“Scrooge” (1913) (aka “Old Scrooge”)

Retro Review #4: Old Scrooge – Which do you want first? The good news or the bad?

“Scrooge” (1913) (aka “Old Scrooge”)
+ Silent short film, bw £ 40m
+ Based on literature (novella) A Christmas Carol. (1843)❗🔙🔜⭐ by Charles Dickens⭐

C-v

Grade: C-v (-0.2) / HOF: 0
EQ 👍? | 📖? 👥? 📽️? 🎼? (Coming soon upon re-review)
DW 😎🕶️🚫?.? | 🌚? 🌝? (Coming soon upon re-review)
POPCAP 💯n/a 🍿n/a 🧢n/a
L-R 💻⬆️⬇️? 👀⬆️⬇️? 🛐⬆️⬇️? (Coming soon upon re-review)

Written by Seymour Hicks. Directed by Leedham Bantock.

The good news is that this film comes in at 40 minutes, so it’s considered a short film. Most sources I’ve seen consider 41 minutes to qualify as feature-length.

But the bad news is that for the first couple of minutes I thought maybe I was watching a documentary about Dickens and his story, because they had an odd trivia-laden introduction.

But the good news is that it got going quickly.

But the bad news is that with numerous title cards, it was like reading a story, with video clips interspersed.

But the good news is that I’ve watched enough silent films to not mind and they seemed to be thoroughly covering every detail of the Dickens novella.

But the bad news is that they were telling a great story poorly. The narrative used a completely non-Dickens voice and felt like a terrible Cliff notes summary written by someone who didn't quite “get” the story.

But the good news is that when the title cards switched to dialogue, it was mostly word for word from Dickens.

But the bad news is that didn’t last. They began garbling conversation attributing quotes to the wrong characters, and then using non-Dickens dialogue, repeating the bad narrative voice problem.

But the good news is that they were following the story precisely.

But the bad news is that they were twenty minutes, i.e. fifty percent into the film, and had only covered about ten percent of the story.

But the good news is that Marley’s Ghost finally appeared.

Seymour Hicks as Ebenezer Scrooge.

But the bad news is that they had only left twenty minutes to tell the remaining ninety percent of the story. So they rolled the next three ghosts into one and rushed through, slowing down once for an overlong visual between two badly written title cards.

But the good news is that there was just enough Dickens in this train wreck to avoid a D+ or worse grade, and I escaped with my sanity intact. I recommend this film only for those who would, like me, marvel at the bizarre mix of superb and incompetent storytelling.

But the bad news is that what with all the start-of-tour housekeeping and the volume of rapid stops, some on this Tour may be getting a bit overwhelmed.

But the good news is that we stopped early right here on December 1, pushing the next few stops ahead to today, an already light day. You'll get the December 2 reviews tomorrow, and very soon we will settle into just one or two texts per day.

Onwards!

+ viewed 2024-12-02, sd7, 1.33, 0
+ ⏳👻🎈⛄🎄🎅🦄🧙😥

+ ✅❌? NR (Coming soon upon re-review)
+ 😡? 😵‍💫+? 🤬+? 🤭+? 🫣+? (Coming soon upon re-review)

+ 👀 (Coming soon upon re-review)
+ ✝️ (Coming soon upon re-review)
+ ✡️ (Coming soon upon re-review)
+ 🗽 (Coming soon upon re-review)

Originally posted to text group 2024-12-02
Last updated 2025-04-04

Please do not include spoilers in the comments.
Spoilers are permitted in the Chat for this work.

⬅️Previous (all sections) | Next (all sections) ➡️