Am I the only one who hated this?

I have most of the ''Christmas Carol'' films on dvd-but this one has been my favorite since I saw it on the big screen back in ''71.

I do not hate this movie because there are some individual parts of it I like. But unfortunately with each viewing I give it, it seems like the things that bother me about it just keep sticking out more and more.

1-Alec Guinness is sad to say, the worst Marley I have ever seen in any production. His whole manner doesn't suggest a drop of pity for his former partner and supposed friend, but instead, especially in that terrible and unnecessary Hell sequence, an impish fop taking sadistic pleasure in seeing Scrooge get comeuppance. It's a performance that rings false to what Marley is supposed to be.

2-There is a strange lack of focus on what the "true meaning of Christmas" is supposed to be about in this film, and I'm not simply talking about the total lack of reference to the birth of Christ (we lose for instance even those small points that reminded us of this like Bob and Tim returning from Church and Bob sharing Tim's observation about hoping they would see him as a cripple so they could remember on Christmas who made lame beggars walk and blind men see). Where is the sense of humility and charity and the spirit of good will that Christmas embodies and which the source material talks much about? It seems like the only thing Christmas stands for to all of London is partying, getting presents and getting drunk. Indeed, the whole tone of the "Christmas Present" segment gets neutered beyond belief in which all we see is Scrooge getting giddy over drink and being made to "loosen up" but he gets no reproach from Christmas Present with the children Ignorance and Want. What a cheat it was to not get to hear Kenneth More (in what was otherwise an excellent performance) deliver the mocking refrain of the line, "Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?"

3-The Christmas Past sequence is sloppily paced. And a big mistake in not having "Happiness" be a duet between young Scrooge and Isabel because that would have sold the credibility of their actually having had a romance. All we see is Scrooge looking quite indifferent or blankly through their "courting".

4-The Hell sequence. Ugh. For twenty years of TV viewings this was always cut and it's not difficult to see why. It's over the top, cements the awfulness of Guinness's performance as Marley and it also robs us so much of the haunting effectiveness of Scrooge alone in the graveyard. So much great Dickens dialogue lost.

5-And maybe I just prefer things done more simply, but I prefer seeing a more low-key Scrooge waiting to surprise Bob until the day after Christmas than a big production number through the streets.

There are good things about it. But the 1951 Sim version and Scott's 1984 version blow all others away IMO.

While you two are not alone (unfortunate as that is) I am very happy to say you are in a minority. Yes critics at the time may have deluged this with overly-detracting lamentations all launched over and over, but all the negative jibes and I do mean all were very wrong and overly prejudging, and many of those critics have altered their original views of the film since the films release. There is a simplistic reason... this version just grabs hold of so many. It does it for oh so many reasons, and does so year after year, but it really comes down to that this version has true heart. I am also not sorry to say this has been a firm staple for me and mine for over 30 years, I have owned it in every single format released. 'Mine' also includes numerous family and friends and each would say we do so more than once during the holiday season, trading locations but enjoying over at everyone's home in turn. This truly is first and foremost "Scrooge" for us in our home. While we do own and watch each of the various adaptations out there as well, and I know there are those who will say this one is really out there... it still works for so many, on so many levels, for all the right reasons. The film is, and always will be, a permanent fixture at our holidays. I was taken to the theater to see this during original release and it still conjures up vivid pictures and memories each time it is viewed, if only other movies had that ability. I wish you could enjoy it for what it truly conveys, honest feelings without the overly Hollywood blah/hype.

It was not a "bomb" when it was released in fact it remains one of the biggest hits that Radio City Music Hall has ever seen. The nationwide release was marred by the demise of National General Pictures and Cinema Center Films, yes. But the film was revived on VHS and DVD (BY POPULAR DEMAND) and resurrected by Fox, almost unheard of for any movie that is not a mega-success.

It garnered 5 Oscar Nominations and though it is only shown during a 3 week period around the holidays....it is viewed on television by many more people than have ever seen "Oliver".
Hate it if you must, but there's something to be said about a musical that keeps coming back, year after year, for 44 years. Like "It's a Wonderful Life" it is a feel-bad-then-feel-good holiday classic.

Hardly.

I love this movie..how could you go wrong with this..what humbug to hate this.....but I do admit another factor, often discussed hereon, has been critized, the scary phantom skull and other scary things. What the Dickens.