The Christmas Carol (1949)

Good concept, poorly executed.

A very feeble attempt at affirmatie action

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

BEWARE OF FALSE REVIEWS & REVIEWERS. SOME REVIEWERS HAVE ONLY ONE REVIEW TO THEIR NAME. NOW WHEN ITS A POSITIVE REVIEW THAT TELLS ME THEY WERE INVOLVED WITH THE FILM. IF ITS A NEGATIVE REVIEW THEN THEY MIGHT HAVE A GRUDGE AGAINST THE FILM . NOW I HAVE REVIEWED OVER 200 HOLIDAY FILMS. I HAVE NO AGENDA. I AM HONEST! The Christmas Carol is a 1949 low-budget, black and white television special narrated by Vincent Price. Compressing the Charles Dickens classic story into a half-hour, it is stated to be "the oldest extant straight adaptation of the story" for television.The production will be considered primitive by modern standards; it is also noted for misspelling Ebenezer Scrooge's name as "Ebeneezer" in the opening credits. This special is worth watching for many reasons. There is something about watching an old black and white movie about Christmas. The production is not the bet ever adaption of the Charles Dickens classic but none the less it is well thought out and executed.Older adults will like this. Kids will be bored. It is worth seeking out. There is a "Timeless Vibe" to this that big feature films seldom capture.

The problem with "The Christmas Carol" (1949) is that it's a VERY familiar tale--with quite a few versions out there--including the classic versions with Alistair Sim as well as Reginald Owen, a musical, some wonderful made for TV versions and it's probably the most ripped-off plot used in sitcoms! So, because of this, a SHORT version with cheap sets is already at a huge disadvantage--even if it had Vincent Price narrating. Most of the acting (except for the Ghost of Christmas Present) is decent and it's okay for 1949 TV. But, shoving this into such a short time slot and the poor ending at the Cratchit ending didn't help. Overall, it's worth a look if you are curious but my advice is to see the made for TV version starring George C. Scott--I really think this is the best of the lot.This show is like white bread--inoffensive and a bit bland.

Mainly because of Vincent Price's excellent and tongue-in-cheek narration, reading the celebrated Dickens story, this works better than it should, especially given the ridiculously over the top performance of Taylor Holmes as Scrooge, acting in a way one associates more with the worst excesses of silent cinema.However, in twenty-five minutes this production does include a scene in Scrooge's office, Jacob Marley and all the three ghosts, as well as a glimpse at Scrooge's redemption and celebration of Christmas.As an example of early television's attempts to film the classics, it is very good indeed. There are of course better adaptations of this tale, but this one is worth seeking out even if is just the once.The version I watched is rather muddy picture-wise, but the sound is clear and understandable, and everyone has clear voices which serve Dickens' text well.

This condensed version of the Dickens story was shown on CBN one December in the mid-1980s. I taped it, and our family has enjoyed watching it each Christmas since then. The production is simple, but certain of the elements evoke unintended laughs. Only about half of the actors use British accents. Taylor Holmes' portrayal of Scrooge is very melodramatic, and we laugh at some of his delivered lines. The effect of Marley breaking through Scrooge's door is also very funny: a shot of the door is superimposed with Marley walking through a large sheet of paper and accompanied by a big "boom" sound effect. However, the program is very charming, despite the mediocre production values. I hope it is made available someday, even as a bargain-bin DVD.