Scrooge
|
DVD Cover Information Actor: Donald Calthrop, Garry Marsh, Mary Glynne, Robert Cochran, Seymour Hicks Brand: Image Entertainment DVD: Region Code 1 Audio: English (Unknown); English (Original Language) Format: Black & White, DVD, NTSC Picture Format: 1.33:1 Running Time: 78 minutes DVD Release Date: 2002-10-29 Audience Rating: NR (Not Rated) Studio: Image Entertainment |
| New | New Usually ships in 1-2 business days | $6.90 | ||
| Used | Used Usually ships in 1-2 business days | $1.49 |
Your purchase is protected by the A-to-z Safe Buying Guarantee. Amazon.com automatically transfers your payment to the merchant so you'll never need to pay a merchant directly. Amazon.com A-to-z Safe Buying Guarantee covers both the delivery of your item and its condition upon receipt.
Movie Reviews of Scrooge
Movie Review: Dated, but Hicks is Still Good!
Summary: 3 Stars
This is the oldest talking version of The Dicken's Classic and stars Seymour Hicks as Scrooge. Sir Seymour Hicks was a renowned stage actor during his time and actually does a commendable and faithful portrayal of Scrooge. He's certainly among the meanest, most surly and unkept Scooges you've ever seen on screen. This version isn't nearly as well known as the 1939 Reginald Owen or 1951 Alastair Sim versions due mainly because it very rarely shows up on TV these days...in fact it's rarely been on TV as long as I can remember.
There are some notable differences in this version. First, you never actually see Marley's ghost, merely here the disembodied voice of Scrooge's former partner. The sets are also far less ornate than even in the 1939 version. Although removed by only four years, clearly there was not a lot of money thrown into this version. Another weak point is the supporting cast. Hicks was a pro and had to pretty much carry the whole show. It's a good thing he is onscreen most of the time. Donald Calthrop is a rather dull Cratchit and a bit old for the part. Oscar Asche is a rather Bulbous Spirit of Christmas Present and far different than the types we've seen in latter versions.
Still the dinginess and starkness of the sets and costuming kind of fits with this period of Dicken's England so in some ways there is perhaps more authenticity to the film. It's not a horrible version but it's definitely dated.
Reviewed by Tim Janson