Scrooge's dad.
Is he not the creepiest and nastiest person ever? Plus his lazy eye makes him that much more creepier. He gives me the chills.
shareExplanation for Scrooge not being allowed home -his mother died in childbirth,giving his father a grudge aginst him.
shareIt's sooooo sad - he did nothing to earn his father's hatred. At least Fan loved him. (Or is it Fran?)
----------------------------------------
Be excellent to each other!
No, it's Fan. I wonder if she was his half-sister due to his father remarrying...
shareThis version seems to be the only one (that I've seen, and I'm trying to see them all*) where Fan is older than Ebenezer. Which would let their mother die in childbirth with Ebenezer and still have both children. In just about all the other versions I've seen she's much younger than he is, as she is in the book.
(*My current signature is from the Reginald Owen version!)
"Don't work overtime. You might make something of yourself!"
I forget...is this the only version where it is revealed that Scrooge's mother died giving birth to him, or is it said in other versions/the book as well?
shareIt's definitely in the book. I'm pretty certain it's mentioned in all of the traditional versions of A Christmas Carol that show the relationship between Ebenezer and his father, Silas.
I pulled out my copy of Dickens... I was wrong. Fan is the younger in the book.
That was the story in the 1951 version. Wonder if Scrooge's school was in Yorkshire?
shareI honestly don't think that Scrooge's mother is mentioned in the original story at all, certainly not that she died in childbirth. It's never said that Fan died in childbirth either, only that she had one child. It never hints at all that Fred's birth is the reason she died. I think this version just wanted to give a psychological reason for Scrooge to have a hard beginning, which led to his hard heart.
This version, which is my favorite, is the only one that says Scrooge's mother died in childbirth. I don't think any version says that Fan died in childbirth.
"Don't work overtime. You might make something of yourself!"
The 1951 version (which has a very expanded "Christmas Past" section) shows Fan on her deathbed. Scrooge begs her not to die, and gives an absolute death look to her husband the screaming baby nearby, but doesn't hear her final, dying request that he love and care for her son. Which adds some poignancy to his treatment of his nephew.
shareI’ve always felt that Charles Dickens’ big weakness as a writer was his tendency to wallow in sentimentality. There’s plenty to be had in A Christmas Carol, but due to the nature of the story, I’ve never minded this in the book. In the films, it’s often a different matter. A good number of the invented scenes of Christmas past in the 1951 film version bother me because they drag on for far too long and too frequently descend into mawkishness. The film bashes the audience over the head foreshadowing Fan’s death, an event that we already fully expect to happen, and the dialogue there and in the death scene itself lacks subtlety. 😜 Thankfully, the film as a whole shines as a true classic, with an inimitable performance by Alastair Sim. His is the most faithful portrayal of Scrooge that we’ve had, I think.
Still, when I’m in the mood for a film version of this story, my preference will be the sober and better-balanced 1984 television movie. What can I say? I just love this film. I’ve been wondering, though -- how old is Scrooge supposed to be in this movie? Like most actors who’ve played the character, George C. Scott wasn’t at all an old man; he was in his mid-fifties. I guess it’s plausible that Scrooge could have been close to or a little older than this age, as well -- people couldn’t expect to live as long in those days. We see Scrooge’s former fiancée with her family -- which, in the book, includes a baby and at least one child who has reached adolescence -- seven years prior to the events of the story, so she couldn't have been past her mid-forties at that time. Hmm... Very interesting!
"Courage is found in unlikely places." ~ The Fellowship of the Ring, J.R.R. Tolkien
I actually prefer the '51 as being truer to the feel of the book. About the only addition I don't like especially is showing whatever-they-called-her (usually "Belle" in most versions) tending to the old Irish woman, as having her give up any family and children and devote herself to basically being an Anglican-acceptable nun is laying it on thick. But overall it does a slightly better job of explaining why despite being a clearly devoted brother to Fan he's at best tolerant and at worst actively hostile to her only child and his only living relative when Fred has clearly never done a thing to him. Not as big a problem for me as the really bad casting of "Tiny" Tim, who looks more like he sprained an ankle playing football than he's got such severe rickets he's dying and it's totally absurd when he's nearly as tall as his "father". The Scott version actually looks like he's got something seriously wrong with him.
I would assume Scrooge is in his mid/late 50s or early sixties. In actual fact the "short lifespan" statistic is somewhat deceptive-it's skewed dramatically low by the extremely high infant mortality rate and also by women of child-bearing age (who didn't die as often in real life as in fiction, but it was still a risk.) Particularly for a man of Scrooge's social class (ie not someone who does hard physical labor or is so destitute he has no access to medical care or decent nutrition-a class that includes the Cratchits, too, as Scrooge in fact pays Bob quite well by the standards of the day) if he reached his teens, he could expect to live well into his sixties or even older.
The costumes in the Scott version are a little confusing there, though. Janet in particular has hair and a gown that suggests late 1850s at the earliest. Scrooge's leaving-school clothes and Fan's very narrow dress argue that's VERY early 19th century. Which would put him more in his late 60s/early 70s. I suppose it doesn't matter, he's George C. Scott. He is whatever age he says he is. My question is "Why does Scrooge have an American accent and no one else does?"
I confess that I never paid that much attention to the costumes. Perhaps that’s just as well, given that they appear to have caused confusion for other people. 😀 I think you’re right that the leaving-school scene must take place in the very late 18th or early 19th century. The scene at Mr. Fezziwig’s establishment definitely looks like the very early 19th century. But as I’m no expert on historical costume, I’m interested in knowing what details of Janet’s dress reflect a date no earlier than late 1850s. I always assumed that the setting is 1843 or thereabouts, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it is meant to be a slightly later period.
As you say, the average life expectancy during the 19th century is misleading due to high infant mortality rates and childbearing risks. Provided that they survived childhood and adolescence and avoided dangerous work, most people could have expected to lead fairly long, full lives during that era. That said, Scrooge seems to be considered fairly old in the book, and most people today would find it absurd to refer to a fifty- or early sixty-something person in those terms. I always imagine him as being in good physical health, though it is clear from Dickens’ description that he doesn’t lead anything approaching a healthy, normal emotional life. 😉 That kind of dreary, misanthropic existence would turn anyone into an old crank.
George C. Scott’s accent is a little out of place, I grant you. I guess it’s one of those flaws I blissfully ignore in the light of all the things that impress me. 😃 I don’t think his portrayal is as faithful to Dickens’ conception of the character as, say, Alastair Sim’s, but it’s a marvelous performance on its own terms. A good while ago, I posted a lengthy comparison of the 1951 and 1984 films, which I think are the two finest film adaptations of this story (I know, I know -- it’s hardly an interesting or brave stance to take when it’s exactly the same as the general consensus 😉). The gist of it was that I find the 1984 movie more faithful on the whole, but the older version has the superior Scrooge.
"Courage is found in unlikely places." ~ The Fellowship of the Ring, J.R.R. Tolkien
I just accept it because it's George C. Scott! Patton didn't sound like that, either (he actually was embarrassed by having a high, reedy voice. Scott always sounds like he gargled gravel.) George C. Scott just makes anything better whether he sounds "right" or not.
Janet's hairstyle (with the center part and forward curls) is very much in a mode fashionable in the United States during the American Civil War. Her skirt is extremely full (1840s fashions were not quite at the full circle hoop stage. Belle/Anne/whatever her name was in the 1851 version is actually wearing a late '30s-mid 40s style when Scrooge dumps her.) Assuming that fashions went east to west, and given the neckline and that it's not a HUGE skirt even on a party dress, I'd guess she is costumed 1850s, probably latter end of the decade. The men, otoh, aren't quite there yet, even Fred. (Scrooge we can excuse because he doesn't care about fashion, which is normal for an older man, and Cratchit's a bit hodge podge but probably isn't spending money on brand-new clothes or fabric. Though his wife does have a fashionable hairstyle.)
And yeah, it's really hard to argue for any other versions, imo. Even if they don't follow the novel religiously at all points, I think both hit the spirit of it closer than any others.
Yes, the mere presence of George C. Scott improves any film. ☺ Personally, I think his voice -- aside from the accent -- evokes Dickens’ description of the character quite well. Scrooge is supposed to sound harsh and grating, and given that he’s also suffering from a minor cold at the beginning of the story, I’d say that Scott’s gravelly tones are practically ideal. I like Alastair Sim's voice, as well -- it gives him a profoundly vulnerable, haunted quality that most Scrooges lack. It would be hard for me to pick a favorite part of the 1984 film, but the scenes with Scott’s Scrooge and David Warner’s excellent Bob Cratchit are right up there. I've always enjoyed Warner’s likeable, wonderfully dignified, understated performance. The meeker Bob Cratchit performances from several of the other adaptations wouldn't really suit this particular film, given Scott’s exceedingly gruff and formidable Scrooge. 😉
I’ll have to take your word for it on the costumes. I've checked Wikipedia, and it doesn't seem to have much in the way of helpful information on this topic. The article does say that the film is set in 1843 -- but there are no links to back this up, so I’m inclined to consider it unconfirmed, for now. It’s possible that the costume design isn't entirely accurate, or maybe, given that this was a relatively low-budget production, the designer had to rent basically everything and make do with a hodgepodge of whatever happened to be in stock. Still, in my (obviously unprofessional) opinion, the costume design has a nice, unified look in spite of the possible anachronisms, so I doubt the latter is true.
"Courage is found in unlikely places." ~ The Fellowship of the Ring, J.R.R. Tolkien
Which leads me to wonder, in the original book, why did Scrooge's father dislike him so?
---
House. My room. Cant walk. My medal. My father. Father, dont!
Scrooge's father -- in the book -- seems to have been cold and unkind in general, rather than personally bitter towards Scrooge himself. Fan's remark, that their father was "so much kinder" that she no longer felt afraid to make a simple request on her brother's behalf, says a lot, I think, but I don't know that he was colder to his son than to his daughter, necessarily. Charles Dickens leaves it fairly ambiguous. It's no wonder that a couple of the adaptations -- including this one -- add a line about Scrooge's mother dying in childbirth. It might be superfluous, but I don't blame the filmmakers for wanting to provide more depth and an explanation for Scrooge Sr.'s harshness.
"Courage is found in unlikely places." ~ The Fellowship of the Ring, J.R.R. Tolkien
It's confusing, but Fan was born first. Even though Scrooge calls her 'Little Fan'. I believe it was because even though she is eldest she was small and frail herself giving the impression that she is the younger of the two.
shareLike Father like Son. This is why Scrooge can't abide Fred. Because Fan died giving birth to Fred.
shareExcept that in the original story neither mother was said to have died in childbirth, and in the 1984 version they never stated or implied that Fred's mother died in childbirth. If she did, how could Fred say how much she loved Scrooge? Was he assuming that? Based on Scrooge's actions and personality I don't think it likely. I don't think there were a lot of other family members who could have told him about her devotion to Scrooge, so that leaves the fact that Fan herself told him.
"Don't work overtime. You might make something of yourself!"