Reviews (5)

View "Easy Virtue" as an artifact and "Blackmail" as genius
Easy Virtue is one of Hitchcock's forgettable silent melodramas about a woman who wants to divorce her alchoholic husband and is scarred for life as a result.

Blackmail, on the other hand, is a work of genius! It's Hitchcock's and England's very first talking film and viewing it, one would think Hitchcock had been working with sound on film for decades already. Hitchcock has always been ahead of his time and I can't think of a better example of this than Blackmail.

Unfortunately, most transfers of this film to home entertainment media over the years have been less than tolerable at worst and just okay at best (the best being Criterion's Laserdisc transfer from several years back) This recent Laserlite release of the film is merely okay. It's not terrible and it's not terrific. It's hard to believe no one's done a full-out restoration on a picture of such importance. Kudos to Criterion for giving it the old college try on laserdisc, but like many of the other early Criterion Hitchcock laserdiscs (39 Steps, Lady Vanishes, Secret Agent) it still falls just barely short of the mark (which isn't to say they're bad transfers at all, mind you, they're just not as restored as they should be.) Kudos also go to Laserlite for trying and succeeding to give us a watchable home DVD copy of this classic. Thankfully, it's a reasonably good transfer that seems to have had more time taken with the transfer than Laserlite's terrible release of "Murder," Let's just hope Criterion soups it up for this one like they did for "The Lady Vanishes" and "The 39 Steps" and gives us the ultimate copy of this, one of my 10 favorite Hitchcock films. Until then, this is the best you're going to get on the DVD market, but ultimately, I recomend Criterion's "Blackmail" Laserdisc if you're still a dinosaur looking for the best copy available.

5 Stars to Hitchcock for one of the best films in the history of cinema, 4 stars to Laserlite for doing the best they can with a small budget.

A Budding Genius...
This review refers to the LaserLight Special Edition Double Feature DVD.....

A pair of gloves is the only evidence in a murder case. One is found by the detective working the case, the other by a sinister eyewitness who wants to "Blackmail" the killer. No, this is not a TV movie about OJ Simpson, this is early Hitch!(Only he could have known.)
In 1929 Alfred Hitchcock was already displaying his innate senses of style, suspense, shadowy figures,sensuality and lets not forget his wonderful sense of humor. This film has all those qualities that makes his films so recognizable.
Alice is bored,and steps out on Frank, her Scotland Yard boyfriend. Her "date" offers to paint her portrait. She agrees, but once in his apartment, he attacks her and she kills him in self defense.
The investagation leads her Detective boyfreind to realize she is the killer, but keeps it to himself, There's another witness, one that can blow the lid off the whole case.Alice's guilt is getting the best of her(shades of "Tell Tale Heart" by Poe). Will she turn herself in before it's too late, or will they keep this secret buried.The film stars Anny Ondra (she's marvelous)as Alice,John Longden as Frank, and Donald Calthrop as the blackmailer.
"Blackmail started out as a silent but with films like the "Jazz Singer" opening in the States, Hitch decided to add sound to this one making it the first British "Talkie".
Looking for Hitch: I spied him in the first 10 minutes in quite a comical cameo, don't miss it!

The 2nd feature is "Easy Virtue". This was a silent made in 1927.
Don't look for suspense or horror in this one. It's a great drama though, and you'll still recognize Hitchcock's signature in it.
Larita is an innocent woman whose name and reputation is dragged through the mud after a nasty divorce. The publicity of it all makes her infamous. She tries to start her life anew, marries and must deal with some very nasty mother-in-law problems while trying to live down her notoriety.It is based on a play by Noel Coward and the score is newly recorded. Isabel Jeans plays the misunderstood woman in question.
Where's Hitch: You got me!. I can't say that I saw him in this one, although I did spy a portly man in a suit walking off a tennis court(very strange) but Only from the back so....

LaserLight delights us with this DVD of early work of Hitch, although the film's do show their age(really old), especially "Easy Virtue", they are totally watchable, nice black and white images, and the sound is very good. There is an introduction by Tony Curtis and an Original Theatrical Trailer of Rear Window for an extra added treat! Hitch fan's you gotta add this to your collection.Oh and everything is on one side, no need to flip the disc for the second feature!
Have fun with this one......Laurie

View these films as historical artifacts...
My wife and I are avid Hitchcock fans and have begun a collection of his DVDs. Surprisingly, we both enjoy many of his early efforts. I'm a bit disturbed by reviewers who ridicule early Hitchcock films. They seem to expect films produced in the late 1920s to be comparable to those produced ten, twenty or thirty years later. That's just plain silly -- like comparing Lindbergh's plane with a B-17 or an F-14. As usual for Hitchcock, the women in both films steal the show. Blond and delicious. Hitchcock knew how to cast and photograph young ladies. It's great that these "early" Hitchcock "thrillers" are available to collectors.

A Good Double Bill
This is one of Laserlight's best Hitchcock DVDs. 'Blackmail' is worth a look if only for the fact that it was Britain's first talkie. In fact some of the early scenes are still silent and you expect a title card to appear at any moment. Although 'Blackmail' never reaches the heights of 'The 39 Steps' or the 1934's 'The Man Who Knew Too Much', it is significantly better than most of Hitchcock's other films of the late twenties and early thirties. A few of the scenes are rather long and stagey but there are still some eyecatching moments and Anny Ondra is definitely an asset to the film despite her voice being dubbed by another actress. Picture quality is also very good. Unfortunately, with the notable exception of 'The Lodger', Hitchcock's silent work does not measure up to much. 'Easy Virtue' is probably one of his better efforts but I doubt you will be on the edge of your seat come the film's climax. The picture quality isn't too good either - only watchable - but I guess we shouldn't expect too much given the budget nature of the DVD. All in all, a decent double bill at a decent price. Well done Laserlight!

The Master is speaking
Of course, Easy virtue is quite a boring film. But Blackmail is a chef d'oeuvre. Many of the scenes are unforgetable. Watch this movie, and you not only can't forget it, but you'll be sure (if not yet) that Hitchcock was a Master. This movie was a silent one, but a few scenes were shot again to make the first english talking movie ever! In my mind, the best scene is when, after the murder, lady Ondra hear a neighbour speaking about knive... knive... KNIVE... You feel yourself as bas as the "poor" girl. If you like oldie but goldie, don't miss this DVD The images are fine and the sound is OK ... Read more

Description

Boris Karloff gives a brilliant performance as mad scientist Dr. Laurience, a once-respected researcher of the mind and soul who goes off the deep end when the scientific community rejects his work.He uses his invention to first exact revenge on his enemies, then tries using it to win the heart of his delightful assistant, played by British ingénue Anna Lee.It’s classic Karloff in this unforgettable early horror film. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Of all the things I've lost I miss my mind the most ...
In the English production The Man Who Changed His Mind (1936) aka The Brainsnatcher aka Doctor Maniac Who Lived Again aka Dr. Maniac aka The Man Who Lived Again (whew!), directed by Robert Stevenson, who later went on to direct primarily for Disney on such features as Old Yeller (1957), The Absent Minded Professor (1961), Mary Poppins (1964), The Love Bug (1968) among many others, stars Boris Karloff as Dr. Laurience, a scientist who has perfected a means to remove the content of one's mind, store it, and transfer it to another host body. The film also stars Anna Lee, whose film and television credits, spanning 65 years, are too numerous to mention here, as Dr. Clare Wyatt along with John Loder, another actor with an extensive history in film, as Dick Haslewood.

The film begins with a young couple, Dr. Clare Wyatt and Dick Haslewood, discussing Clare's imminent departure to go and work with the well known, but now reclusive, brain specialist Dr. Laurience. It's a great opportunity for Clare, but Dick feels uneasy about it, and uses the chance to badger Clare with his endless proposals of marriage, which contain all the charm of asking one what'd they like for lunch. He's a real smooth one, that Dick...oh yeah, I almost forgot to mention Dick is a news reporter, and the newspaper he writes for is also owned by his father, Lord Haslewood (I don't think Lord is his name but more like his title, as the English are apt to lavish such things on you if you got the dough). A classic case of nepotism? Sure looks that way to me...anyhow, Dick decides to follow (can you say stalker?) Clare out to the small village where Dr. Laurience is holed up on the pretense that maybe there's a story to be had, but we all know he's jonsin' for the Clare. Clare arrives at a dilapidated old house, where she meets Dr. Laurience, along with his cranky, gimpy, wheelchair-confined psuedo manservant Clayton. Clayton seems to suffer from any number of normally fatal maladies, but the doctor manages to keep him alive. Why? It couldn't be for the man's wit and personality, as he's a real crank and quite curmudgeonly. We soon learn of what the doctor has been doing, his whole saving the contents of the mind deal. At first the notion, while intriguing, doesn't seem to be very practical, but then we see the real application as Dr. Laurience transfers the minds of two chimpanzees (you see, one monkey was docile while the other hostile, and, after strapping electrified colanders to their heads, the once docile monkey was now hostile, and vice versa). Isn't science a wonderful thing? Anyway, after the success, the doctor now ponders another experiment, one with human subjects...

Dick, who isn't aware of any of this, writes a fluff piece to which his father, Lord Haslewood, a pompous goof and supposedly supporter of science, offers Dr. Lauirence an opportunity to work in his institute, and access to much better equipment and resources on the condition that Haslewood's newspaper gets exclusive rights to publish the results of the doctor's experiments, whatever they may concern. The trouble really begins after Lord Haslewood calls together the scientific community so that Dr. Lauirence may announce his theories, which elicits much derision, and subsequently Lord Haslewood not only cuts off the doctor's funding, but then he claims all the work Dr. Lauirence has done is now his property, to do with as he wishes, based on the contracts signed. This sends Dr. Lauirence over the edge, in a particularly great scene, and the mad scientist now becomes an evil mad scientist, declaring his intentions to use his machines and theories not for the betterment of mankind as he once hoped, but for his own, personal gain. Just what exactly does this entail? Well, you'll have to watch and see...

I really enjoyed this little known creepy classic. Karloff plays the mad scientist wonderfully, managing to squeeze out a certain amount of pathos and dimension in a role others would have played in more traditional, straight up form. Purely interested in the science of screwing around in realms not meant to be delved into my man, he soon finds himself betrayed by those who once seemed to support him, and now he reverts to the very callous base human attributes of greed, lust, and revenge. The supporting actors, all accomplished within their own right, were wonderful and seemed to flourish within the context of good scripting, snappy and polished dialogue, and excellent direction. I did love Karloff's mind snatching machine...it was kind of subdued, certainly not in the grand nature of that of Frankenstein, but certainly believable and adequate, despite the fantastical theories and possibilities behind it...the morality of Dr. Lauirence's experiments within the story were rarely focused upon, but it did seem to be an underlying aspect imbedded in the story, allowing for the viewer to come to his/her own conclusions, which I appreciated. The film, which runs approximately 66 minutes, moves quickly, wasting little or no time on useless elements. I did sort of question Clayton's relationship with the doctor, as he didn't seem capable of much anything given his state, and his presence seemed a bit contrived as the plot unfolded, but this was a minor issue. I really loved the bits of humor injected within the script, which worked wonderfully to round out some of the characters.

The full screen (original aspect ratio) print provided on this disc looks remarkably good, despite its' age, and the audio is clear and crisp, much better than I would have expected, given the rarity (until now) of the film. There are no special features available other than chapter stops, but that matter little to me given the excellent quality of the film available here.

Cookieman108

KARLOFF THE GREAT!
this is a wonderful film. fantastic production values from gainsborough films in england, a wonderful print, and a good performance from anna lee, who starred later with karloff in "bedlam." p.s. when are the val lewton films coming out on DVD????

and karloff of course great. the release of this and a mint print of THE GHOUL add greatly to the karloff oeuvre of the 30s.

now when are they going to release THE BLACK CAT and THE RAVEN on DVD???????

Rarest Of Karloff Classics Is Here!
I ordered this DVD without any idea as to it's quality --- the original title for the disc (as opposed to the American release monicker, "The Man Who Lived Again" ) tipped me off that it could be something special. Well, Karloff fans, it is something WONDERFUL, and every bit the Karloff "event" as last year's "The Ghoul". As most of you know, the pic was virtually lost for decades, and the only video source was a well-used 16mm print with the American main title. This DVD is, however, very much the real thing, and it looks and sounds terrific --- it's the major vintage horror release of 2004 (so far), and I dare say it will be hard for anyone to top it. As to the movie, it is one of Karloff's best from any period, and I would recommend this DVD without reservation! ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Framing Woes
As a Hitchcock aficionado, I bought this DVD purely for "Juno and the Paycock." (The early masterpiece, "Blackmail," has long been available.) While the film is of interest to Hitchcock fans, beware this edition: sloppy framing cuts off the actors' heads in nearly half the shots. It won't prevent you from seeing what's good (and what's not so good) about the film, but you'll wish Whirlwind Media had been more careful in putting this package together.

A GOOD LOOK AT EARLY HITCH
Most of the very early Hitchcock films are not among my favorites--but perhaps only because his later work is so brilliant.... These two early works never fully succeeded on video, because of the exceedingly poor production quality. This DVD version improves the sound greatly, so that you don't have to strain just to make out the basic words. Hitch's take on the great Sean O'Casey play ("Juno and the Paycock") is well done, though it's a difficult work to render in film, especially during the era in which it was produced. "Blackmail" is, I think, a much better piece of work, and one that lies closer to the British director's heart. You see--in this grainy, miminal film--the seeds of his later brilliance. The plot and tone are definitely Hitchcock, although his skill as a director is still developing. The acting is pretty good, but the writing leaves something to be desired. As a whole, fans of Hitchcock and cinema history should thorougly enjoy this set.

Juno And The Hitchcock
Well, first off, this rating should be around 3 and 3/4 stars instead of just three. Hitchcock films the Sean O'Casey play just as it is. It is one of the first in a tradition of Hitchcock filmed plays. This tradition is that since the play was written for the stage and works best that way, why change the locales and "open" the play up as filmed versions of the play often do? Rope and Dial M For Murder are Hitchcock's greatest examples of this art. Juno and the Paycock is not the best of Hitch's films, but the actors are very good and the story is very interesting. It also shows Hitchcock's continuing transition to sound from just one year earlier. It is definitely worth checking out and is not great, perfect Hitchcock, but good Hitchcock showing his ability to utilize the fresh new sound technology in rather entertaining dialogue. It is worth a look. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Big Waste of Money!
I know that since the movie is over 75 years old, it wouldn't be the best. But little to nothing has been retouched and you can tell it is 75 years old. Some scenes such as the sinking scence are so dark, all you see is a black screen. It was a total waste of money. I think it would have been much better if they would have spent the time to clean up the frames of the movie. I'd like to know what they mean by "digitally mastered". If you want a good viewable version of the disaster, buy A Night To Remember!!!

An authentic Titanic presentation
Unlike the Cameron's love story this is an history buff's film. It seems honest and pure to its time. It's closer to the feel of A Night to Remember than Cameron's last film. The accompanied documentary was a very nice surprise. I found it very informative and well worth the watch but I also had fun hearing each actor playing different parts than I have seen them in the other Titanic programs.

Disappointing !
Titanic Disaster in the Atlantic, had nothing whatsoever to do with the TITANIC. It bore a minute resemblance to the story in the sense that a passenger liner sank in the Atlantic, there the similarity ends. David McCallum looked decidedly uncomfortable introducing this, which I can only describe as drivel. The TITANIC Chronicles however was mildly entertaining in the sense that it contained eye witness accounts of the disaster. In my opinion the saving grace of this DVD. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This 1930 drama was an early field day for Alfred Hitchcock and his evolving ideas about the blurring of opposites: reality and illusion, guilt and innocence, observing and doing, men and women. A rare whodunit in the director's canon, the story finds a stage actress (Norah Baring) convicted of murdering a female friend. Herbert Marshall stars as a veteran theater actor and, coincidentally, member of the jury who has grave doubts about the verdict and decides to investigate the crime on his own. His efforts lead him through a world with which he is sufficiently familiar--that of backstage intrigues--and toward what some critics have charged is an unfortunate link between villainy and a gay stereotype. But that limited critique completely misses the playful overlapping of faulty perceptions invited by this movie, in which Hitchcock deliberately confuses us at times about whether the action we're seeing is real or occurring on a stage. Even when the distinction is obvious, thematic echoes bounce wildly between the two, such as an early scene in which policemen observing a play don't realize the solution to the real murder is weirdly foretold in what they're watching. The print of the film used in the DVD release is serviceable and probably comparable to an average 16mm classroom or museum presentation. The DVD also includes a Hitchcock filmography, trivia questions, a director biography, and scene access. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Amazon.com

This British production of Dickens's Christmas Carol has been eclipsed by subsequent versions, but it stands on its own as a darkly atmospheric (if sometimes regrettably brisk) telling of the beloved tale. Even with the rough quality of existing prints, this Scrooge has a visual intensity that approaches the bold compositions of German expressionism. And in its central role it has a mostly forgotten star: Sir Seymour Hicks, one of the era's celebrated English stage actors. With his gnarled face and flyaway hair, Hicks looks every inch the mean old misanthrope, and his cruelty has a realistic quality missing in some of the more stylized interpreters of the role. Hicks had played Scrooge many times on stage (and before in silent film), and he gets the tenor of every "Humbug!" just right. As a bandy-legged Bob Cratchit, Donald Calthorp is a perfect Victorian illustration come to grinning life. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (14)

The oldest version of "A Christmas Carol" you can still view
This 1935 version of "A Christmas Carol" by Charles Dickens stars Seymour Hicks as Scrooge, which probably explains the title. The performance by Hicks, who had played the role on stage may times and in a 1913 silent film version, dominates the rest of the actors (Hicks was knighted that same year). Beyond that it is the sense of Victorian England that director Henry Edwards evokes that stands out. The contrast between the home of Scrooge's nephew Fred and that of Bob Crachit (Donald Calthrop) is rather shocking; you would think the Crachits were squatters because they really do have NOTHING. Combined with Scrooge's brutal treatment of his kindly clerk, this is the version of "A Christmas Carol" that really emphasizes the poverty and social conditions that offended Dickens.

This film runs only 78 minutes, and those familiar with the story will find that most of what is excised are the Ghost of Christmas Past scenes. This is rather unfortunate since they are the key building blocks in creating sympathy for Scrooge and the first steps in his transformation. Still, this is yet another fine version of "A Christmas Carol," and it is simply that there are versions that are better in various ways. But this particular "Scrooge" is the oldest version readily available and deserves to maintain that status. Final Note: Look quick for Maurice Evans as the Poor Man. The Shakespearean actor was still three decades away from his most famous roles in "Rosemary's Baby," "Planet of the Apes," and the television series "Bewitched."

The first sound version of the story
Although I've seen and treasured some of the other film versions of Charles Dicken's 'A CHRISTMAS CAROL', I still have some heart to this, the first sound version. It bolsters some fine performances by Donald Calthrop as Cratchit and Sir Seymour Hicks as Ebenezer Scrooge (Hicks had also played the role in a silent film, and at sixty-four, is probably the oldest of the many screen incarnations). The photography and production gives out a convincing Victorian atmosphere to the proceedings, and while I didn't like the idea of making Jacob Marley an invisible ghost, the cinematography does give some interesting touches to the visuals, like Scrooge's head superimposed on a large shadow of himself in the 'Christmas Yet to Come' sequences (For some reason, although Scrooge is dressed in pajamas when first visited, the ghostly journeys have him in his business clothes!). It's too bad that most of the video versions edit this film from its 78 minute length to an hour, removing several key scenes (Christmas Past continuing his presentation to Scrooge of how others celebrate Christmas, Tiny Tim saying 'God bless us, everyone!', etc.). Still, an interesting adaptation.

Lackluster production values
One of the reasons Alister Sim and Albert Finney work so well as Scrooge is that you are able to witness a transformation of a person throughout their lives. This truncated version does little to convey the whole story. It is also a horrible transfer and the original print has faded to dull tones of grey.

It is interesting to see the censorship laws at various times throughout our cinematic history in the choices made when producing "A Christmas Carol." The Patrick Stewart version is perhaps the best-filmed version but the heavy-handed script writing destroys the illusion of 19th Century England. Stewart's one-man stage play is a much better version by far.

Seymour Hicks is very good at being nasty but that's not what Scrooge is about. Scrooge is a guy who has had a tough life and he chose to value money above people to get through the day. Hicks can never seem to rise above the nastiness. He is never subtle like Finney or giddy like Sim, he's always just there.

For a completest, you should get this DVD; other folks should enjoy Albert Finney's musical version and Alistar Sim's B&W triumph.

Good!
I saw Scrooge starring Seymour Hicks years ago on TV when I was a little girl, I believe it was on Christmas Eve and I remember sitting on the livingroom floor in front of the TV and liking this movie so one day I was in a store and found this movie on video and I purchased it but the tape's quality was awful and it was cut down in length from about 80 minutes to 60 minutes so it made an already short movie even shorter and very choppy so I'm hoping to buy the DVD that has the restored length and better film quality!

Creaky, Short, But Good
I can say that I never saw a Scrooge I didn't like, although some are just better. Sir Seymour Hicks' version shows its age definitely, but be forgiving here-it's from the depression era. This extends to Marley being invisible, Christmas Past being only a light, and Christmas Future only a shadowy hand. Hicks makes up for it by making the viewer concentrate on him and his emotions instead. Only Christmas Present is seen-although being clean shaven, fat and too serious instead of the "jolly giant" of Dickens make him a little disappointing. Hicks does not show himself as a young man in the Past, and therefore his lost fiance is shown as middle aged instead of the pretty girl of the book. However, Hicks puts his all into being Scrooge, and the photography is a wonderful example of vintage black and white. The scene in Old Joe's is especially effective, where his customers appear to be the "obscene demons" as described by Dickens. My own complaints are really few: Was the Lord Mayor's celebration scene really necessary? (Sure, it shows a grand event, but it's a distraction from the story.) And why is this short film cut even more for video? This is the only way I've been able to see it and it's very noticeable when the Spirit of Christmas Present reminds Scrooge of his opinion about "the surplus population" because he didn't say it earlier in the film. (Or is this only a scriptwriter's goof?) We need a fully restored edition. Still--watch it and enjoy! It still has plenty of "Spirit" and will make you want to say with Scrooge at the end, "God bless us--every one!" ... Read more

Amazon.com

The technical challenges of this 1932 "old dark house" mystery arelargely what appealed to Alfred Hitchcock, who uses a staircase quite inventively to create a series of emotional and dramatic thresholds from which to tell a story (adapted from a play) about a policeman, a hobo, and a gang of jewel thieves. Besides the technical temptations of filming in the house, Hitch turns (as he often did in the early days) to models to create an exciting chase-climax between a train and a bus. A very minor work, indeed, but revealing of the director's early interest in transcending dull material with exercises in what he termed "pure cinema." The print of the film used in the DVD release is serviceable and probably comparable to an average 16mm classroom or museum presentation. The DVD also includes a Hitchcock filmography, trivia questions, a director biography, and scene access. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (14)

The oldest version of "A Christmas Carol" you can still view
This 1935 version of "A Christmas Carol" by Charles Dickens stars Seymour Hicks as Scrooge, which probably explains the title. The performance by Hicks, who had played the role on stage may times and in a 1913 silent film version, dominates the rest of the actors (Hicks was knighted that same year). Beyond that it is the sense of Victorian England that director Henry Edwards evokes that stands out. The contrast between the home of Scrooge's nephew Fred and that of Bob Crachit (Donald Calthrop) is rather shocking; you would think the Crachits were squatters because they really do have NOTHING. Combined with Scrooge's brutal treatment of his kindly clerk, this is the version of "A Christmas Carol" that really emphasizes the poverty and social conditions that offended Dickens.

This film runs only 78 minutes, and those familiar with the story will find that most of what is excised are the Ghost of Christmas Past scenes. This is rather unfortunate since they are the key building blocks in creating sympathy for Scrooge and the first steps in his transformation. Still, this is yet another fine version of "A Christmas Carol," and it is simply that there are versions that are better in various ways. But this particular "Scrooge" is the oldest version readily available and deserves to maintain that status. Final Note: Look quick for Maurice Evans as the Poor Man. The Shakespearean actor was still three decades away from his most famous roles in "Rosemary's Baby," "Planet of the Apes," and the television series "Bewitched."

The first sound version of the story
Although I've seen and treasured some of the other film versions of Charles Dicken's 'A CHRISTMAS CAROL', I still have some heart to this, the first sound version. It bolsters some fine performances by Donald Calthrop as Cratchit and Sir Seymour Hicks as Ebenezer Scrooge (Hicks had also played the role in a silent film, and at sixty-four, is probably the oldest of the many screen incarnations). The photography and production gives out a convincing Victorian atmosphere to the proceedings, and while I didn't like the idea of making Jacob Marley an invisible ghost, the cinematography does give some interesting touches to the visuals, like Scrooge's head superimposed on a large shadow of himself in the 'Christmas Yet to Come' sequences (For some reason, although Scrooge is dressed in pajamas when first visited, the ghostly journeys have him in his business clothes!). It's too bad that most of the video versions edit this film from its 78 minute length to an hour, removing several key scenes (Christmas Past continuing his presentation to Scrooge of how others celebrate Christmas, Tiny Tim saying 'God bless us, everyone!', etc.). Still, an interesting adaptation.

Lackluster production values
One of the reasons Alister Sim and Albert Finney work so well as Scrooge is that you are able to witness a transformation of a person throughout their lives. This truncated version does little to convey the whole story. It is also a horrible transfer and the original print has faded to dull tones of grey.

It is interesting to see the censorship laws at various times throughout our cinematic history in the choices made when producing "A Christmas Carol." The Patrick Stewart version is perhaps the best-filmed version but the heavy-handed script writing destroys the illusion of 19th Century England. Stewart's one-man stage play is a much better version by far.

Seymour Hicks is very good at being nasty but that's not what Scrooge is about. Scrooge is a guy who has had a tough life and he chose to value money above people to get through the day. Hicks can never seem to rise above the nastiness. He is never subtle like Finney or giddy like Sim, he's always just there.

For a completest, you should get this DVD; other folks should enjoy Albert Finney's musical version and Alistar Sim's B&W triumph.

Good!
I saw Scrooge starring Seymour Hicks years ago on TV when I was a little girl, I believe it was on Christmas Eve and I remember sitting on the livingroom floor in front of the TV and liking this movie so one day I was in a store and found this movie on video and I purchased it but the tape's quality was awful and it was cut down in length from about 80 minutes to 60 minutes so it made an already short movie even shorter and very choppy so I'm hoping to buy the DVD that has the restored length and better film quality!

Creaky, Short, But Good
I can say that I never saw a Scrooge I didn't like, although some are just better. Sir Seymour Hicks' version shows its age definitely, but be forgiving here-it's from the depression era. This extends to Marley being invisible, Christmas Past being only a light, and Christmas Future only a shadowy hand. Hicks makes up for it by making the viewer concentrate on him and his emotions instead. Only Christmas Present is seen-although being clean shaven, fat and too serious instead of the "jolly giant" of Dickens make him a little disappointing. Hicks does not show himself as a young man in the Past, and therefore his lost fiance is shown as middle aged instead of the pretty girl of the book. However, Hicks puts his all into being Scrooge, and the photography is a wonderful example of vintage black and white. The scene in Old Joe's is especially effective, where his customers appear to be the "obscene demons" as described by Dickens. My own complaints are really few: Was the Lord Mayor's celebration scene really necessary? (Sure, it shows a grand event, but it's a distraction from the story.) And why is this short film cut even more for video? This is the only way I've been able to see it and it's very noticeable when the Spirit of Christmas Present reminds Scrooge of his opinion about "the surplus population" because he didn't say it earlier in the film. (Or is this only a scriptwriter's goof?) We need a fully restored edition. Still--watch it and enjoy! It still has plenty of "Spirit" and will make you want to say with Scrooge at the end, "God bless us--every one!" ... Read more