's performance, in my view it's a little uneven. Sim, however, is perfect in every respect.

reply

[–] Darren (1134) 5 months ago

Yes I've seen it. It's a great adaptation, and Sim gives a great performance. I still prefer the 1984 film, and Scott's version of Scrooge. I just think that Scott, with his craggy features and gravelly voice, was more convincing as the intimidating miser that cowed everyone around him into submission before his conversion back into a good man.

reply

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8304) 5 months ago

Scott probably does come off as a little more severe, or at least as the more intimidating man, but I think that's also why I don't fully buy the post-conversion version of the character. That is to say, the Scrooge at the end of the film doesn't quite seem to be the abundantly joyful, redeemed character that Dickens wrote about. He still seems like he's hanging onto a little of his old self.

As I said though, I do enjoy this version. In fact, I'd put it in my #2 spot. I even own it on Blu-Ray.

reply

[–] hyperjet (637) a year ago

It is for me. It's the one I sort of grew up with and so Scott's 'mean' portrayal is the one I'm used to. When I see a different version where Scrooge is small, harmless and mumbles around it doesn't work for me.

reply