I positively love the Alastair Sims version of A Christmas Carol... simply titled "Scrooge" upon its 1951-2 release. It's the first I recall seeing, and it began my devotion to reading just about everything Dickens has put to pen.
Now that said, I have noticed countless people who comment that this is the "truest" to the novel, and I'm sorry; but having read this particular novella at LEAST a couple of hundred times... (several times every Christmas), I can assure you that it in no WAY is the truest to the actual novel. But this in no way detracts from its own value as a moving experience in watching the transformation of the quintessential Scrooge in the person of Alastair Sims.
Where it deviates GREATLY with the book: 1.) There is no Belle, we have the girl of his love changed into an "Alice"... why this name change defies any logic I can fathom. 2.) Unlike the Belle whom we see happily married with children, giving Scrooge a glimpse of what he'd lost, (still with the Ghost of Christmas Past)... we later have her shown as a poor spinster working as some nurse or volunteer in an almshouse, poorhouse, or some such institution (and that by the Ghost of Christmas PRESENT)--completely not in the book, and, I think, an unnecessary deviation from a much better scenario presented by the book's original author. 3.) The first scene of young Scrooge left "back at school" has him practically a man, not the little boy reveling in the stories of Ali Baba, and Robinson Crusoe, and the Parrot! Fan, is practically a woman, not the excited tiny girl who had to reach up just to put her arms around her brother's neck. Again, these do not prevent it from being a good movie; but are a disappointment to a purist like myself who would truly like the movies to be more faithful to the book. I am stunned by the number of people who often think this to be one of the most faithful, when, if anything, it deviates from the actual text, if anything, MORE than most.
The manner in which Scrooge and his later partner, Marley, join forces at another business (not anywhere in the book)... the manner in which they procure Fezziwig's own business, and put him OUT of business, (not anywhere in the book), the continuing sequence of scenes of his hard business dealings (nowhere in the book)... His bedside scene where Fan dies and she makes him promise to look after her son... (nope not in the book)... the bedside scene of Marley's death... also not in the book. create a mountain of little infidelities which, while unfaithful to the actual text, DO manage to create a nice Christmas story--just, at least as I see it...NOT the one Dickens created.
The scenes created in the presence of the Ghost of Christmas Present (with the exception of the "Alice" scene), are among the few that do remain somewhat more faithful to the written story, although much is left out as well. The episode with the Ghost of Christmas future is practically inverted, with the first scene at the Cratchits, (which is practically the last in the book)... but this minor item can be overlooked as much of the dialogue at the 'Change, is faithful to the text and the BEST scene, in my humble opinion, is that of the Undertaker, the charwoman, and Mrs. Dilber in their dealings with Old Joe, which I find delightfully close to the text.
Of course we all know how it ends, the great transformation. This is handled very well, and close enough to the book to satisfy even persnickety folks like me, especially since the lad shouts "Walk-ER" instead of some of the inane substitutions made by those newer versions which feel this compulsive need to translate things into a more common language for the viewer. And with all that said, I give it seven stars... actually it merits an 8 1/2 as a thoroughly enjoyable and inspirational Christmas story... but I penalize it for its vast variance from the actual text, and in my opinion overuse of poetic license, and therefore, round it back down to seven; but here... don't let this Dickens purist and curmudgeon detract you in the least. It IS, after all is said and done... a very good motion picture! And that's MY take on it!
Now that said, I have noticed countless people who comment that this is the "truest" to the novel, and I'm sorry; but having read this particular novella at LEAST a couple of hundred times... (several times every Christmas), I can assure you that it in no WAY is the truest to the actual novel. But this in no way detracts from its own value as a moving experience in watching the transformation of the quintessential Scrooge in the person of Alastair Sims.
Where it deviates GREATLY with the book: 1.) There is no Belle, we have the girl of his love changed into an "Alice"... why this name change defies any logic I can fathom. 2.) Unlike the Belle whom we see happily married with children, giving Scrooge a glimpse of what he'd lost, (still with the Ghost of Christmas Past)... we later have her shown as a poor spinster working as some nurse or volunteer in an almshouse, poorhouse, or some such institution (and that by the Ghost of Christmas PRESENT)--completely not in the book, and, I think, an unnecessary deviation from a much better scenario presented by the book's original author. 3.) The first scene of young Scrooge left "back at school" has him practically a man, not the little boy reveling in the stories of Ali Baba, and Robinson Crusoe, and the Parrot! Fan, is practically a woman, not the excited tiny girl who had to reach up just to put her arms around her brother's neck. Again, these do not prevent it from being a good movie; but are a disappointment to a purist like myself who would truly like the movies to be more faithful to the book. I am stunned by the number of people who often think this to be one of the most faithful, when, if anything, it deviates from the actual text, if anything, MORE than most.
The manner in which Scrooge and his later partner, Marley, join forces at another business (not anywhere in the book)... the manner in which they procure Fezziwig's own business, and put him OUT of business, (not anywhere in the book), the continuing sequence of scenes of his hard business dealings (nowhere in the book)... His bedside scene where Fan dies and she makes him promise to look after her son... (nope not in the book)... the bedside scene of Marley's death... also not in the book. create a mountain of little infidelities which, while unfaithful to the actual text, DO manage to create a nice Christmas story--just, at least as I see it...NOT the one Dickens created.
The scenes created in the presence of the Ghost of Christmas Present (with the exception of the "Alice" scene), are among the few that do remain somewhat more faithful to the written story, although much is left out as well. The episode with the Ghost of Christmas future is practically inverted, with the first scene at the Cratchits, (which is practically the last in the book)... but this minor item can be overlooked as much of the dialogue at the 'Change, is faithful to the text and the BEST scene, in my humble opinion, is that of the Undertaker, the charwoman, and Mrs. Dilber in their dealings with Old Joe, which I find delightfully close to the text.
Of course we all know how it ends, the great transformation. This is handled very well, and close enough to the book to satisfy even persnickety folks like me, especially since the lad shouts "Walk-ER" instead of some of the inane substitutions made by those newer versions which feel this compulsive need to translate things into a more common language for the viewer. And with all that said, I give it seven stars... actually it merits an 8 1/2 as a thoroughly enjoyable and inspirational Christmas story... but I penalize it for its vast variance from the actual text, and in my opinion overuse of poetic license, and therefore, round it back down to seven; but here... don't let this Dickens purist and curmudgeon detract you in the least. It IS, after all is said and done... a very good motion picture! And that's MY take on it!