Tetrady not as good as all the hype

Rijndri Load of rubbish!!

Inadvands Boring, over-political, tech fuzed mess

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Byrdz Shower of Stars - 1954. Fredric March as Ebenezer Scrooge. Basil Rathbone as the Ghost of Jacob Marley. Bob Sweeney as Bob Cratchit. What could possibly go wrong ? Where do I begin ?The first three minutes of the program is taken up by Choral Singing. In fact, the program turns out to be a series of mediocre to bad songs interrupted occasionally with an abbreviated telling of "A Christmas Story". There is a way overlong love filled duet by the young Ebenezer and Belle following which she breaks off their engagement. Ummm... wha ? Following this, Ray Middleton goes on and on about Christmas and Santa which has nothing to do with the story. It's like he is supposed to be the "Ghost of Christmas PRESENTS"To make matters worse, March has a distractingly huge and obviously false nose that is not the color of his face. Then there is the final carol by "Tiny" Tim / choir during which we see several minutes of Frederic March making faces. It's just too too odd.I looked forward to seeing Basil Rathbone as Marley's Ghost but found him to be nothing special in the role.If you have made a list of "A Christmas Carols" to watch and need to check this one off .. do so... otherwise skip it.Almost forgot .. there are some cool ads for Chrystler cars !

Syl Back in the day, every great actor had played Ebenezer Scrooge and it was Fredric March's turn. Basil Rathbone played Jacob Marley. But I really wanted to see this episode for an appearance of a young Bonnie Franklin as Martha Cratchit. She and her sister Judy Franklin played sisters in this episode as the Cratchit sisters. Bonnie must have been only 10 years old. Sally Fraser's singing voice was dubbed by the great Marilyn Horne. Bernard Hermann wrote the score. We could argue forever which is the best Scrooge actor and which film is best of all. Every actor like Fredric March takes a different approach and every "Christmas Carol" rendition is worth watching especially with Basil Rathbone as Jacob Marley. This version only lasts about an hour.

patrickharman My wife's uncle gave us this clunker. It is by far the worst video adaptation of the Dickens classic we have ever experienced! From a visual storytelling perspective, there is far too much wasted screen time that advances the story not a whit; vapid songs about the "Spirit of Christmas" contribute only a "spirit of ennui" to the production, which bears little resemblance to the powerful tale of a soul's miraculous conversion and redemption that comes through the printed word and many fine films. If this video vehicle has any value at all, it could only be as a snapshot of the crass, commercialized America at mid-century that mistook drivel like this for high culture.The 1984 TV movie with George C. Scott delivers a far more satisfying experience.

roghache I bought the Bing Crosby / Kate Smith Christmas DVD specifically for the inclusion of this 1954 Frederic March version of A Christmas Carol as a bonus. For those who are real Carol fans and simply must see every version, naturally this shouldn't be missed. However, if this were the only adaptation available to me, I'd feel quite deprived!Frederic March makes a fairly good Scrooge, in my opinion. The rest of the cast didn't much stand out with me one way or the other except that I didn't really like them 'doubling up' on roles. The same actress played both the Ghost of Christmas Past and Belle, and the same actor both nephew Fred and the Ghost of Christmas Present. I suppose it must have been fairly low budget and this was cheaper. I found odd and objectionable the writers having Marley's ghost repeatedly moaning "Oh God!" The Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come was ridiculous -- some sort of blackbird! Even the Ghost of Christmas Present was miscast. Instead of a cheery, benevolent, bare chested giant clothed in a green robe, he wore tunic and pants and seemed rather slovenly, lolling about on the floor singing! They modernized or Americanized the story a bit, having one of the songs refer to Santa and the Cratchits trim a Christmas tree.The movie seemed to start out better than it ended. I found the first scenes preferable to later sequences, mainly because less seemed to be omitted early on! I prefer non-musical versions to musical ones anyway but find it especially irritating when they find time for several songs but omit crucial characters such as Ebenezer's sister Fan and eliminate numerous vital scenes. This version is short anyway, only about 50 minutes, and the story is pretty bare bones. Most of the details that enrich the tale are simply left out.The music was pleasant enough and seemed to fit in suitably but for most of the numbers, I found they contributed little and I merely wanted them to get on with the story! Unlike the 1970 Albert Finney musical which did boast some truly catchy tunes, none of these songs were the least bit memorable. However, I did enjoy the carolers at the beginning of the movie. Also, Tiny Tim sings a song at the end which, if I heard correctly, tells the Christmas story (religious context) and it appeared as though Scrooge was truly moved.Lest I appear too critical, this adaptation is a fairly traditional (if summarized) telling of Dickens' story and certainly maintains the original spirit. Again, I enjoyed March in the role and really loved some of the sets, especially the street scenes with the carolers and the drawing room with Fezziwig's party. I'd certainly recommend it to any Carol enthusiasts. Just keep an open mind and you'll enjoy it, but don't get your hopes up too high because you'll probably be disappointed!