I plan on watching muppets christmas carol again this year, same as I do every year. It remains my favourite version of the story, and I doubt this one will dethrone it!
It’s my favourite version. And the costuming in it is sublime! Abby Cox (a legit dress historian) does a breakdown of why the costuming in Muppets Christmas Carol is just so good.
I'm seriously conflicted. While the show, as a whole, would probably be something I wouldn't enjoy...that last scene in the graveyard sounds actually really fascinating. I've always personally found the stuff with the 3rd ghost to be the least interesting part of the story, and had this scene (or something close) taken place in a better adaptation, it might have led to something I'd really love.
@@rowandunning6877 yeah, totally. It seems like it had interesting ideas in some parts...but like no one watches A Christmas Carol to be super bummed out. Plus, it kinda misses the whole point Dickens was trying to make.
My dad was the biggest "A Christmas Carol" fan I ever knew, if there was a new adaptation you bet he watched it. And if he disliked it you bet that you would hear about it for the next few days. I'm glad he never saw this adaptation cuz if he had he probably wouldn't have shut up about it till New Year's.
Huh. Only yesterday I was having a long conversation with someone about how this is the worst Christmas Carol adaptation. By the end I was just yelling 'ICE SKATING' over and over again. This was a much more coherent and well-thought-through take down of this stupid thing.
I mean, I've complained about the Cats 2019 movie and ended it yelling "GINGER CAT!", so I can understand the frustration. But seriously, how did they not understand that the character who crochets, is concerned about manners, and ends her song with "Thank you my dears" is supposed to be a grandma?! NOT Rebel Wilson?!
oh my god thank you for this! watching this with my family last christmas left me with this unending cynicism that really soured my christmas. I found it utterly devoid of hope or any redemption and was so surprised when I checked the reviews to find it being received positively by some! can't wait til the premiere
To me, the reason why the ghosts taking him through his life works so well, is because they’re showing him all the little decisions he’s made over the course of his long life, and the choices he’s making now have added up. Becoming as cruel as Scrouge could happen to anyone who just doesn’t stop to think about others for so long. That doesn’t work so well when he’s given these big tragic events that he can point to explain his life.
I think there's a couple of interesting ideas there, potentially, buried in all the dark, gritty nonsense. Like if Scrooge had paid someone (not an existing character please, a new one) to have sex with him rather than just help her when she needed it, but at the last minute change his mind and told her to leave with the money. I think that could work. The man treating everything as a transaction, only helping when he can think of something he wants in return, but just showing this one moment where he found a line he wouldn't cross. And the graveyard scene. What if he had said he couldn't be redeemed and didn't deserve anyone's care, that he would try to change but nothing he did now could make up for his past actions only for Marley to say something along the lines of "So you're going to start doing the right thing now, just because, with nothing in return? No gratitude? No escape from your terrible fate? And you still think you're beyond redemption? That's why I think you're wrong Ebenezer Scrooge." And then he wakes up and we get a less joyous version of the ending, where he still does all the good things in the morning, just a little less sure of himself. I think that would be an interesting take.
I really love that take of yours for the graveyard. I've always detested this version for its nihilism, which is not what this story is about. I think it's brilliant for an evil character's redemption arc to go, "I can't make up for the past, but that doesn't mean I can't make a few people's futures brighter, and if I get a foul afterlife, well, so be it." I would add that I think it would be more powerful if Scoorge said that to himself/to the ghost of Christmas future, almost like going through the stages of grief.
We have to know why scrooge is this way actually here means, we can't allow someone to be a shitlord without giving them an over-the-top tragic backstory. I really *don't* like the idea that people can't be redeemed, although it's an interesting and relatable sentiment for someone to express at their low point. But aaah redemption isn't something you're given, it's something you earn. And the point isn't to get to have people like you, it's to /actually do better by people/. You're right, Scrooge can't undo the harm he's already done, but everyday we're alive we get to choose again how to act and how to treat people and it /always/ matters to try to help people, to be compassionate, to improve other people's lives. Getting stuck in "I'm just a bad person" mode is narcissistic and prevents a person from /actually doing better./
Just saw this version in late 2023. Having seen countless versions of the tale before, I loved this one for its uniqueness and grounded-ness. The original text may have had levity, but you have a hundred versions of that previously if thats what you want. This is different, more real and with no cartoonish whimsy. First time I actually saw Ebeneezer Scrooge as a real person with real change - the glacial type. And Guy Pierce's performance is perfect.
Having always been a staunch fan of the George C. Scott film, I was amazed by this version. I think it cuts a little too deep for most people, especially people who haven't dealt with much hardship in their lives.
I am so sick of dark and gritty everything, but especially period dramas, and especially when they bring that into the costuming. Partly because it’s depressing, and partly because people love colour! They’ve always loved colour! If anything, they loved colourful clothes more than we do now, and yes, even the poors! This is why the Muppets Christmas Carol is the best Christmas Carol, and I even have a video essay by a legit expert dress historian to back me up on this - Abby Cox has one on her channel, it’s delightful. They put more effort into costuming one muppet than it seems this production did for every single cast member.
The sooner the "grimdark is KEWL" trend ends, the better. It's why, though I tried, I couldn't get through the first Game of Thrones book and never got into the series. A story needs darkness and conflict in order to work, but when it's just nothing BUT nearly unrelenting darkness and misery and nothing gets any brighter than dull, muddy gray...well, there's a reason that there's a TV Trope called Too Bleak, Stopped Caring. (Formerly known as Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy.) I'm not slamming on the series' fans at all and I'm sure the writing has a lot to recommend it...that's just how I feel.
I got to read half the narration for an audio adaptation of a Christmas Carol at my high school and oh BOY do I agree with the idea that what makes the story timeless is it’s sincerity. there are about five takes of a passage near the end when Scrooge is pleading with the ghost of christmas future that i completely ruined by just bursting into tears part way through my lines 😅. the final product will probably never see the light of day but it ended up being my favourite thing i worked on this whole semester.
As a kid, I was so obsessed with the very idea of ghosts showing you your life to inspire change. When other girls brought their Barbies to play with mine, I kinda forced them to recreate Christmas carol with an all-female cast :D
One thing that really annoys me is that it kind of misses a big point the book made about systems of oppression. It wasn't about the fact that the individual was irredeemable it was the privilege and power that came with his money and position as a landlord that corrupted him reinforced by his isolation. That the system of house ownership and renting allowed for that power to be held over starving families and the human cost of treating people as numbers in a book. By making it about one man who is 'too irredeemable' who also assaults/ does extra nasty shit they shift the focus of 'scrooge could be anyone, don't become scrooge' to 'scrooge is this particularly awful person'. One of the comforts of the book, for people are aren't scrooge, is the idea that these systems and practices are man made and at odds with the natural world which manifests in the ghosts. Its the same logic that makes the 'heres a story about one bad cop' kind of thing and it drives me up the wall that the creators of this didn't understand that you don't need to make it 'darker and edgier' because the concept of holding someones very home over them, their family starving, etc is already hellish. Thats the point. Its a hellish existence and he was deliberately blind to it.
Yes! Dickens was based, and he saw systems of oppression. I wonder if the writer of this adaptation ever actually read Dickens? Or sis he just see one of the (far superior) movie versions and decide he wanted to do something he couldn’t have watched as a kid? Because he certainly seemed to miss the entire point of the story.
In the book Scrooge was a money lender, not a landlord, but many adaptations change it to make it more relevant in today's world. Either way, your point still stands
I think a better option would be for Scrooge to decide he does not deserve redemption, and instead offers himself up as a sacrifice for Tiny Tim to be able to live. That might have given this version meaning, if they were really set on him not becoming redeemed. Personally, I think a miserly wealthy man being confronted by the effects of his actions is still just as subversive as it was back in the Victorian Era. The big difference is that no one is actually using the phrase "the deserving poor," but the indifference and even perverse pleasure that wealthy people take in the suffering of the poor is still there. This reminds me of a version of The Nutcracker where Drosselmeyer (sp) was portrayed as a pedophile, and it seems like the only reason was also to make the story more grim. It's not necessarily a bad idea to make new gritty versions of beloved classics, but there has to be some kind of point. And if there's no point, we might as well make something uplifting.
That's an odd thing the writer said about really diving into Scrooge's character and how anyone could possibly end up that way. Like, Malthus was popular, a lot of people thought that way and actually a lot of people still do. That's why we see Scrooge change his mind when he's actually shown the reality of what those ideas mean. He's not meant to be uniquely cruel or evil; he's a participant in this oppressive system who hasn't properly thought about it. Because Dickens wants the reader to think about it. You're supposed to be coming along on this journey and perhaps reflecting on times you yourself have turned away people in need or ignored suffering going on around you, or pushed people away. I'd argue that's why the story is so timeless, and a perfect Christmas story. You're not meant to be watching it thinking "He's a bad person and I'm a good person, this has given me nothing to reflect on in my own life". I mean, you can do that if you want, but it's a bit pointless and probably explains why I stopped watching this adaption after 1 episode.
THIS THIS A THOUSAND TIMES THIS. This version (from what I've seen and read of it; after reading the synopsis and reviews I could only make it through a couple of snippets) misses the point by making Scrooge actively evil. Which I don't think he was meant to be. If anything, he was someone who'd convinced himself that this was the way of the world in general, and the business world in particular, and who was he to buck the trend? He wasn't doing anything really bad. It's not like he KILLED anyone, is it? And then he's knocked for a loop when he sees Marley's fate. Remember, he says, "But you were always a good man of business, Jacob!" Which Marley refutes with "Mankind was my business." He's here to tell Scrooge that (as his counterpart in the underrated An American Christmas Carol puts it) evil isn't just what you do, it's what you DON'T do. That's why I love the Alastair Sim version's added scene of Scrooge visiting Marley's deathbed. Jacob, with one foot in the next world and realizing what awaits him, tries to tell Ebenezer how wrong they'd both been, but Scrooge misses the point entirely, saying, "We were no worse than any other businessmen." Plus, as you said, many believed in Malthus' philosophies about the "surplus population", which was why Scrooge was brought up short when he came up against the fact that the "surplus population" were individuals who had names and loved ones.
I am at the moment with seven chritmas ago, Scrooge ask to the mother of Tiny Tim to..... come to his rooms and obey. And I am just like "what the actual.... WHAT" This adaptation seems like a forced darker version of A Christmas Carol. Wow. Your video was cool :3 ! Thank you !
Ok, hear me out: "Scrooge doesn't deserve redemption" is the most basic takeaway from A Christmas Carol. It is Baby's First Nitpick. But this could have almost been very good. A Christmas Carol is a very short book - and not just by Dickens's standards, either - which is attempting to sell you on the prospect of examining your own flaws, abandoning your Scrooge-like tendencies, and becoming a source of joy in the world. This story is a full-page ad for Your Best Self. That's why Scrooge is so happy at the end, and that's why it feels so good to see him that way. Because being a source of joy to others is a joyful experience, and if this clown can pull it off, anyone can. But if you really want to address the "Scrooge doesn't deserve redemption" thing, you totally can.. Have a character - one of the Cratchits or maybe Fred's wife or something - be really reluctant to forgive Scrooge. They're still hurting, they're still angry. And have him be okay with that. Scrooge has a better life now that he's changed, but that's not _why_ he's changed. He's changed because everyone else deserves a better Scrooge.
I find that making Scrooge's pre-haunting personality due to super intense childhood abuse massively undercuts the messaging of the original because it paints him as someone who ended up that cruel due only to preventable tragedies without parallel to the types of people and behaviours that Dickens was critiquing with his work.
The worst thing about this show is it's an adaptation. If it had just done its own thing, which it clearly wanted to do, then it would have been interesting at least. But instead, every point it tried to be A Christmas Carol it failed.
Because I think we should have a better, more faithful retelling...Here's my concept: The movie starts with the woman (I am terrible with names and it's been a long time since I've consumed any Christmas Carol content, I am sorrry) asking Scrooge for money. He debates it, taking out his riches and counting them. His hands shake and he knocks it all to the ground (he's old, his body is failing him somewhat). The woman takes a few coins off the floor. He growls at her, snapping at her for her to hurry up so he can start cleaning without her meddling interruption. She grabs only a few more and leaves. She goes and hires off a nurse. Someone who is close to scrooge's age. The nurse goes to Scrooge, accidentally bringing with the ghosts (It's not the poor nurse's idea. He's just naturally a good medium who brings forth ghosts). The first night, the nurse is hard at work, trying to make sure Scrooge is comfortable and happy, and the ghost of christmas past visits. He wakes in the middle of the night, screaming, and the nurse rushes in. They talk. The nurse gently pushes Scrooge to actually talk about his feelings, and though scrooge is snappy and bitter about it, he complies, hoping if he gives the bare minimum the nurse will leave. It works. The next three days and two nights... we see the nurse carefully push Scrooge to being open with himself, and slowly, they fall for each other. Christmas day, with a gentle push from the nurse, he gives the workers a paid day off, telling them to go home to their families. Scrooge is not changable, not fully on his own, but with some personal revilations and someone determined to help him be his best self, he starts to beomce better. Plus, it's gay.
My surface level view of this says they wanted to make Scrooge out to be an asshole Sherlock Holmes crossed with Geralt from the Witcher, Batman, and other grimdark sorts of characters with deep voices and dark backstories. but Scrooge's backstory was already plenty tragic, so it just doesn't seem to introduce anything really new.
I can not begin to tell you how excited I was to see a reference to the Albert Finney one and ESPECIALLY the song where they are rejoicing at his death. I LOVE that scene, honestly no adaptation hits that height for me, though I love them all. (Except this one jeeze)
And if I had a flag I'd hang me flag out, To add a sort of final victory touch! But since I left me flag at home I'll simply have to say Thank you very, very, very much!
My favorite version of A Christmas Carol is the cartoon version with Mr. Magoo. I loved the music and animation in it. its really hard to find now and almost no one has heard of it but the TV stations in the Midwest played it every year ,and Iooked forward to every airing.
That was the first version I ever saw...at the age of about six, on Christmas Eve while waiting to head over to my grandmother's house. A short time later, McDonald's did that promotion for PBS' "Once Upon A Classic" where they gave away some of those illustrated classics adapted for younger readers. A Christmas Carol was one of them, and it was the first version I read (I was reading at three and was proficient by the age of six) even if it wasn't Dickens' original.
@@SaraSG1 Trivia: Tim was "played" by Gerald McBoingBoing, a Dr. Seuss creation who'd starred in his own UPA animated shorts (UPA also did the Magoo shorts). At least in this, he gets to speak and sing actual English!
The scene with Mary Cratchit reminds me of the scene with Constanze and Salieri from Amadeus. It’s a deleted/director’s cut scene, which only really serves to make Salieri more evil (I personally don’t care for it), but at least it was consistent with Salieri’s envy and repression and Constanze’s coldness toward him later.
I will tell you the facts here. Yes, this version was WAY too nihilistic, and as much as I didn't like it last year, I loved it in 2020, because it captured the utter hopelessness we all felt all year.
Oh it gets my blood boiling when a filmmaker goes "I wonder what makes a character like [Scrooge]" and their conclusion is f*cking child r***, god. Can they not conceive of a person who maybe, just maybe, is a dick because they want to? Because they learned from their parents to value status more than people or something?? This entire thing reads like an edgy fanfic trying to shock the audience, and honestly, a 14 yo would have made enough grammatical mistakes for it to be at least funny.
festive asexual with cute nail polish and vest! love to see it . now i shall find out about this horrific adaptation what sort of thing manages to hit all these content warning???
I'm glad someone else shares my love of Christmas Carol adapations. I am slowly collecting them. I even have the one where Scrooge is Susan Lucci set in I think the 80s. The Ghost of Christmas Past takes her to the disco 70s so that's about right.I've also seen the one where Scrooge is a Pop Star played by Vanessa Williams. I saw this version and while I enjoyed it more than you did, I can see your POV. I thought your analysis was very good and brought up some intelligent points. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
It's worth noting that Steven Knight also made Serenity. It's legitimately one of the wildest (and worst) films ever made. Not bad because it's weird as hell, but bad for reasons not dissimilar from some of the issues here. Also, changing the message to be about being "beyond redeeming yourself" kind of pisses (ha) on an actually important idea, at least to me. That yes, there may be times when we are beyond forgiveness. But it is never too late to try. Redemption is not a singular act but a process, and one which can never be universally judged to have been successful. Attempting it guarantees you no forgiveness, from yourself or those you have wronged, but that it not the point. You do it because it is right, because doing good is better than doing nothing. It is why restorative justice is useful, and punitive justice does little but destroy. And that's a message that I think is worth while, that there is "still time" as Scrooge says. Granted, I'm not saying we WAIT for them to give back the money, nice as that would be.
The main problem I have is that it loses sight of the message of a Christmas Carol. They wanted the story to be how Scrooge is irredeemable, and doesn't even think he should be forgiven, but in order to do that you have to push him way farther than he is in the book. If he isn't redeemable though then Marley has no purpose. The point of Marley is that he is stuck being punished, and he cares about Scrooge enough to want him to escape that fate. It's also way too slow with the whole first episode basically just being an extended prologue for Marley.
haha, my family and I started watching this and stopped around 20 minutes in at the marley christmas tree hell scene, nice to know that was the right decision...
I just saw it in Disney Plus, I only found weird how so much time was dedicated to Christmas Past while the other two felt like the director was speedrunning the scenes.
This version is not a faithful adaptation of A Christmas Carol but a very brave riff on the tale. I absolutely love it for what it is. My favorite faithful adaptation will be the 25 minute 1971 animated version that was broadcast on television every holiday season for years. We have many faithful adaptations of the story. This interesting take on the story is a welcome variation. That's my opinion, for what it's worth.
"Oh, I don't deserve forgivness, so I won't change anything!" Oh, shut up with this edgelord bullshit. Redemption and forgivness is something you earn, something you pay for. This is just Scrooge straight up not deigning to try to change. Don't do it for yourself, do it for the people you hurt and the ones you can save, that's what redemption is about! This...this is just narcissism and laziness combined. Also, wow, they really went with the "he's evil and because he was m***** as a child" thing. Didn't at least one person in the writing board said "hey guys, don't you think this is a little insensetive?"
i'm stuck on how nephew fred never shows up again. he doesn't need to say the mean thing because that's what the later party is for! why add in something that is already well down later in the story!
Why not omit him altogether for that matter? He never invited his uncle at his wife's requests, but because he is his only living blood relative so far as he knows, and refuses to close the door on him. Changing him in this matter, then never following up on him makes his scene pointless. Speaking of which, making Cratchet hate him is a complete contradiction of his character, too. In spite of his cheapness, Cratchet loves him nonetheless.
Its a reason why I've stopped watching a lot of TV - I just can't handle how dark everything is these days. I can even handle it if there's light at the end of the tunnel but yeah....Also I love redemption stories for someone to take the first great redemption story and make it a great grimdark story with a bleak ending is just unforgivable too me. The livestream and especially David within it are right it should be a crime to not like the Muppets version - the one essential part of Christmas that not even Covid can ruin. Hopefully next year the Singalong version will be back.
I appreciated the fact that in this adaptation, Scrooge wasn't surrounded by one-dimensional saints - because none of us are. People are morally ambiguous, flawed, complicated, and messy- but we're all supposed to TRY to act above our demons - that's the point. Brilliant adaptation, in my opinion.
I do think that a “darker” more character driven take on A Christmas Carol that deviates somewhat from the book while still staying true to its themes of redemption could work. Spend more time focusing on Scrooge’s relationship with his sister, how she was really the only person who truly loved him growing up, the only real light in the darkness and how he feels like he screwed their relationship up and how, after her death, this regret influences his relationship with Fred because he sees her when he looks at him. Show more of his time with Fezziwig and Marley and how they influenced his view of work and of the world. It doesn’t even have to be super grimdark to work. Doing it as a miniseries, this was basically GIFTWRAPPED for them, and they fucked it up
Fine. Let me put out the question everyone is asking. Why is Srudge hot? Was this inspired by 50 Shades of Grey? Or am I just confusing who's Srudge because I wasn't paying much attention to the screen?
@@katherinemorelle7115 I don't know about attractiveness, but Scrooge is usually portrayed as this old geezer when, according to the book, he really shouldn't be all that old. The last scene we see in Christmas Past is his ex-fiancee Belle, now happily married with a family. One of her children is still a baby, meaning she's still in her childbearing years. We soon find out that this is the same Christmas Eve that Jacob Marley died, seven years prior. So if Belle were still young enough to bear children only seven years ago, and she and Ebenezer are around the same age...early fifties, tops, for Ebenezer? It's pretty telling that the best live-action versions (Sim's, Scott's, Stewart's) have him as a vigorous middle-aged man in his prime, rather than an old geezer with one foot nearly in the grave already. And it emphasizes the fact that Scrooge, in his new future, will have time to do the good he's neglected.
I really enjoyed it. I liked the DARKER adaptation. Gave it a 9/10. Did you guys really want just another same ole' retelling of the same old story that already exists????
My favorite adaptation is the Jim Carey Disney movie even though it’s scary, it stays true to the original story and captures the Christmas spirit really well.
At least whoever hired the Peaky Blinders guy to make A Christmas Carol adaptation got what they wanted. Everybody else had to suffer for it but two people probably ended up satisfied with the end result.
I love how out of touch this " adaptation" is. I don't understand how scrooge cant change when seeing all the people he either killed or injured in the mines. that HE CAUSED by the way. They died because of him. He saw them die. but can change when a little boy drowns in an accident that had nothing to do with him. i don't even know why they even left tiny time in this version.
The worst part is that there are some good ideas here (having Scrooge's sister be a ghost...granted, I think she was the wrong ghost) and some great performances (especially Stephen Graham as Marley). But it's all part of a truly ATROCIOUS end result
I'm also a massive carol-phile. Thank you for expressing so well the disgust I felt at this wretched adaptation. You might enjoy the 1977 BBC version starring Michael Hordern as Scrooge.
I think that even if it's an interesting take, it's ultimately not only dismissive of the general tone of the story, but also thematically boring when it comes to moral philosophy because you can make the case that Scrooge doesn't deserve forgiveness for his actions, but in refusing to change he's even more of a shit person and it's just going back to "feeling bad about my life justifies me doing vile shit" it's like if in a trolley problem you had already ran over 5 people and had to chose between running over more people or... Not doing that and you thought that not running over more people would be unfair to those you have already run over. Not to quote The Good Place, but the most important step a man can take is the next. Like idk I feel that if your tone is more defeatist morally and more fire and brimstone than Catholic doctrine, then perhaps you should lighten up a bit.
While the point about how past action can never be undone still stands, the whole "I don't deserve redemption" thing kinda misses the point of redemption IMO. The story isn't about Scrooge's redemption arc, it's about what lead him to begin that arc, that arc has only begun at the very end of the book, and he'll just have to keep trying his best t make up for his wrongdoings for the rest of his life and hope for the best. Or better yet, not actually caring if he gets redeemed or not and just doing good bc he cares about other people's happiness now, even if his soul might forever have a seat empty for him in hell. but yeah going "I don't deserve redemption" when you haven't even begun to try, not t mention deciding to never change bc of this, just comes off as someone who's still very selfish. It's never too late to change your ways and do good as long as you're still alive.
I *hhhaaaaated* that they made Cratchit mean to his wife, and that they had the "Magical Negro" subplot. What we did NOT need, no sir, was Mrs. Cratchit putting a curse on Scrooge.
You as I are entitled to our opinions. This particular adaptation may not be for all but I found it as one of the best along with the George C Scott version. I say "God Bless them"
I actually like the idea of other characters having flaws of their own. That actually does make the story more life-like. Perhaps if the rest of the characters were okay but not saints, that might actually make a really brilliant adaptation.
I wondered how I had missed this, given that it was a BBC adaption. As your film went on, I realised I had watched the first episode, but I obviously didn't go back for any more, and had forgotten all about it. I think I'll stick with The Muppets Christmas Carol, the greatest of all adaptions!
try the Bristol Old Vic version!! on their website I think for a few days more so get in quick!! the bloke being Scrooge plays an absolute blinder, and the whole thing is so joyful.
Maybe if they had made everyone else miserable and then had Scrooge redeemed and realize that he could change things for everyone, it would have fit better for this adaptation.
I like how for once I saw a Scrooge who was a genuinely loathsome human being. A man for whom one night of plain truths didn’t change his nature. It gave him a compelling reason to change that was entirely selfless. We went from not wanting redemption. To wanting it but not thinking himself worthy of it. To seeking it not for himself but for the life of another. Because in the end we’re not nice people for our own benefit. Real morality comes from wanting more for others than you think yourself deserving of. I get in the end Scrooge is still unhappy, guilt ridden and bothered by the unfairness of life. First the unfairness visited on him as a child then the unfairness he visited on others as an adult. But the spirits have made him see that this can go no further unless Scrooge is willing to go to places that horrified him. His change isn’t for his own sake, it’s for the sake of tiny Tim and that act of selflessness not only redeems Scrooge as a man but crystallizes the meaning of Xmas. Thinking about others and not yourself.
It has great actors and good atmosphere, but it's a Christmas Carol in name only. All the joyful elements of Christmas, every element of the holiday itself, has been removed. It suffers for it. Without these elements it's a depressing mess.
I rly dont like the idea that for someone to as bad as Scrooge is, they need to have gone through childhood trauma n what not. When in realitty, rich ppl keep doing awful things just for the money, and people that have endured childhood trauma dont usually grow up to be the villains of the world.
We liked it....very dark, gloomy, exactly as Dickens would've envisaged it. Guy Pearce was brilliant as Scrooge. It was very atmospheric and shone a light on the reasons Scrooge became the way he was....Scrooge was actually just an extremely damaged, sad man.
