Showing posts with label Alastair Sim. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alastair Sim. Show all posts

Saturday, March 5, 2022

Barry MacKay 101 - Lesson 6!


After having enjoyed "Gangway" with Jessie Matthews and Barry MacKay, I thought it appropriate to watch their third and final screen pairing - "Sailing Along" from 1938!

It's also Barry's last movie in England before going Hollywood for MGM's "A Christmas Carol" later in 1938.

"Sailing Along" is another fun movie with Jessie and Barry still displaying good chemistry, but it's a bit different from "Evergreen" and "Gangway" in a few ways.

A big difference is that their characters already know each other when the movie starts, so they don't "meet cute" as is often the case.

They argue a lot and profess not to like each other, but if you've ever seen a movie before, you know that couples who argue that much must really love each other. In the movies at least!

Another difference is that Jessie is given a polished song and dance man to perform with, as opposed to having Barry sing a little and dance a little.


The singer/dancer in question is American Jack Whiting, who was mainly a stage performer, making only a handful of movie appearances. His only other movie of the period is Paramount's "Give Me a Sailor," also from 1938, a Martha Raye/Bob Hope vehicle in which Jack is cast as Hope's brother!

Funny that Jack Whiting has those two movies from 1938, but one's American and one's British, yet they both have "sail" in the title!

Whatever the case, he's quite good here in "Sailing Along," which gives him a better chance to showcase his musical skills than "Give Me a Sailor" does.

Jack's character is also a romantic rival for the affections of Miss Matthews, an idea not present in the first two movies.



Also different is the setting, as a lot of the action takes place on a barge, Barry's character being the son of a barge owner, with Jessie the foster daughter of the same owner.

Said barge owner, the Skipper, is played by Frank Pettingell, whom we remember from his 1959 recording of "A Christmas Carol."



Second (but much smaller than Jessie Matthews) billed is Roland Young, whom I've always enjoyed in the many movies in which I've seen him.

He has a British stiff-upper-lip mumbly delivery that enhances the one-liners he gets to toss off.

Roland Young's main Dickens connection is his terrific performance as Uriah Heep in MGM's 1935 adaptation of David Copperfield," in which he cast against type but delivers the goods.



Also on hand in "Sailing Along" is Alastair Sim, playing another wacky side character as he had in "Gangway."

Watching these movies definitely gives me context for Barry MacKay, but it's also enlightening to see Alastair Sim early in his career playing very eccentric characters. You wouldn't think he be giving an acclaimed performance as Scrooge as dozen or so years later!

Here's a clip from the VCI's DVD of "Sailing Along":



All in all a fun flick!

That's "Love Is Not a Joke" in Italian!


Friday, October 8, 2021

Must See TV!

This ad is ostensibly from the Chicago edition of "TV Guide" from 1956:


The movie would have only been five years old at that time, so what a holiday treat for viewers!

Saturday, July 10, 2021

Boy's Own!

Here's the intriguing cover of the January 1952 (presumably available in December 1951) issue of the British publication "Boy's Own Paper":

What would an early 1950s British boy say about that? Brilliant? Wicked? Gear?

The "Boy's Own Paper" was published for quite a long time, 1879 to 1967. I know I've heard the phrase "Boy's own" this or that used (somewhat derisively as in too good to be true) in old British movies and maybe this magazine is the source of that?

Sunday, June 20, 2021

Blooper!

We have a lot of "Jingle Bells" to cover, so I'm going to intersperse some random Scrooge/"A Christmas Carol" stuff in between as not to get to far away from things!

For example, did you ever notice the blooper near the end of "Scrooge" (1951) starring Alastair Sim?

It occurs after Scrooge wakes up on Christmas morning and looks in a mirror a couple of times. Each time you can see some crew member or somebody in the mirror:


Fun!

Friday, December 25, 2020

Friday, September 4, 2020

"Scrooge" (1951) Lobby Cards




While we're in a visual mode, let's take a look at some lobby cards from theatrical adaptations of "A Christmas Carol," starting with the esteemed 1951 film "Scrooge" starring Alastair Sim.

These are from the American release, as evidenced by the "A Christmas Carol" title, the movie being renamed in case we didn't know who Scrooge is!

Take a look:










These would seem to be colorized frames from the film rather than stills shot with color film, as Scrooge's robe changes color!

The copy calling Alastair Sim "incomparable" is spot on, but doesn't the little Tiny Tim cartoon look like he's going to hit cartoon Mr. Sim with that polo mallet, ur… crutch?

Sunday, December 22, 2019

The Scrooge Look



While talking about the 1999 made-for-TV adaptation of "A Christmas Carol" starring Patrick Stewart, I mentioned that I didn't think he had a Scrooge "look."

That got me thinking about which actors in the role did have the look and whether that helped them in our acceptance of them as Scrooge.



Starting at the top, I do think that Alastair Sim has a pretty good Scrooge look. Certainly he's well-accepted in the role. The funny thing is that he doesn't have unusual makeup or a very different hairstyle. He always looks that way!

I imagine most people that know him at all today only know him as Scrooge. They like him, but may be underrating him as an actor. If you see him in another movie, such as 1946's "Green for Danger" (which is a good one), you realize that he looks and sounds the same as he does in "Scrooge," but the character is totally different. That's just good acting!



Moving ahead to Albert Finney, he has makeup to make him look older and more Scroogy and he affects a wacky voice. He's certainly far removed from how he looks as young Scrooge. I think he gives a terrific performance, but he's helped by the makeup and voice.



George C. Scott sounds the same as he usually did, but he had ginormous mutton chops to make him look more Scroogish. Also, his general reputation for being, shall we say, mercurial makes casting him as Scrooge a non-stretch. But he certainly delivers the goods.



Even Mister Magoo seemed well-cast as Scrooge and didn't need to change his appearance too much to be convincing. The brilliant voice acting of Jim Backus certainly helps too!



Sir Seymour Hicks is a great Scrooge, but there's not really much of a point of reference of how he might have been otherwise, so it's easy to accept him as Scrooge.



Fredric March was a great actor with two Oscars on his mantel, but he definitely needed makeup to look like Scrooge, as he still looked like a movie star in 1954.

So, props to Patrick Stewart for doing it au natural, if you will, and pulling it off!

Friday, December 6, 2019

A Christmas Carol (1971) - Part 3



I find the 1971 made-for-TV adaptation very interesting.

As I mentioned, I had seen this a few times as a kid and it made an impression on me. It seemed like forever went by until I saw it again, but it was maybe only around 15 years, which doesn't seem so long now!

I like this a lot, but I hear (read) so often that this is the best version ever or at least the best animated version or it's the most faithful version ever, etc., etc., etc.

I'm going out on a limb here, but this I don't think it's any of those!

The whole thing sometimes comes off as an English Literature class. There's not much fun present. You admire it, but do you enjoy it?

I do think that the creators tried really hard to be faithful to the book and I appreciate those little details that they included. But they omitted a couple of key things from Scrooge's past and rushed through a lot of other incidents. As I mentioned before, I think you really need to be familiar with the source material to appreciate or at least understand a lot of what's going on.

I don't think that's just because it has a short running time. Some of the transitions are so abrupt that it's hard to tell exactly what's going on. I really like Michael Redgrave as the narrator, but he's way underused. They have him explain the part about the blind man's dog, but not much else. I would've liked more.

Another thing I think it could use is a musical score. Even just a few flourishes. The little fanfare when young Ebenezer imagines Ali Baba and the other characters is jarring becomes it comes out of nowhere.

All that being said, this thing is very stylish. The tracking shots and pans and all are really great. The drawings themselves look like etchings. It's really like a book come to life.

But... as much as I like this, it's not my "go to" for a 20-odd minute faithful adaptation. That honor still goes to the 1953 radio broadcast with Laurence Olivier.

There, I said it!

Thursday, December 5, 2019

A Christmas Carol (1971) - Part 2



The 1971 animated adaptation of "A Christmas Carol" is extremely faithful to the original novella.  The title card says "A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens" for a reason. No "freely adapted" here!



It also includes the "A Ghost Story of Christmas"  subtitle to let us know some eeriness is on the way!

There are a lot of little details present here that we don't usually see in other versions. I think this whole thing probably works best for those who are already familiar with the book, otherwise some things might be hard to follow, or at least "get."

Although there's an obvious attempt to follow the book closely, there are some incidents omitted, as this is only about 25 minutes long. It is with these exceptions that we are concerned.

That last line is actually my little takeoff on the introductory narration, which is not from the book. It's different to have a narrator that doesn't say anything about Marley being dead.



We get most of the usual business in the opening scenes at Scrooge's office, although these are a bit shortened, such as his nephew is in and out pretty quickly and Scrooge doesn't argue with Bob Cratchit about the coal.

The oddest thing of all here is that Scrooge says that he knows that the charity solicitors will probably say that some people would rather die than go to the prisons or union workhouses. It's as if he's heard them say that before. He answers it with his usual "surplus population" remark, but it loses a lot of its punch.

Scrooge goes straight home, but not before a blind man's dog avoids him, just like in the book.



He sees Marley's face in the knocker, which is not plain as described in the book. It's some sort of face to begin with (a lion?) and really doesn't change all that much when it becomes Marley.

Scrooge does see a hearse in his staircase, another detail not often seen.

Scrooge is quickly in a nightshirt, which makes him look a little pudgy, and a wacky nightcap that looks like a dunce cap!



Marley's Ghost comes in and he is creepy to be sure. Good use of this being a cartoon is made in having his jaw really open when he removes the cloth. And he talks without his mouth moving, so Scrooge better be scared!

We also see Marley's fellow doomed phantoms, which adds to the creepiness!



The Ghost of Christmas Past appears and this is probably the closest in appearance to how it's described in the book than any other adaptation. It kind of shimmers and has multiple limbs and eyes appearing and disappearing and you can't tell if it's young or old. Again, excellent use of animation to do something that would be really hard to pull off with live action.

This show moves fast, so we don't get every scene in the past. We start with young Ebenezer at school. We see him reading as usual, but this time we see the characters from his books come to life.



I remember that image with the little musical fanfare as much as anything from seeing this show as a kid. I hadn't read the book yet, however, so I had no idea what that was supposed to signify.

The next image is cool, as we see Ebenezer grow, as he does in the book. He winds up as an apprentice with Fezziwig, however, instead of still being at the school with Fan coming to take him home.

I think without Fan, we miss the significance of Scrooge's sister's memory living on through his nephew. Who is this nephew, then?

In any event, we see Fezziwig's party and Dick Wilkins is there, and true to the book, Belle is not.



Belle shows up next, when she breaks up with young Scrooge. She's dressed just like she should be, in mourning clothes.

Old Scrooge dispatches the spirit right after this, so we don't see Belle with her husband and family.



The Ghost of Christmas Present appears and looks like you'd expect him to. We actually get just about everything in the present sequence, although shortened.



We start off with people milling about, then go to the Cratchit's house. Martha is already there and doesn't hide. She's actually not called by name here, and neither are Peter nor Belinda. We're out of there pretty quickly, but we do get to hear Tiny Tim "sing" about a child lost in the snow, as he does in the book. No argument about toasting Scrooge. Curiously, Mrs. Cratchit says, "God bless us everyone," before Tiny Tim does!



Other scenes from the book not commonly found in most adaptations are the other Christmas celebrations, with the miners and really old guy singing, the lighthouse, and the ship at sea.

We then get a very brief stop at Fred's house, where he toasts his uncle. His quote is from the book when he says, "Whatever he is," but taken out of the context of the guessing game, it doesn't really make sense.



It gets close to midnight and the spirit has really aged. Before he goes, we see extremely creepy versions of Ignorance and Want. Did I say extremely creepy?

The clock starts to strike midnight and the Ghost of Christmas Future appears. He's a  bit early, as Marley's Ghost said he would appear when the last stroke ceases to vibrate. But they have a lot to see, so might as well get started!



The spirit is a hooded phantom, but we mostly see just its hand, which is effective.


They see the other businessmen at the Exchange and one has the weird growth on his nose, as per the book. We get inside Old Joe's with only the laundress and charwoman. Which one is not stated.



The characters in the scene at Old Joe's are perhaps the most unrealistic in the whole thing. Kind of reminds me of the corresponding scenes in the 1935 "Scrooge" and the previous animated special "Mister Magoo's Christmas Carol."

We then see a body on a bed with the sheet barely covering it. It looks like there's a bunch of grey hair sticking out of the top. That can't be Scrooge, though, right? He's bald on top, but it's supposed to be him. Am I mistaken in what I think I'm seeing?



We next briefly see Bob at Tiny Tim's bed, but we don't see Tim's face (good!). Scrooge sees his name on the gravestone, then is back in his own bed, hugging his bed curtains.

He dances around a lot, with an awesome vocal performance by Alastair Sim, echoing his 1951 portrayal.

He calls out the window to the boy in the street, but only to inquire what day it is. He doesn't have him buy the prize turkey. I always thought the kid sounded a bit like Yogi Bear!



Scrooge goes to the poulterer's himself. The sign reads "Prize Turkee" for some reason.

He meets the portly gentleman who did the talking and promises to make a donation. He then goes to his nephew's house, sees the girl at the door and goes in. He calls his nephew "Fred" and that's about it.

After an abrupt cut, we're at the office the next day, where Scrooge catches Bob coming in late, but raises his salary. I think this is one point where you really need to be familiar with the story, as there's nothing to tell us it's the next morning.

We finally get Michael Redgrave's narration back to wrap up the story with some text right from the book.

So, a faithful adaptation with a lot of often overlooked details from the book!



Wednesday, December 4, 2019

A Christmas Carol (1971) - Part 1


A Christmas Carol (1971)
Director: Richard Williams
Scrooge: Alastair Sim

Now we turn our attention to another animated adaptation that is the polar opposite of "Mickey's Christmas Carol!"

This 1971 made for TV version is very well regarded, although it seems to have been out of mainstream circulation for a while. This was so acclaimed that it actually won the 1972 Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film, even though it was originally shown on TV. Apparently that loophole was closed shortly thereafter!

This was directed by Richard Williams, a renowned animator, later justly famous for his work on "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" (1988), so he knew what he was doing. The executive producer is the legendary Chuck Jones, director of more Looney Tunes classics than you can think of off the top of your head. This production doesn't scream "Chuck Jones," however, in the way that say, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas"(1966) does.

The voice cast is excellent. Somebody had the awesome idea of getting Alastair Sim to reprise his role of Ebenezer Scrooge from that brilliant 1951 version!

They also got Michael Hordern, who had played Marley's Ghost in the 1951 film to repeat that role.

Throw in esteemed British actor Michael Redgrave as narrator and the whole thing is loaded with class!

We haven't even talked about the visual style. It really looks like an old edition of the book come to life. There are also a lot of pans and dissolves and such, which give the whole production an artistic touch.

 I remember seeing this a few times on TV as a kid and it seemed a cut above the usual animated fare they threw at us back then!

This seems to have disappeared for a while after that, but I always remembered it and hoped to see it again.

Then when home video became a thing in the late 1980s, I was lucky enough to acquire a VHS tape of it. I'm not sure what the origin of the tape was, maybe "gray market," as it was recorded at EP speed. If you can remember,  EP speed was the one that would let you record six hours on one tape with lower quality. Since the cassette of this show used only enough tape to hold the half-hour, it was the tinest little spool of tape I had ever seen!

So, how does this version hold up after 48(!) years?

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Sim and Finney and Scott! Oh, my!

When discussing that 1984 TV-movie from 1984 starring George C. Scott, I mentioned that I had put him in a "Big Three" of Scrooges along with Alastair Sim and Albert Finney back in the day. They didn't really have an awful lot of competition at the time, but newer adaptations have come along and older ones have resurfaced, so it's a more crowded field. But, I still say those three are the best!

It's intersting to compare and contrast their interpretations, as they each give the role a different spin.

I think that Albert Finney and George C. Scott are at the extreme ends of the Scrooge spectrum. Finney plays the role very broadly and really emphasizes the eccentric aspect of being a miser. He's a bit crazy on the whole and really does a 180 when he reforms. He embraces his new philanthropy with the same vigor that he had when trying to collect debts! It's a borderline comic performance.

George C. Scott, on the other hand, emphasizes the businessman aspect of Scrooge. He's obsessed with money, to be sure, and wants to have as much of it as possible. But he doesn't seem the least bit crazy or even eccentric. Just a really tough businessman. When he reforms, he's still somewhat reserved, which is in keeping with the performance, which is not comic at all.

So, how does Alslatair Sim fit in? Quite well, I think. He's kind of splits the difference between the other two. He seems a bit odd, but not totally off the wall like Finney. And he's a tough businessman, but not quite as ruthless as Scott. I think is what serves to help make him the ideal Scrooge.

I do think that these guys all had good scripts to work with and solid supporting casts to play off of, but they run the show.

They are all very convincing as Scrooge, but I think that George C. Scott may have had more of a handicap in making audiences think of him as Scrooge in that I believe he was the most recognizable at the time.

Alastair Sim was never a star in America and is really only known now because his Scrooge was so good. In 1951 (or since) American audiences can easily believe he's Scrooge because you don't know him anyway.

Albert Finney was well-known in 1970, but he had the advantage of old-age makeup and a wacky voice to make him seem like Scrooge.

George C. Scott was very well known in 1984 and most of the people tuning in knew him from other roles, especially General Patton. He has the mutton chops, but otherwise looks and talks the same as usual. So, he needed to act like Scrooge to convince us he was Scrooge.

By the same token, his generally perceived persona and "difficult" reputation made this seem like ideal casting, so I guess he had that going for him!

In any event, those are my top three, with Quincy Magoo in his own category.

What do you think?


Wednesday, October 23, 2019

Scrooge (1951) - What's What



So, we've established that "Scrooge"from 1951 has a great cast, as led by "the incomparable Alastair Sim" (the poster is correct!).

The cinematography, set design, music score, special effects, script, direction, all good!

Except for changing the title to "A Christmas Carol" for U.S. release, there's nothing Americanized about it and the very British feel of the whole thing adds to the authenticity. And as we move further away from 1951, the movie seems to get closer to actual Dickensian times, making it a wonderful time capsule.

The movie feels authentic, but is it actually faithful to the source material? Well, yes and no.

Now, I wouldn't say that there are actual spoilers ahead, as if you're reading this, you must know how the whole thing turns out. But if you have not seen this version yet, by all means do so, then come back!

The idea of the whole thing hasn't changed much, but a lot has been added to the Christmas Past sequence in order to flesh out Scrooge's character. With these added things, we get more on idea of how Scrooge came to be such a miserable wretch!

Many of these new angles have been appropriated (to be polite) by subsequent versions, because they came up with some really good ideas!

The biggest change of all is to make Fan the older sister of Ebenezer. Dickens clearly states in the book that Fan is much younger. Making her older allows for their mother to have died giving birth to Ebenezer. That wouldn't work if Fan were younger. But this causes the father to be kind to Fan and resent Ebenezer. In the original text, we have no idea what happened to their mother or why Daddy Scrooge scorns Ebenezer but favors the younger Fan. This all makes sense now, though.



Now, throw in Fan dying while giving birth to Fred and we have a reason why Scrooge resents his nephew.

The added scene of Fan's death is very powerful. Scrooge and the Ghost linger after the young Scrooge storms out. Turns out Fan hadn't passed away yet and the last thing she asked is for Ebenezer to take care of her boy. That hits the old Scrooge like a ton of bricks and you know right there he will never again have a cross word with Fred.

Another scene from the past that goes on after young Scrooge leaves is the breakup with Alice. She puts on a brave face while young Scrooge is there, but after he storms out, she breaks down. Another thing that hits old Scrooge hard. Alastair Sim's reactions in these scenes really help sell them.



Besides being named Alice rather than Belle, another big change is that she did not get married to someone else after splitting with Ebenezer. She went the opposite route from him and works as a nurse or social worker or something. I always hope that in the new, improved future, Scrooge looks her up and they finally get together! Some Dickensian shipping!

The expansion of Scrooge's back story also includes his progression from happy young apprentice with Fezziwig to miserable old partner with Jacob Marley. The newly added character of Mr. Jorkin sets this in motion by introducing young Scrooge to young Marley and he inadvertently allows them to take over the company, eventually driving Fezziwig out of business.

It's very interesting to see the gradual hardening of Scrooge as it happens, rather than just hearing Alice/Belle say that it happened.



While they're throwing extra scenes into the past, we get to see Jacob Marley on his deathbed. He tries to warn Scrooge to change his ways, but Scrooge isn't buying it.

We also get see Bob Cratchit in this scene and since it was on Christmas Eve, he tries to get the next day off as usual. Scrooge has a comical reaction to Cratchit's "if it's quite convenient line," saying that Cratchit says the same thing every year. It's funny, but kind of backwards, as Scrooge should have had that reaction in the present rather than in the past if he had already heard it so many times before with an additional seven times added on!

In any event, it's really in the past that most of the changes and/or additions take place. They all make sense and blend in so well that they could have been part of the original novella.

Back in the present, quite a bit of screen time is given to the charwoman, Mrs. Dilber. She also had popped up in the Marley's death scene and gets her own catchphrase; "in keeping with the situation!"

 Not too much is omitted, but the whole thing clocks in at a snappy 86 minutes, so you can definitely fit in a screening at least once every holiday season!