For some odd reason, this earlier filmed version of the venerable Christmas classic has somehow eluded my attention. Perhaps it's because for a long time I thought the 1951 Alastair Sim movie was the original, and now I've come to learn that Seymour Hicks actually reprised an even earlier silent interpretation of Ebeneezer Scrooge dating back to 1913. The additional irony is that this "Scrooge' is now easily available via VCI Entertainment's widely distributed package featuring the Sim version in both black and white and a colorized edition.
Surprisingly, or maybe not, Hicks does a rather reasonable job of bringing the Dickens classic to film. Although he seems to be rather more overbearing in his miserliness than Sim's character, part of one's reaction to his performance may well rest on his physical presence. Hicks has a fuller, more rounded appearance than Sim, who's scarecrow-like features always suited me better from the perspective of how I envisioned the character myself. There's also the question of the picture's length. This earlier version doesn't have as much time to fully develop Ebeneezer's transformation, skipping rather large parts of the story's exposition when it comes to Jacob Marley's appearance and the subsequent visits from the other worldly spectres. Scrooge's personal relationships are also given fuller measure in the 1951 picture.
All in all though, I have no trouble in recommending the picture on it's own merits. It handles the basic story well if rather thriftily, and even manages to throw in an interesting aside focusing on cooks preparing a royal party for the Lord Mayor of London, while the crowd toasts the Queen, and forlorn peasants outside the gathering manage to pay tribute to her majesty from their street side vantage point.
Surprisingly, or maybe not, Hicks does a rather reasonable job of bringing the Dickens classic to film. Although he seems to be rather more overbearing in his miserliness than Sim's character, part of one's reaction to his performance may well rest on his physical presence. Hicks has a fuller, more rounded appearance than Sim, who's scarecrow-like features always suited me better from the perspective of how I envisioned the character myself. There's also the question of the picture's length. This earlier version doesn't have as much time to fully develop Ebeneezer's transformation, skipping rather large parts of the story's exposition when it comes to Jacob Marley's appearance and the subsequent visits from the other worldly spectres. Scrooge's personal relationships are also given fuller measure in the 1951 picture.
All in all though, I have no trouble in recommending the picture on it's own merits. It handles the basic story well if rather thriftily, and even manages to throw in an interesting aside focusing on cooks preparing a royal party for the Lord Mayor of London, while the crowd toasts the Queen, and forlorn peasants outside the gathering manage to pay tribute to her majesty from their street side vantage point.