What If?

It's not really my intention every time I watch MGM's 1938 version of "A Christmas Carol" to wonder who should have been cast as Ebenezer Scrooge rather than Reginald Owen (since Lionel Barrymore), but I do wonder!

Throw in that I recently was listening to Charles Laughton's 1951 recording of "A Christmas Carol" for RCA Victor on which he did not portray Scrooge and it occurred to me...

What if MGM had cast Mr. Laughton as Scrooge in their movie?

I had mentioned before that Laughton could be very evil (1935's "Mutiny on the Bounty") or kind (1935's "Ruggles of Red Gap) so he could easily handle the before and after Scrooge characterizations.

And since "Mutiny on the Bounty" was an MGM production, their hype machine could say "It's Charles Laughton at his 'Mutiny on the Bounty' evil best!" or "You thought he was mean as Captain Bligh? Wait until you see him as Scrooge!"

If they had gone that route, it would be a bigger production with a longer running time and the story would have more meat and not be so fluffy.

As such, you throw in more of Scrooge's past, such as his doomed engagement to Belle. And who plays Belle? Laughton's real-life wife, Elsa Lanchester!

For visual reference as to how Charles Laughton might have looked as Scrooge, we merely have to turn to 1939's "Jamaica Inn":

That movie takes place in the 1820s, roughly the same period as "A Christmas Carol," so you can totally see it!

While I'm throwing things out there, here's another thought...

Producer Selznick (left) and director Hitchcock.

What if former MGM producer David O. Selznick, who had produced 1935's Dickens blockbusters "A Tale of Two Cities" and "David Copperfield," was involved in the production of a late-1930s "A Christmas Carol" and had imported Alfred Hitchcock to direct it? (Selznick brought Hitch to America to direct "Rebecca" (1940) following "Jamaica Inn," Hitchcock's last British film of the time.)

I can see it all!