Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Lucia Ayala It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Jenni Devyn Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

smerph If there's a lesson to be learned from the countless adaptations of A Christmas Carol, it's that the makers should stick to the text as closely as possible. Dickens barely wasted a word in his novella; it being a perfectly judged, perfectly paced bit of fiction.This adaptation takes a few wrong turns. It takes far too long before we get to the actual haunting, with the first 30 minutes being positively meandering. There's also a perfunctory sequence, featuring none of the main characters, where the King is celebrated. Maybe this kind of thing pleased the masses back in the thirties, but it does make the opening act a bit of a slog.One would hope that things would get back on track when Jacob Marley appears. Unfortunately, Jacob Marley doesn't appear at all; he's a rather unimpressive voice-over. It's an odd choice; as if the makers aren't confident enough to give us a character design that will work for us.Unfortunately, the sequence following this isn't much better. The visit from The Ghost of Christmas Past is done and dusted in less than 5 minutes (I'm not exaggerating). There's nothing of Scrooge of a boy, no mention of Fezziwig and we only really see the break-up of his relationship with Belle (and nothing of the good times Scrooge shared with her). This is a major misstep; as it fails to adequately give us Scrooge's backstory. Considering what *is* included in this adaptation, it's baffling that such a key segment was skipped over. I'm wondering if it was abridged so that they'd be no need for other, younger actors to play Scrooge, but that seems like an unnecessary compromise.The Present and Yet To Come sequences fare better, and the conclusion to the story is really rather good as adaptations of the novella go. However, the damage has already been done.It's a big shame as the cast are fine. Seymour Hicks may be a touch too shabby for my tastes as Old Scrooge, but he's able to give us a decent contrast in his performance (even if his redemption is far too quick, and seems almost complete after a quick glimpse at his past).In summary, this is probably on an even footing with the Reginald Owen offering from just three years later (1938). Both have as many flaws as aspects to recommend, but both are worth a watch to aficionados of the classic story.

jacobjohntaylor1 A miser is hunted by ghost on Christmas eve. This a great movie. It is best on one of the the best book ever. It has a great story line. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. Seymour Hicks was great actor. Marie Ney was a great actor. This movie tells good moral story. It is very spooky. It is a true classic. 6.6 is underrating it. Occar Asche was a great actor. It is a great movie. It is a must. It is one of the best fantasy movies ever. This is great movie. You must see this movie. It is one of the 5000 movies to see before you die. C.V France was a great actor. Donald Calthrop was a great actor.

Rafi Khan Seymour Hicks is unparalleled in so far in his portrayal of a Victorian miser, and tyrannical employer and is rightly the central focus of the film as C.D's would have desired a dark and sobering tale.I also think the Bob Cratchitt Character is a much more accurate representation of a cowed,lowly clerk in an era without Social Security for the employed and the possibility of being let go at a moment's notice with all the possible subsequent financial and domestic disaster that may ensue.Other Characters, I haven't comment d on so you should draw your own conclusions...

utgard14 Not bad but not great version of the classic Dickens tale. Seymour Hicks makes for a very different Scrooge than most of us are used to seeing. Big bushy eyebrows, wild hair, and a permanent caveman expression on his face. He makes Scrooge appear more brutish than other versions. His Scrooge looks like the kind of guy you would see in films of the period that hung around the docks waiting to rob people. This is a darker Carol than most. A lot of stuff is either left out or is only alluded to rather than shown. I don't know...it's not one of my favorite versions, to be sure, but it is interesting and enjoyable enough. Give it a shot if you have seen other versions and like to compare. Otherwise, if this is your first stop for A Christmas Carol film, you'd be better off with the 1951 Alastair Sim version.