Scrooge is a 1935 British Christmas fantasy film directed by Henry Edwards and starring Seymour Hicks, Donald Calthrop and Robert Cochran.
It is Christmas Eve of 1843: Ebenezer Scrooge, an elderly and cold-hearted money-lender, is working in his freezing counting house along with his suffering, underpaid clerk Bob Cratchit.
At home, Scrooge encounters the ghost of his seven-years dead partner Jacob Marley, who wears a chain he "forged in life" from his own wicked career.
[4][5] The 1935 film differs from all other versions of the story in one significant way – most of the tormented spirits, including that of Jacob Marley, are not actually shown onscreen, although their voices are heard.
[6] Upon its release, Scrooge was praised as "A faithful, tender and mellow edition" of A Christmas Carol by Frank Nugent of The New York Times.
[7] Nugent felt that Calthrop's rendition of Bob Cratchit "could not be bettered", writing, "The dignity, the patience, the kindliness of the man...is imprisoned beautifully in his performance.
"[7] A 1982 television listing published by The New York Times described the film as "a forgotten and apparently excellent British version of Dickens's Christmas Carol.
[9] A 1987 television listing written by Bruce Bailey for The Gazette compared the film unfavourably to the 1951 adaptation, writing, "If you aren't too particular about your entertainment, notice that you can also catch the 1935 version of Scrooge".
"[13] He described the film as "atmospheric" and considered Hicks to be "a suitably crusty Scrooge", who is "especially good at dramatizing [the character's] metamorphosis" but criticised the screenplay's "poor judgement in its selection of scenes" to adapt, writing, "The movie wastes footage on the Lord Mayor's holiday feast, which warrants only the briefest of mentions in the book, while leaving out the bulk of the episodes from Scrooge's youth and early adulthood.
[13] When assessing various adaptations of A Christmas Carol, Christopher Cornell of The Gazette wrote in 1991 that "Vintage-film buffs may sing the praises of Seymour Hicks in 1935's Scrooge".
[14] In 1992, Jim Sulski of the Chicago Tribune described Scrooge as "probably the least known" feature film adaptation of A Christmas Carol and wrote, "That's unfortunate, because it's very loyal to Dickens' story, and it's nicely done.
[15] That same year, Susan Wloszczyna of USA Today described Scrooge as a commentary on the "Depression-era class conflicts" of the 1930s, pointing to the film's focus on "scenes of a sumptuous holiday ball paired with the sight of beggars clutching at scraps thrown by cooks preparing the feast".
[21] That same year, Tunku Varadarajan of The Wall Street Journal called Scrooge's depiction of Jacob Marley "only as an eerie, disembodied voice" his favourite cinematic rendition of the character.
[22] In 2004, Dan Craft of The Pantagraph noted that Scrooge was produced "on the cheap" but complimented the film's "authentic Victorian street feel".
"[5] In 2013, Dave Nordstrand of The Salinas Californian wrote, "Every year...I search the channels for the 1935 version of Scrooge", stating that none of the subsequent film adaptations of A Christmas Carol could "quite match the dramatic power of that flickering original.
"[25] In 2019, Robert Keeling of Den of Geek dismissed Scrooge as little more than "a curiosity piece", calling the film "a dull and drab affair".
"[27] Although he criticised the film for its narrative omissions, he complimented the portrayal of the title character, writing, "Hicks, a monster in the early scenes, is moving in his repentance and delightful in his rebirth.
[13][21] In 2004, Dan Craft of The Pantagraph wrote that "most of the copies in circulation are cheap public domain versions struck from battered 16mm prints.