Alastair Sim and George C. Scott: Ebenezer Scrooges for the Ages
By Alan Herrmann
MOVIE CRITIC
Charles Dickens’ holiday ghost story A Christmas Carol has been filmed dozens of times since 1901. The exact number is difficult to determine when you include television and cartoon versions. I have seen several of these interpretations and maybe half are worth watching.
Every year I have to watch the 1951 and 1984 versions, or a part of the Christmas season is not complete. The other films have some redeeming qualities but somehow don’t measure up to these sterling classics. So, what makes these yuletide favorites such great movies? There are several reasons, and each film has tremendous strong points and some minor weak ones. You could almost pick parts out of each and switch them around. But we can’t, of course, so we need to enjoy them both on their own merits.
The original source material is Charles Dickens’ novella. Published in 1843, A Christmas Carol may have been part of the Victorian era’s craze for gothic ghost stories, but at the same time it served as a device for its author to bring attention to the harsh conditions of the poor and destitute brought on by an increasingly industrial world. It’s no surprise, then, to see this familiar theme in several of his novels like Nicholas Nickleby, Oliver Twist, and David Copperfield.
But it is important to note that in A Christmas Carol, Dickens helped establish how we view and celebrate the holiday season. Wishing friends and strangers alike a “Merry Christmas,” the singing of carols and decorating homes, enjoying Christmas punch, plum pudding, roast goose, and, of course, charitable donations may not have been invented by Dickens, but his story’s popularity has certainly helped bolster these traditions over the years.
With the advent of film and later television, viewers were able to witness these traditions annually and the ’51 and ’84 versions exemplify them best. What is remarkable about these films is that they both take liberties with the original story. But they do so with respect and actually enhance the story in true Dickensian fashion.
Both portrayals of Scrooge are excellent and yet different without compromising Dickens’ vision of the character. In the ’51 version Alastair Sim plays Scrooge as a stern, cold miser whose bulging eyes can be both terrifying and comedic. His manner is brusque, and he has a total distrust of humanity. In this adaptation, there is much more of a backstory than in the novella, and it works well.
We spend a great deal of time with the Ghost of Christmas Past, which helps us see how Scrooge becomes such a miserable human being. His lonely childhood, having to spend Christmas at school, the death of his sister while giving birth to his nephew, and the break-up with the only woman he ever loved all contribute to Scrooge’s flawed character.
But what drives his narrative home is the deceitful and treacherous behavior employed by Scrooge and his partner, Jacob Marley in their middle years. In one of the most stunning scenes, we witness the sad face of Fezziwig, Scrooge’s kind-hearted former employer, after Scrooge and Marley are complicit in the buyout of his company. Their lack of business ethics would ring true in our current world.
The use of black and white photography may or may not have been a conscious choice, but in 1951, color films were rare and quite expensive. This turns out to be a blessing. The deep, dark shadows that permeate much of the film fit perfectly with the ghostly story and also represent the plight of the poor as well as Scrooge’s wretched soul. The black and white contrast works particularly well with some of the exterior shots of London’s old business districts. Complementing the dark photography is the ominous musical score that utilizes heavy strings and a mournful bassoon.
This is a scary movie, and even after brighter scenes like Fezziwig’s party, Cratchit’s Christmas dinner and the lighthearted get-together at Fred’s home, we still have plenty of dread to go around.
Even as Scrooge’s icy heart begins to melt during his time with the Ghost of Christmas Present, we are jolted back into darkness by the images of “Ignorance” and “Want,” the pale and undernourished waifs who are exposed beneath the spirit’s robe. To make matters worse, the Ghost of Christmas Future – voiceless and cloaked in black – reveals to Scrooge his worst fear: his own tombstone. This could be the most chilling scene in the movie. There are no flashy special effects, but we hear an unearthly and nearly inhuman wail as he falls upon the stone. Alastair Sim simply stuns us in this scene.
In the final scenes of ‘51 A Christmas Carol, when the spirits are all gone, Scrooge awakens to find himself alive on Christmas morning. He is a changed man who cannot believe his great fortune. Here, Sim’s acting surpasses anyone else’s in this role. As he leaps merrily about, babbling and chuckling, we find his giddiness infectious even when he teases his housekeeper about being crazy. Sim’s range is astonishing, and he surprises us again when Scrooge finally shows his tender side to Fred and his wife by asking for their forgiveness.
The ‘84 version of A Christmas Carol is a wonderful interpretation of the story with a similar feel to the ‘51 film, but with significant changes as well. It’s not surprising that Clive Donner, who directed this movie, worked as the film editor on the earlier adaptation. Unlike the previous version, this film was shot in color in the old market town of Shrewsbury – doubling for 19th century London – where you feel you are in the market scene with Scrooge and the Ghost of Christmas Present. The use of old carols from the period also adds to the film’s authenticity.
Despite the beautiful use of color to capture the wonderful green, reds, and gold hues of the holiday season, Donner knows this is a tale with some very bleak moments and uses foggy blue shades and darker tones when needed. Donner also added a scene with a homeless family living under an ancient overpass only lit by fires, discussing their options of the poorhouse or possible starvation. It is one of the most powerful scenes, and even though he didn’t write it, I think Dickens would have approved.
The mostly British cast is very impressive and do a first-rate job. Frank Finlay as Jacob Marley, owns the role. With his pale, unblinking eyes, gaping mouth, and from-the-bowels-of-hell scream, Finlay doesn’t let us forget the horror of Marley’s situation. Angela Pleasence does a decent job as the Ghost of Christmas Past, but her costume and hair are too reminiscent of David Bowie in Labyrinth. Edward Woodward gives one of his best performances as the Ghost of Christmas Present. He is powerful, menacing, and in more recent colloquial terms, a wise ass. Roger Rees plays Scrooge’s nephew Fred – who looks very much like young Charles Dickens – as a warm, intelligent soul who sincerely wants his uncle to be part of his life.
George C. Scott had some difficult shoes to fill when chosen for the part of Scrooge. To his credit, he doesn’t try to imitate Alastair Sim, or anyone else for that matter. He does his own interpretation, and it works very well. He gives Scrooge a wicked sense of humor, laughing loudly when uttering the famous line, “Any idiot who goes about with Merry Christmas on his lips should be boiled in his own pudding with a stake of holly in his heart!” Because of his imposing size and craggy looking features, it’s very believable when children run away from him in fear.
The last portion of the film certainly has some tender moments with the Cratchit family, a hopeful but sickly-looking Tiny Tim, and a heartfelt exchange between Scrooge and Fred’s wife. Scott does his best with the Christmas morning frivolity expected from Scrooge, but it doesn’t rank up there with Sim’s performance. Nothing could.
I hope all of you have a wonderful holiday season, and please—in true Dickensian fashion—be kind to one another.
Local Obituaries
To view local obituaries or to send a note to family and loved ones, please visit the link that follows.
Support Award-winning, Locally Focused Journalism
The FXBG Advance cuts through the talking points to deliver both incisive and informative news about the issues, people, and organizations that daily affect your life. And we do it in a multi-partisan format that has no equal in this region. Over the past year, our reporting was:
First to break the story of Stafford Board of Supervisors dismissing a citizen library board member for “misconduct,” without informing the citizen or explaining what the person allegedly did wrong.
First to explain falling water levels in the Rappahannock Canal.
First to detail controversial traffic numbers submitted by Stafford staff on the Buc-ee’s project
Our media group also offers the most-extensive election coverage in the region and regular columnists like:
And our newsroom is led by the most-experienced and most-awarded journalists in the region — Adele Uphaus (Managing Editor and multiple VPA award-winner) and Martin Davis (Editor-in-Chief, 2022 Opinion Writer of the Year in Virginia and more than 25 years reporting from around the country and the world).
For just $8 a month, you can help support top-flight journalism that puts people over policies.
Your contributions 100% support our journalists.
Help us as we continue to grow!
