This off-putting version of "A Christmas Carol" is an object lesson in how not to adapt Dickens's tale. Albert Finney is good as Scrooge: in the opening scenes, he is a fun, hissable miser, chasing down his debtors with cruel gusto. He also does great work in the ghost sequences, mumbling out sad laments over his lost love, and looking pitiable and meek. However, the movie makes the odd mistake of putting everyone Scrooge knows in an unflattering spotlight. Why should we care if Scrooge is redeemed if the people he's helping are all creepy and vindictive?
Compare this version to the wonderful 1951 Alastair Sim adaptation. In that tale, we have one scene (straight from the novella) of some shady characters selling off Scrooge's belongings after his death, shielding themselves from guilt by claiming that Scrooge's behavior brought this judgment upon him. A far cry from the 1970 musical, wherein droves of Scrooge's debtors literally dance in the street to celebrate his death. These are the people we're supposed to root for? You could argue that Scrooge's eventual redemption has the wider effect of making them into better people too (as Tom Jenkins seems to soften once Scrooge forgives his debt), but so what? The 1951 version shows Scrooge's circle as kind, goodhearted people who fear or endure Scrooge, but who don't actively hate him and wish him dead. The 1970 version made me think, Well, you parading freeloaders _did_ all owe him money, didn't you?
Even Bob Cratchit comes off as unlikeable in "Scrooge," with his simultaneously self-effacing and self-aggrandizing wisecracks. In the 1951 version, when Cratchit asks, "Who else in our acquaintance can boast two rounds of the finest rum punch?" he's being sincere, reminding his children to be grateful for what he perceives as their bounty. In the 1970 version, Cratchit knows he's underpaid, he knows he deserves more, and he's petulant and whiny about it. You don't root for this guy.
Aside from that, we have the forgettable score; a bizarre Christmas Yet- to-Come sequence, with punishments that seem far incommensurate with Scrooge's crimes; the entire ending sequence, wherein Scrooge evidently spends every penny he's ever earned to hand out toys and bottles of wine to random strangers; and Alec Guinness, who doesn't know whether to be funny or scary or just shambling and weird. That's this movie for you: shambling and weird.
Compare this version to the wonderful 1951 Alastair Sim adaptation. In that tale, we have one scene (straight from the novella) of some shady characters selling off Scrooge's belongings after his death, shielding themselves from guilt by claiming that Scrooge's behavior brought this judgment upon him. A far cry from the 1970 musical, wherein droves of Scrooge's debtors literally dance in the street to celebrate his death. These are the people we're supposed to root for? You could argue that Scrooge's eventual redemption has the wider effect of making them into better people too (as Tom Jenkins seems to soften once Scrooge forgives his debt), but so what? The 1951 version shows Scrooge's circle as kind, goodhearted people who fear or endure Scrooge, but who don't actively hate him and wish him dead. The 1970 version made me think, Well, you parading freeloaders _did_ all owe him money, didn't you?
Even Bob Cratchit comes off as unlikeable in "Scrooge," with his simultaneously self-effacing and self-aggrandizing wisecracks. In the 1951 version, when Cratchit asks, "Who else in our acquaintance can boast two rounds of the finest rum punch?" he's being sincere, reminding his children to be grateful for what he perceives as their bounty. In the 1970 version, Cratchit knows he's underpaid, he knows he deserves more, and he's petulant and whiny about it. You don't root for this guy.
Aside from that, we have the forgettable score; a bizarre Christmas Yet- to-Come sequence, with punishments that seem far incommensurate with Scrooge's crimes; the entire ending sequence, wherein Scrooge evidently spends every penny he's ever earned to hand out toys and bottles of wine to random strangers; and Alec Guinness, who doesn't know whether to be funny or scary or just shambling and weird. That's this movie for you: shambling and weird.