A Christmas Carol (1923) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
No Tiny Tim, but Has Dickens's Original Text
springfieldrental9 December 2021
Charles Dickens's 'A Christmas Carol' is one of the most adapted stories in the history of literature, with the exception of the Bible. This is especially true in film. In cinema's eighth earliest adaptation of the Dickens's novella, England's May 1923's "A Christmas Carol" (otherwise known as "Scrooge"), this British two-reeler is rare in that it ignores Tiny Tim, neither mentioned or appearing. This is the first version, however, to contain a large amount of Dickens's original text within its intertitles.

The movie is also a departure for showing Scrooge's meanness when he's irritated by one (not the normal two) boy singing Christmas carols outside his office. Instead of simply shooing him away, Scrooge gets out a book and goes outside to thwack the young singer over the head.

The opening credits list only four actors, one being Russell Thorndike, who plays a lively and convincing Scrooge. Known for writing his Doctor Syn novels, of which three have been adapted to the screen, Thorndike appeared in only 19 movies from 1922 through 1955. He was severely injured in Gallipoli during World War One and specialized in Shakespearean movies. His acting sister, Sybil, was more widely known, so much so that George Bernard Shaw specifically wrote his play 'Saint Joan' especially for her.

There are a number of articles and documentaries ranking the 'Christmas Carol' and 'Scrooge' movies throughout the years. One expert ranking (writer Clement Tyler Obropta) has the 1923 British version listed at #37, impressive considering it's less than 30 minutes in length.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
a well Mr. Fred
Kirpianuscus24 December 2023
I appreciated Forbes Dawson as Mr. Fred and this represents, for me, the main virtue of film. I loved the accent to his family life. I saw Russell Thorndike as not so usual Scrooge , from reactions to the end , the reasonable explanation being, off course, the 25 minutes of film.

And, not surprise, I perceived the ghosts as Achilles heel of film.

But entire story is decent reminded and , sure, the absence of few significant scenes - like the dinner of Cratchids can be regretable but the film just works pretty well, proposing fair atmosphere, some humor and the expected final.

Russell Thorndike is man of formula of character and exactly this fact makes the story little more pleasant .
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A brief telling of a classic story.
darkwebonline24 October 2011
If you've seen the other silent versions of A Christmas Carol, this probably feels very familiar. Naturally, in 25 minutes, the story is skated through pretty quick, with large chunks of it completely omitted. But all the ghosts are at least present, and realised quite well, with Russell Thorndike making a suitably grumpy titular character, although the beard is more Father Christmas than Scrooge. One thing that amazes me is how similar Scrooge's chamber looks in all these films - maybe they "recycled" the old set.

In summary then, this version is far from the definitely adaption, but at least it still exists in it's entirely - which is a blessing - and at less than half an hour, it's hardly taxing to sit through.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed