A Christmas Carol (1938)

I was hoping to have this review up before Christmas, but encountered a few technical problems. Hence the reason why it is being posted on December 26th, 2012. 

A Christmas Carol was written by Charles Dickens in 1843 and has been adapted to screen countless times ever since the cinema has started.  One of the oldest surviving prints is from 1907 made by the Edison Company; it's a ten minute short that recreates scenes from the novella through dated, but nonetheless effective special effects. It's also interesting to note that the same actor portrays the Spirits of Christmas. Even though the silent film condenses a great deal of Dickens' story, it's nonetheless captures the essence of it. A Christmas Carol is a very simple and straightforward story; a lonely miser, through the intervention of deceased partner Marley and three Spirits, is given a second chance at life. He learns that life's great rewards come when you in invest in people, rather than money. It's so simple that even a ten minute film can adequately capture it's overall meaning.

There are so many adaptations of A Christmas Carol floating out there that I could probably write an entire novel on the subject alone. What makes every adaptation interesting is how each emphasize a different point in Dickens story. For instance, the 1938 version is 69 minutes long and nearly twenty minute of its running time is focused on the Spirit of Christmas Present, whereas the 1951 version is 86 minutes long and nearly thirty minutes of its running time focuses on the Spirit of Christmas Past.  In other adaptations Scrooge's nephew Fred plays a pivotal role in the story, in others he just a mere after thought. Each adaption brings something different to the table, which is why the story keeps being retold to this very day. This is not including the many sitcoms out there that often feature a Christmas episode that follows a Scrooge-like format; the most famous example is Family Ties, in which Alex is the Scrooge character and absolutely abhors Christmas, but changes his mind when he is visited by three spirits in his dream.  

For the sake of this blog, my review will revolve primarily around the 1938 version, produced by MGM and starring Reginald Owens as Scrooge. 

The version has been largely criticized by Dickens purists due to the many liberties taken with the original novel, which include:

1)      Fred.

      Scrooge’s nephew Fred has a far more prominent role in the film than he did in the actual novel. In the novel, Fred had three very brief scenes; Inviting his Uncle to Christmas Dinner and getting denied, having a Christmas party with his guests as Scrooge and the Spirit of Christmas Present looked on, and finally, standing in a state of shock as his Uncle Scrooge stops by his place to accepts his invite for Christmas Dinner and then asking for forgiveness.  Fred, in the novel, was a minor character to the overall storyline. Interestingly, the 38 version opens with Fred cheerfully walking down the streets of London, on the way to see his bitter uncle. While on his merry journey he stumbles upon Tiny Tim and Bob Cratchit’s other sons. 

 In the novel, Fred was already married. In the 1938 adaptation, he is merely engaged to the lovely Bess.  This provides for a romantic subplot that was completely absent in Dicken’s novel, but fairly common in most MGM productions at the time. MGM was not only in the business of making movies, but grooming talent as well; one gets the sense that the reason this romantic subplot was added was to showcase the talents of Barry Mackay (Fred) and Lynne Carver (Bess). It’s to Mackay's and Carver’s credit that both characters are especially likable and don’t get in the way of the proceedings. In many ways, the Fred/Bess romance is relevant to the actual story line as it shows Scrooges the happiness that could have been his, had he not been consumed by greed. However, this highlights one of the film’s biggest flaws as well.

2)      The Spirit of Christmas Past. 

       This is how Dickens describes the Spirit of Christmas Past in his book,

 

      “It was a strange figure-like a child; yet not so like a child as like an old man, view through a supernatural medium, which gave him the appearance of having receded from the view, and being diminished to a child’s proportions. Its hair, which hung about its neck and down its back, was white, as if with age; and yet the face had not a wrinkle in it, and the tenderest bloom was on the skin. The arms were very long and muscular; the hands the same, as if its hold were of uncommon strength. Its legs and feet, most delicately formed, were, like those upper members, bare.”

In the 1938 film the Spirit of Christmas Past in played by none other than…Ann Rutherford. Rutherford was in her early twenties during the making of this movie and was a starlet in training (she’s probably best known for playing Scarlet O’ Hara’s younger sister Carreen in Gone With the Wind). She’s definitely a curious casting choice for the Spirit of Christmas Past; but again it’s not really much of a distraction once you get past the first few seconds. Rutherford never really reached huge stardom, but she does have an appealing presence and it certainly carries over in this role. 

     The biggest misstep the filmmakers make in regards to the Spirit of Christmas Past section is the omission of Scrooge’s ruin. This segment ends with Young Scrooge and Dick Wilkins happily packing up shop to make way for Christmas.  Scrooge laments about how kind his boss, Mr. Fezziwig, was towards him. The Spirit suggests he can repay Mr. Fezziwig by showing kindness to his clerk, Bob Cratchit. Scrooge balks at this suggestions insisting that “business is business.”  The Spirit then tells Scrooge it is time to show him the more darker moments of his life, but before she can proceed, Scrooge lifts a veil over her head and starts to throttle her, only to wake up and find himself strangling his pillow. I mentioned how the Fred/Bess romance suggests the happiness that could have been Scrooge’s had he not been consumed by greed, but that’s all mere speculation, because we are never shown his downfall. In the novel, young Scrooge falls in love with and becomes engaged to a poor woman named Belle. However, as Scrooge becomes more obsessed with wealth, he slowly distances himself from Belle until, finally, she breaks off their engagement. The 1938 films omits this critical story line and without it, the audience has no idea of the heart ache Scrooge has endured. It's never clear how Scrooge went from being a happy apprentice to Fezziwig to being a lonely, tight fisted cynic. 

3)      Bob Cratchit.

    

     The 1938 version adds more conflict to the story line by adding a subplot in which Scrooge fires Bob Cratchit. While walking home from work, Bob Cratchit gets bombarded with snowballs by children hiding behind a snow bank. Cratchit laughs it off and then gives the children a tip on how to make better snowballs.  The children beg to see Cratchit’s handiwork and a see a man wearing a top hat heading their way. Bob hides behind the snow bank, launches the snowball and knocks off the man’s top hat; much to his horror the man is none other than Mr. Scrooge. To make matters a worse a horse drawn carriage drives by and runs over Mr. Scrooge’s hat. Naturally, this angers  Scrooge, who demands compensation for his hat and then fires Cratchit on the spot.  Even this unfortunate series of events can’t bring Cratchit down for too long; he laughs at the ridiculousness surrounding the situations, shouts out “Merry Christmas” and then proceeds to buy supplies for his family’s Christmas dinner. Cratchit keeps his current unemployment a secret from everyone, except his oldest daughter Martha, because he doesn't want to ruin the holiday spirit. This subplot exists to for two reasons: To make the Cratchit’s situation direr and to make Scrooge’s redemption all the more remarkable.  Bob Cratchit and his family were in bad shape to begin with (a crippled son, low wages), but him getting sacked really ups the ante.  Will Bob Cratchit find another job? Will Scrooge have a change of heart? Of course, the audience already knows the answers to these questions, making this subplot rather unnecessary.  Why include such a subplot? I think it was MGM way of acknowledging the current problems that plagued America; this was made during the Depression. It was a plot device the writers added in hopes of making Bob Cratchit more sympathetic to Depressia Era moviegoers. However, movies are also a form of escapism, so Cratchit’s financial woes are resolved fairly quickly.  

      Gene Lockhart was one of the all time great character actors and is still, far and away, my favorite Bob Cratchit. The other actors the preceded and followed him were good, but they lacked the overall warmth and humor he brought to the role.  The Cratchit family scenes have air of authenticity to them, largely due to the fact that Mrs. Cratchit is played by Lockharts real life wife, Kathleen, and their real life daughter, June, plays one of the Cratchit’s daughters, Belinda. It’s a credit to Lockhart as an actor that the whole “Bob Cratchit” getting sacked subplot, while unnecessary, isn't too intrusive to the overall film. 

4)       Ignorance and Want.
In the novel, The Spirit of Christmas Present ends on a rather grim note:

“Forgive me if I’m not justified in what I ask,” said Scrooge, looking intently at the Spirit’s robe, “but I see something strange, and not belonging to yourself, protruding from your skirts. Is it a foot or a claw?”

“It might be a claw, for the flesh there is upon it,” was the Spirit’s sorrowful reply. “Look here.”
From the folding of its robe, it brought two children, wretched, abject, frightful, hideous, miserable. They knelt down at its feet, and clung upon the outside of its garment.

A few paragraphs down, Scrooge has this exchange with the Spirit:

“Spirit!  are they yours?” Scrooge could say no more.

“They are Man’s,” said the Spirit, looking down upon them. “And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. The boy is Ignorance. The girl is Want. Beware of them both, and all their degree, but most of all beware this boy, for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased. Deny it!” cried the Spirit, stretching out its hand toward the city. “Slander those who tell it ye! Admit it for your factious purpose, and make it worse! And bide the end!”

“Have they no refuge or resource?” cried Scrooge.

“Are there no prisons?” said the Spirit, turning on him for the last time with his own words, “Are there no workhouses?”

This then segues way into Scrooge’s encounter with The Spirit of Christmas Future.  The 1951 version with Alastair Sim has this exchange intact, but the 1938 film omits it from the story line.  Instead of ending on a bleak note, it ends on a rather joyous one; Scrooge begs the Spirit if he can stay and see more of Fred and Bess’ Christmas Party.  The Spirit says, “You don’t like Christmas.”

Scrooge retorts, “I do! I love Christmas.” And then the audience is then shown a montage of all the joyful events Scrooge has encountered throughout the course of the film.  In fact, he’s already a changed man, that it makes the Spirit of Christmas Future anti-climatic; in fact, the Future segment is probably shortest part in the entire film, lasting a little over five minutes. 

Before, I mentioned how Bob Cratchit being unemployed touched on the problems that Depression audiences faced, and while MGM was willing to briefly acknowledge the problems that plagued America, they weren't going to hit them over the head with it.  It is one thing to have Bob Cratchit unemployed for a brief period of screen time, but it is quite another thing to show two undernourished children in dire straits. This scene probably hit too close to home for many audiences, and to include in what is essentially a feel good story would probably (in the studios eyes) undermine the overall enjoyment of the film.

The 1938 version gets heavily criticized for being overly cheerful, but this isn't too surprising given that it was made by MGM, whose business was to sell fantasies to audiences desperately wanting to escape (if briefly) their real life woes.  It is a film that made audiences happy and, maybe, gave them a little hope for the future.  While the 1938 version maybe be “too cheerful” for some audiences, it does, for the most part, capture the essence of Dickens novel.  It also includes a scene from the novel that is completely missing from the 1951 version.  In the novel Scrooge and The Spirit of Christmas Present are walking through the city, watching people carrying their dinners to the bakers shop:

The sight of these revelers appeared to interest the Spirit very much, for he stood, with Scrooge beside him, in the baker’s doorway, and taking off the covers as their bearers passed, sprinkled incense on their dinners from his torch. And it was very uncommon kind of torch, for once or twice when there were angry words between two dome dinner-carriers who had jostled each other, he shed a few drops of water on them from it, and their good humor was restored directly. For they said, it was a shame to quarrel on Christmas Day. And so it was! God love it, so it was!

This scene gets re-enacted in the 1938 film, in which two men bump into each other and start to quarrel. They start to shove one another, then the Spirit waves his torch over them, and they start to comment how silly they are acting. They apologize and one of them offers to buy the other a beer. It’s a wonderfully funny scene and it’s shame that most adaptations have dropped it altogether.  

The 1938 version has my favorite Jacob Marley, Leo G. Carroll. What I love about Carroll’s performance is that he is wonderfully creepy without overdoing it. In the 1951 version, Michael Hordern played Jacob Marley and he is completely over the top with his performance; at one point even putting his right hand to his forehead, while bemoaning all the opportunities he wasted in his lifetime.  Secondly, the 1951 staging of this scene is fairly (with the exception of Marley’s wailing) lifeless, Scrooge and Marley sit down on comfy chairs and have a nice fireside chat.  It worked well in the novel, but is fairly dull on film.

The 1938 version livens up this scene by having Scrooge run to his window and call out to night watchmen for help. The night watchmen run up to his room, don't see anything out of the ordinary, and assume that Scrooge has had too much to drink. The 1938 version is far more cinematic as well;  at one point Marley passes in front Scrooge and the audience can see through Marley; Scrooge remains in frame the entire time. It’s a neat effect. The 1938 relies heavily on close ups to convey the emotion of the scene, while the 1951 is a static long shot, only cutting to close up after Marley starts wailing. The 1951, despite making Marley transparent, is staged like a play. The 1938 version is cinema at its finest. 

The 1951 version is often considered the best adaptation of the Dickens novel, mainly due to Alastair Sim's wonderful performance as Scrooge. Sim is far and away the best Scrooge in cinema history and makes up for that film's shortcomings. Reginald Owen's portrayal as Scrooge is not nearly as compelling as Sim's, in fact, he gives a rather one note performance. However, while Owen's interpretation may lack the depth that Sim's brought to the role, he is nonetheless a lot of fun to watch as Scrooge; check out the scene in which a wad of spit spews from his mouth when he says to Cratchit, "It's poor excuse for picking a man's packet every 25th of December." It may be a one  note performance, but it's certainly the right note. The difference between the two movies is this: the 1938 adaptation is an ensemble piece, while the 1951 version is a detailed character study. 

What makes A Christmas Carol such a compelling story is that everyone, regardless of age, is capable of changing.  You’re future is not preordained, but rather is in your hands to mold. It’s a very comforting message and explains why this novel has been adapted so many times in last century.  

Credits:

Cast: Reginald Owen (Ebenezer Scrooge), Gene Lockhart (Bob Cratchit), Kathleen Lockhart (Mrs. Cratchit), Leo G. Carroll (Jacob Marley), Barry Mackay (Fred), Terry Kilburn (Tiny Tim), Ann Rutherford (Spirit of Christmas Past), Lynne Carver (Bess), Lionel Braham (Spirit of Christmas Present), D'Arcy Corrigan (Spirit of Christmas Future), Ronald Sinclair (Young Scrooge), June Lockhart (Belinda Cratchit).

Director: Edward L. Marin

Screenplay: Huge Butler

Running Time: 69 minutes.