Skip to main content

What’s Christmas but a time for finding yourself a year older and not a day richer? There’s nothing merry in that.

Scrooge
(1970)

(SPOILERS) The most charitable thing one can say about Scrooge the musical is that it was bound to happen at some point. It isn’t even necessarily a bad idea. It could work. Indeed, it did work two decades later when the Muppets tried it. Which rather highlights the big problem with this picture; it’s no fun.


As taglines go, “What the dickens have they done to Scrooge?” is laying yourself open for invective, but the film was an easy sell to awards ceremonies, inclined as a matter of course towards sumptuous musicals. It was nominated for a BAFTA, gathered a handful of Golden Globes (I know, as meaningless as it gets, thus Albert Finney took a Best Actor award) and four Oscar noms (tellingly, none were in major categories). It’s always fun to disagree with Pauline Kael’s critiques, but she had Scrooge thoroughly banged to rights when she hauled it over the coals. She accused it of the crime of playing it tediously safe; “If you make it tastefully dull, you stand a very good chance of coming out with a picture that will be acclaimed a screen classic”.


I’m not sure that has happened, but its perennial small screen presence reserves it just that kind of festive status. The fact that IMDB (a mystifying 7.5 average) seems to rate it, and that somehow – presumably because the big-screen-musical-to-stage reversal is now so commonplace – it’s oft revived for touring (Anthony Newley and Tommy Steele both took the title role), shouldn’t blur its limited appeal. “Will children enjoy it? I doubt whether they will, much” Kael answered her own question. Scrooge is the sort of Christmas movie no one sits down to watch with their undivided. They have it on in the background, so it assumes the status of slightly less static festive decor. Only slightly, though.


Albert Finney had done relatively little cinema following his (rightly) acclaimed international breakout in Tom Jones, and he initially turned the Ebenezer role down (others offered the part included Richard Harris and Rex Harrison, both of whom would have been much better suited). As with Murder on the Orient Express, but much less fun – Finney doesn’t quite go ham-side up, but rather, as Kael commented “plays it glumly and realistically, a terrible mistake” – this finds the actor donning layers of makeup to accomplish an “astonishing” physical transformation. A young 33-year-old becomes an old man! But Finney’s choices weren’t in the aid of dramatic or mesmerising results, as per Brando’s Vito Corleone a couple of years later. Instead, they smacked of classic theatrical vanity, literally disguising oneself with one’s art; his performance suggests Alfred Steptoe sucking a lemon while encountering the first stages of a stroke. Even Bill Oddie did a more convincing old man – old Bill – in The Goodies episode The End. And he wasn’t trying.


The less-than-compelling casting extends to his strangely under-amped support. Alec Guinness (who really didn’t enjoy the experience, understandably, as the flying harness gave him a double hernia) is okay, but that’s about the worst thing you can say about one of his performances. Kenneth More barely registers as the Ghost of Christmas Present, but his fake beard partly makes up for it. Nephew Fred is chipper, but that’s about it (Michael Medwin, 13 years older than Finney and in desperate need of rejuvenating cream to convince as a passably flourishing younger man). Only David Collings manages to breathe life into the material, making a fine, moving fist of Bob Cratchit. But it isn’t enough. As for when Tiny Tim starts singing… Gawd help us, every one.


Scrooge is possessed of that unerring competence Hollywood could still apply to the musical at that time, even though they were entering a terminal decline, rubbing the wrong way against the new generation of wunderkinds and evolving tastes. As such, alarm bells should triggered at Fox when they secured the services of Leslie Bricusse to pen the screenplay and lyrics – Kael again, on the writer: “the name of a form of instantly disposable music; your mind flushes it away while you’re hearing it” – ouch, but true) – since he’d written Fox’s last song and dance bomb, Dr Doolittle (later, much later, he’d pen Michael Winner masterpiece Bullseye!)


Ronald Neame directs as statically and uninterestedly as only a certain strain of transatlantically-inclined British directors of the time were capable, rarely showing even a glimmer of style but somehow continually getting re-employed (Michael Anderson was another). He’d go on to make The Poseidon Adventure and Meteor, before it dawned on studios that giving him lots of cash might not yield the most compelling results (to be fair, The Poseidon Adventure made a lot of money, and as ‘70s disaster movies go, it’s one of the least offensive). When Ebenezer descends into hell, you aren’t struck by the dreadful, oppressive atmosphere so much as the polystyrene rocks.


Later, for a wrap up, Scrooge even dons a Santa outfit (slightly anachronistic for a story set in 1860, but then it’s only a musical, right). It shouldn’t need saying, but if you’re angling for a great Scrooge, where there’s palpable uplift when Ebenezer turns over that new leaf, look no further than Alistair Sim’s performance in the 1951 film. You’ll be as merry as a schoolboy. As giddy as a drunken man. And the dancing will actually raise a smile.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

You guys sure like watermelon.

The Irishman aka I Heard You Paint Houses (2019)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps, if Martin Scorsese hadn’t been so opposed to the idea of Marvel movies constituting cinema, The Irishman would have been a better film. It’s a decent film, assuredly. A respectable film, definitely. But it’s very far from being classic. And a significant part of that is down to the usually assured director fumbling the execution. Or rather, the realisation. I don’t know what kind of crazy pills the ranks of revered critics have been taking so as to recite as one the mantra that you quickly get used to the de-aging effects so intrinsic to its telling – as Empire magazine put it, “you soon… fuggadaboutit” – but you don’t. There was no point during The Irishman that I was other than entirely, regrettably conscious that a 75-year-old man was playing the title character. Except when he was playing a 75-year-old man.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

This popularity of yours. Is there a trick to it?

The Two Popes (2019)
(SPOILERS) Ricky Gervais’ Golden Globes joke, in which he dropped The Two Popes onto a list of the year’s films about paedophiles, rather preceded the picture’s Oscar prospects (three nominations), but also rather encapsulated the conversation currently synonymous with the forever tainted Roman Catholic church; it’s the first thing anyone thinks of. And let’s face it, Jonathan Pryce’s unamused response to the gag could have been similarly reserved for the fate of his respected but neglected film. More people will have heard Ricky’s joke than will surely ever see the movie. Which, aside from a couple of solid lead performances, probably isn’t such an omission.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.

The more you drive, the less intelligent you are.

Look, the last time I was told the Germans had gone, it didn't end well.

1917 (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I first heard the premise of Sam Mendes’ Oscar-bait World War I movie – co-produced by Amblin Partners, as Spielberg just loves his sentimental war carnage – my first response was that it sounded highly contrived, and that I’d like to know how, precisely, the story Mendes’ granddad told him would bear any relation to the events he’d be depicting. And just why he felt it would be appropriate to honour his relative’s memory via a one-shot gimmick. None of that has gone away on seeing the film. It’s a technical marvel, and Roger Deakins’ cinematography is, as you’d expect, superlative, but that mastery rather underlines that 1917 is all technique, that when it’s over and you get a chance to draw your breath, the experience feels a little hollow, a little cynical and highly calculated, and leaves you wondering what, if anything, Mendes was really trying to achieve, beyond an edge-of-the-seat (near enough) first-person actioner.