Showing posts with label 1950s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1950s. Show all posts

16 February 2026

“Lady & the Tramp” (1955)

Lady & the Tramp


Brief Description:

The romantic tale of a sheltered uptown Cocker Spaniel and a streetwise downtown mutt.

(from IMDb)


Date: 1955

Genre: American animated musical romantic comedy film

Running time: 1 hour 16 minutes


Cast: 

Peggy Lee: Darling; Peg; Si & Am

Barbara Luddy: Lady

Larry Roberts: Tramp

Bill Thompson: Jock; Joe; Bull; Dachsie; the policeman; Jim's friend

Bill Baucom: Trusty

Stan Freberg: the beaver

Verna Felton: Aunt Sarah

Alan Reed: Boris

George Givot: Tony

Dallas McKennon: Toughy; Pedro; the professor; the hyena

Lee Millar: Jim Dear; the dogcatcher; the man in the pet shop

Thurl Ravenscroft: the alligator

Thurl Ravenscroft, Bill Lee, Max Smith, & Bob Stevens: Dog Chorus

Donald Novis: lead vocals for the opening song


Director: Hamilton Luske, Clyde Geronimi, & Wilfred Jackson

Production company: Walt Disney Productions


Inspired by: Happy Dan, the Cynical Dog by Ward Greene


Wikipedia page



Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 4/5

I love the setting of Lady's side of town—it's so pretty and Edwardian! The Christmas beginning and ending are particularly charming and nostalgic. 


Characters: 4/5

Although I have a few bones to pick with Tramp, he's not half bad, and Lady's a little sweetheart. Jock is adorable and Trusty's amusing. Jim & Darling are nice enough too, and Aunt Sarah ends up sort redeeming herself. As for the dogs in the kennel, they're hilarious and heartbreaking all at once. (And I love their singing numbers.)


Plot: 4/5

Well-crafted plot, with plenty of tension and sweet moments, along with good humour. 


Romance: 4/5

Tramp & Lady are pretty cute together 😉 


Violence: 5/5 (low)

Mild violence (dog fights, etc) 


Overall: 4/5

It's sweet, vintage, and very pretty :) 

2 March 2024

“Bombay Waterfront” (1952)

Bombay Waterfront

Also known as: Paul Temple Returns


Brief Description:

The Temples investigate a series of murders attributed to a mysterious figure known as “The Marquis.” 

(from IMDb)


Date: 1952

Genre: Drama crime mystery

Running time: 1 hour 11 minutes


Cast: 

John Bentley (Paul)

Patricia Dainton (Steve)

Grey Blake (Storey)

Peter Gawthorne (Sir Graham)

Valentine Dyall (Bradley)

Robert Urquhart (Slater)

Christopher Lee  (Raybourne)

Dan Jackson (Sakki)

Ronald Leigh-Hunt (Ross)

Arthur Hill (Guest)

Ben Williams (Carson)


Director: Maclean Rogers

Production company: Nettlefold Films


Based on: Paul Temple by Francis Durbridge


Wikipedia page


Watch on Dailymotion

(watched on Tubi)



Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 4/5

I really enjoyed the 1950s British setting! The tower was a GREAT addition. :) There was plenty of thrill and atmosphere, and the Egyptian addition was fun—although I don’t get Steve & Paul’s aversion to it and specifically Abdullah. Granted, he freaked me out too the first time. ;P 


Characters: 3/5

I wasn’t a fan of the characters, except for Paul. (Figures.) Steve was very one-dimensional. She wasn’t faintish and scared, but she also wasn’t worth much of anything except to discuss theories and be threatened. The film would hardly have changed if she wasn’t in it, I think. Sir Felix and Storey were both okay. I pegged the bad guy pretty early on, and the other one was just indifferently good. I would have liked to see more of Ross, to be honest! 


Plot: 4/5

A mystery with 3 possible villains is always fun. I did feel like the description of the film was a let down, with its high stakes of “serial killer” and “gruesome murders” (Tubi). 5 people were killed [not gruesomely] and the Marquis was no danger to the public, only to those specific people. But anyhow, I enjoyed the chase, and the final climatic scenes, and overall I’m interested in watching more of the Paul Temple films. I really liked his TV address. ;) 


Romance: 4/5

Steve & Paul were quite cute. :) 


Content: 4/5 (low)

Slight racism towards the Burmese and the Egyptians; English archaeology in Egypt a main spring of the film; a few instances of mild language; drinking. 


Violence: 4/5 (low)

One person is shot onscreen; another person is electrocuted onscreen; a hanged man is discovered in a closet (only the shoes shown); a shot of a dead woman in her killer’s arms (non-graphic); a woman is threatened with murder (nothing happens). 


Overall: 3.5/5

Not the best mystery film I ever saw, but not the worst either. I feel pretty neutral about it. 

11 October 2023

“The Story of Robin Hood & His Merrie Men” (1952)

The Story of Robin Hood & His Merrie Men

Brief Description:

When King Richard the Lionheart leaves England to lead a crusade to the Holy Land, his treacherous brother conspires to bring himself to power.


Date: 1952

Genre: action adventure

Running time: 1 hour 24 minutes 


Cast: 

Richard Todd (Robin)

Joan Rice (Marian)

Peter Finch (Sheriff)

James Hayter (Friar Tuck)

James Robertson Justice (Little John)

Martita Hunt (Queen Eleanor)

Hubert Gregg (Prince John)

Elton Hayes (Alan-a-Dale)

Anthony Eustrel (Archbishop)

Patrick Barr (King Richard)

Anthony Forwood (Will Scarlet)

Bill Owen (Will Stutely)

Hal Osmond (Much)

Louise Hampton (Tyb)

Richard Graydon (Merrie Man)

Michael Hordern (Scathelock)

Julian Somers (Posse Leader)

Bill Travers (Posse Man)

Clement McCallin (Earl)

Nigel Neilson (Merrie Man)

Geoffrey Lumsden (Merrie Man)

Leonard Charles Newcombe (Page Boy)


Director: Ken Annakin

Production company: RKO-Walt Disney British Productions Limited


Based on: the Robin Hood legends


Wikipedia page


Watch on Archive


Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 5/5

While “The Adventures of Robin Hood” (1938) seemed more centred on the Normans, this one felt more centred on the England of the time. It was somewhat rougher in atmosphere. A very interesting alternate POV!


Characters: 5/5

Robin Hood was not a noble here, and a lot more rough. I know I said he was super proud and a bit brutal in the 1938 film, but he's even more so here. ;P He's much more of an impudent young man than a clever, calculating leader like in the '30s film. Marian is a tomboy, which is an interesting alternate POV (though I like her best as a lady). I like Little John very much in here, and the Friar is SUPER accurate to the books [Pyle's The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood & Gilbert's Robin Hood]. The Sheriff (De Lesseps) feels like a mix of the Sheriff and Guy of Gisbourne, which is fun. Queen Eleanor is pretty awesome, and Prince John is less sinister (being less gabby), but he gives off more spoiled-younger-brother feels and is more slimy nasty than scary nasty. Alan-a-Dale is great (love his singing, but also I want a film rendition of the alternate young knight Alan and his love!!). The Archbishop is great--very nice after the nasty Bishop of the 1938 film, and Stutey & Scarlet are much more like the Merry Men in Gilbert's Robin Hood.


Plot: 5/5

Honestly, this is a very interesting different view of Robin Hood than the '30s film. Starting with Richard leaving, Robin & Marian being childhood friends, Marian's father leaving her as a ward in the Queen's keeping, and Richard confiding England to John's trust, we then have the archery tournament--but not to capture Robin! Definitely gives off strong Ivanhoe and Merry Adventures feels there. Then we have Robin's father slain and Robin outlawed, following which are skimishes with the Sheriff (and Friar Tuck) reminiscent of Robin Hood. Then Richard's ransom is announced, and the Queen & Archbishop try unsuccessfully to get the Prince & Sheriff to help raise the money. Marian gets involved, loses faith in Robin when he robs someone for no good reason, and eventually finds it again... and then there's more hijinks against John & the Sheriff, and Marian is locked up, and then there's the climax and Richard's return. So, similar to the '30s film but moves stuff around, adds and removes stuff, and generally is a great alternate storyline. 


Romance: 3/5

I do not find Robin & Marian really cute somehow in this film. Perhaps because I really don't like Robin that much, or Marian terribly much more. It's cute, but it's kinda lame?? I don’t know. I can't put my finger on why I don't love it. 


Theme/Message/Topics: N/A

Literally none, unless I really forgot something. It's just a swashbuckler. 


Content: 3/5 (medium)

I'm surprised by the content in here, because as it's a Disney film I assumed it was a family film. Well, it's a lot rougher/coarser than the 1938. There's a lot of shirtlessness. 2 or 3 kisses between Marian & Robin, some hugs. Marian traipses around in leggings (& a cape) and later in leggings + a big Lincoln Green shirt that is pretty open down the front, though it doesn't really show anything. 


Violence: 3/5 (medium)

The violence is also stronger in this film. De Lesseps tortures Stutely, and his bloody back is shown. Everybody's pretty rough, as aforementioned. There's a lot of fighting, though nothing graphic. SPOILER One of the villains is insinuated to die by being crushed between a castle wall and the drawbridge, which personally really bothers me. END OF SPOILER


Overall: 4.5/5

There are some imperfections, but I do enjoy the film, especially when I follow it up with the 1938 as a alternate POV. 

16 July 2023

“The Hoodlum” (1951)

The Hoodlum


Brief Description:

Vincent Lubeck is a hardened criminal by his early twenties. His mother begs for him to have a second chance, and against the better judgment of the prison warden, Vincent is paroled. His family does everything they can to set him back on his feet. Will Vincent choose to change, or to return to his crimes?

(possibly written by me, possibly taken from Tubi, IMDb, or Wikipedia and edited by me. I forget)


Date: 1951

Genre: American film noir crime drama

Running time: 1 hour 


Cast: 

Lawrence Tierney (Vincent Lubeck)

Allene Roberts (Rosa)

Marjorie Riordan (Eileen)

Lisa Golm (Mrs. Lubeck)

Edward Tierney (Johnny Lubeck)

Stuart Randall (Police Lt. Burdick)

Angela Stevens (Christie Lang)

John De Simone (Marty Connell)

Tom Hubbard (Police Sgt. Schmidt)

Eddie Foster (Mickey Sessions)

O.Z. Whitehead (Mr. Breckenridge)

Richard Barron (Eddie Bright)

Rudy Rama (Harry Hill)

Raymond Bond (Old Man)

James Conaty (Parole Officer W.D. Allen)

Bill Coontz (Gang Member)

Russell Custer (Police Officer)

Rudy Germane (Guard)

William H. O'Brien (Morgue Attendant)

Gene Roth (Prison Warden Stevens)


Director: Max Nosseck

Production company: Jack Schwarz Productions


Wikipedia page


Watch on Archive

(watched on Tubi, where the CCs are wildly inaccurate, by the way!)



Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 3/5

I haven’t watched many 1950s New York style crime films, so I enjoyed this one. It was also more domestic and focussed on ex-cons, which was a new setting for me. 


Characters: 2/5

The only one I liked was Mama. Poor Mrs. Lubeck! I felt her broken heart. I may or may not have cried during her passionate outburst at the end. Also the Warden. He was very interesting and human. 

John was too harsh with Vincent, and he snapped at the end. I liked Rosa, until she went stupidEileen, same. And Vincent I HATED. Oh, I rooted so hard for him at the beginning!! But he just utterly destroyed everyone around him. He was selfish and hateful. He was horrid!!! 


Plot: 2/5

Like I mentioned above, I appreciated the part that it focussed on ex-cons. I was hoping for a big character showdown where the MC finally triumphed even if he went bad a few times. Nope. Instead he broke his mother’s heart, destroyed his brother, and murdered the woman who carried his baby. Indirectly, perhaps, but still 100% his fault. There was no sad, somber note to carry away. I was just frustrated. To be honest, I’m writing this weeks after watching the film, so I may have forgotten some stuff, but I doubt anything could make me feel different about this. 

However, I really liked the themes of the film. Rosa’s and Vincent’s rooftop conversation = food for thought. And it was rife with subtle messages about Vincent and his reasons for being a criminal. Also, Mrs. Lubeck had some great lines, and the scene ranting about the city dump was SO good. And the death scene was epic though. If that had happened sooner, I think Vincent’s life might have been turned around… 


Romance: 1/5

I hate romance triangles. I hate how Vincent led on Rosa and Eileen at the same time. I hate how Rosa fell for him. I don’t understand how Eileen fell for him. WHY do girls always chose to give their hearts to red-flag men who carry their red flags like semaphores??? 


Theme/Message/Topics: 3/5

This was the only part of the film I actually liked. 

A) The theme of how hard it is to come back and rebuild your life after prison or conviction. Even if Vincent had tried—which he did, for like 2 days—he was, as he truthfully pointed out, treated badly. He was always suspected, he was spoken of in very unkind ways, he was shunned… He had a point about how unforgiving society was towards him. 

B) Very subtle but I appreciated how they showed why Vincent was a criminal. Lack of confidence. Seeking self-assurance. Again circling back to how he was treated.

Also, B.2, it was shown how Rosa’s platitudes were so useless.

C) How Forgiveness must be tempered with Justice. And how you can’t save everyone, and must protect others sometimes from people who prove to be bad over and over until they evidence change.

D) How easy it is to be seduced and drawn into paths of evil. 


Stevens: The only extenuating circumstances in Vincent Lubeck’s case is that he has not killed anybody… yet. 


Rosa: Is it so… so difficult to adjust yourself, Vincent? 

Vincent: I came out just like I went in, only smarter. I learned a few things. 

Rosa: It’s better to forget those things. Start with new plans.

Vincent: Forget what? That I was behind there when I’d get out? Life wouldn’t be planned for me and I’d go walking around just like anybody else? When you get out they won’t let you forget. They’re still pointing a finger at you, something different.

Rosa: Why don’t you stop yelling, I’m an ex-con, what are you gonna do about it?? The only finger pointing at you is your own.

Vincent: Don’t hand me that. Make a mistake once and you’re dead. The cops are always after you, people don’t want you around, everybody wants to play warden. Keep them locked up, keep them penned in, don’t let them free!

Content: 1/5 

At least one kiss (stolen, by the way), maybe more. Also a scene with at least one woman in a low-necked dress. Can’t remember anything else, but the main problem of the film is that Vincent decides to steal his brother’s fiancée. That’s the stolen kiss. It continues for most of the movie—she fell for him early on—and eventually she gets pregnant and begs him to marry her. He tells her plainly he had no intention to from the beginning and she means nothing to him. She suicides. Also in the end John tries to kill Vincent, although he loses his nerve finally. 


Violence: 3/5

I remember a shootout where several officers die, and there’s probably other mild violence. 


Overall: 2/5

I’m not sorry I watched it, and it made me think about a lot of stuff. But I can’t really recommend it…

24 March 2023

“The Big Caper” (1957)

The Big Caper


Brief Description:

A con man in debt and down on his luck comes up with what he thinks is the perfect caper—robbing a small-town bank that keeps a lot of money on hand because of the payroll of a nearby army base. He convinces a vicious crime boss to bankroll his scheme, but when he and his boss’ girl move into the town to make preparations for the heist, he begins to have second thoughts about the whole operation.

(from frankfob2@yahoo.com, via IMDb)


Date: 1957

Genre: American crime drama film noir

Running time: 1 hour 24 minutes 


Cast: 

Rory Calhoun (Frank)

Mary (Kay)

James Gregory (Flood)

Robert H. Harris (Zimmer)

Roxanne Arlen (Doll)

Corey Allen (Roy)

Paul Picerni (Harry)


Director: Robert Stevens

Production company: Pine-Thomas Productions


Based on: The Big Caper by Lionel White 


Wikipedia page


Watch on Tubi



Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 5/5

I loved, loved, loved the 1950s American small town aesthetic/feel. It was sooo sweet and wholesome and homey!! <3 The addition of little Bobby or what’s-his-name brought out all the mother + father in Kay & Frank and was super cute. And the barbecue. XD


Characters: 2/5

Flood was terrifying. Doll was an idiot and a very loose woman. Zimmer was despicable. Frank was… okay. He was loyal and ended up redeeming himself. Kay started out nasty and turned into a pretty normal American housewife. Roy was straight up  c r e e p y.


Plot: 1/5

Strike one: Kay & Frank living together as man and wife to win the town’s trust. (They had different bedrooms, but still.) 

Strike two: scene where Roy gets super creepy on Kay, and then Flood shows up and literally makes him lie down on the bed and flogs him with a rope while Kay sits and hears Roy scream. (Really creepy scene. Really.) 

Strike three: Doll. The whole addition of Doll, who flirts and throws herself at every guy. Bleh. 

Strike four: Zimmer. I hated Zimmer and he creeped me out almost as much as Roy did. The guy was a raging alcoholic and so disgusting and terrifying with his cold remorselessness and pyromaniac tendencies. 

Strike five: the scene where Roy + Doll goes swimming (I was getting really tired of seeing him in a speedo) and then SPOILER he attacks her. I expected a sexual attack. Instead it was a murder. END OF SPOILER But it was literally thrown in for ZERO reason except to amp stuff up??? Or get rid of Doll??? Literally remained 100% unresolved. And it’s never explained why Roy is so weird and why Flood “rescued” him (from what?!). 

Strike six: it literally ends with the bad guy barely knocked out, and the MCs are kissing and whatnot instead of running to get the police to stop this guy before he murders them. 

Oh, and strike seven, which I forgot: Kay basically propositioning to Frank a couple times, if not specifically in one scene. 

There was probably more, but I think that covers the basics. 

The only thing I liked was all the suspense about saving the kids. Very cool addition. And Kay + Frank suddenly turned into heroes. That part of the film was really fun, actually. 


Romance: 1/5

Sorta already covered all that. I was not a fan of Kay & Frank’s sorta-illicit-because-she’s-Flood’s-girlfriend, whirlwind, passionate romance. Oh, and I wasn’t a fan of all the kissing, stroking, lap-sitting, and otherwise romantic moments between Roy, Harry, Frank, or Flood towards Doll and/or Kay. 


Content: 1/5 (high)

See all my ranting above.


Violence: 3/5 (medium)

Besides my ranting above, there’s some onscreen violence (fistfights, shooting, etc) but nothing graphic. 


Overall: 1/5

Waste of my time and waste of my brain matter. 

“No Escape” (1953)

No Escape

Brief Description:

When evidence and circumstance in a murder case points to a young woman as the main suspect, both her boyfriend (a police detective) and a struggling songwriter who plays piano in a bar, decide to withhold evidence from the police. Both of them ostensibly act to protect the woman, who believes that she accidentally killed the victim after an attempted assault. But when the songwriter is suspected by the police, the girl cant take it any more 

(from Wikipedia, edited & added to by me)


Date: 1953

Genre: American crime drama mystery film noir

Running time: 1 hour 16 minutes 


Cast: 

Lew Ayres (Tracy)

Marjorie Steele (Pat)

Renny McEvoy (Turnip)

Sonny Tufts (Shayne)

Lewis Martin (Gunning)

Gertrude Michael (Olga)

Charles Cane (Grossett)

James Griffith (Hayden)


Director: Charles Bennett 

Production company: Matthugh Productions


Wikipedia page


Watch on Archive

(watched on Tubi)


Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 4/5

The ’50s aesthetic/feel was definitely there, with nightclubs, parties, apartments… I just wish the setting involved the pub less. ;P 


Characters: 3/5

I really liked Pat because she was kind-hearted and tried hard to be honest and do the right thing, even if she messed up a couple times. I ended up liking T. as he redeemed himself. I never did like S., though. He was too aggressive, even to his girlfriend. Gunning was fun though. And Turnip was an interesting sidekick. (Also, random policeman who spoke to Pat on the bus—super cool guy.)


Plot: 3/5

Suspense? Yes, especially with the manhunt. But I figured out the baddie early on. Partly because of the stupid Tubi synopsis, though—I don’t know if I’d have guessed it was them otherwise. I was not a fan of how the murder came about, with the attempted assault and all the other stuff that happened to compromise Pats reputation. 


Romance: 2/5

S + P were kinda cute at first—I mean, I tried hard to ship them. But S just was too aggressive and controlling. T was a lot more gentlemanly—ironically. The relationship was kind of whirlwind and you could see it a mile off, and it just wasn’t my fav. 


Theme/Message/Topics: 0/5

No theme, except maybe don’t go home with drunk men?


Content: 1/5 (high)

Drinking, lots of it. Some language, possibly. Portrait of “Sultry Sally” in a rather revealing costume. Kissing which is considered passionate in my book. Off-screen, a guy tries to assault a girl. 


Violence: 4/5 (low)

Little to no on-screen violence. Shot of a dead man (eyes open); a few scenes where someone is threatened with a gun; a scene where people are shot—all nongraphic.


Overall: 3/5

Meh. It wasn’t awful, but I didn’t really like it either. And I really hated Shayne.

25 December 2022

“Dennis the Menace: The Christmas Story” (1959)

The Christmas Story 


Brief Description:

It’s Christmas Eve, and Dennis is desperate to find out if he got a sled or not. His parents are just as desperate for him not to find out. When the Wilsons get caught in the crossfire, how far will Dennis go to carry out his search? 

(written by me)


Date: 1959

Genre: American Christmas family film TV episode

Running time: 26 minutes


Cast: 

Jay North (Dennis)

Herbert Anderson (Henry)

Gloria Henry (Alice)

Joseph Kearns (Mr. Wilson)

Sylvia Field (Mrs. Wilson)

Billy Booth (Tommy)

Robert B. Williams (Mr. Dorfman)


Director: Don Taylor

Production company: Darriell Productions


IMDb page


Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 5/5

I love the 1950s homey feel of the Dennis the Menace show! And this episode has strong Christmassy feels <3


Characters: 4.5/5

I am not Dennis’ biggest fan—I wish he were more obedient! That would make for no show though, so I tolerate it. ;P He is very funny and very cute and very realistic, which also helps resign me. Meanwhile, his mother and father are perfect, and the Wilsons are epic neighbours—Martha is so sweet and George is hilarious with his cranky exterior and soft interior. And Tommy is the best sidekick. XD


Plot: 4.5/5

Again, I wish the plot didn’t involve Dennis going against his parents’ wishes by trying to find his Christmas gifts. But it is a funny, sweet, realistic episode and I love how Christmassy it is. (I know, I know, I’m repeating myself.) And I absolutely adore the singing scene. That’s probably the only reason I love this episode so much. ;) I wish there were a little more Christ and less Claus in the Christmas, though.


Overall: 4.5/5

A perfect Christmas Eve watch. 

14 December 2022

“Scrooge” (1951)

Scrooge

Also known as A Christmas Carol


Brief Description:

On Christmas Eve, tight-fisted businessman Ebenezer Scrooge is visited by the Spirit of Christmas Past, the Spirit of Christmas Present, and the Spirit of Christmas Yet to Come. Is there any chance his frozen old heart will change, and that he can escape the frightful destiny that awaits him?

(probably written by me)


Date: 1951

Genre: British Christmas fantasy drama

Running time: 1 hour 26 minutes


Cast: 

Alastair Sim (Scrooge)

George Cole (Young Scrooge)

Michael Hordern (Marley)

Patrick Macnee (Young Marley)

Mervyn Johns (Cratchit)

Hermione Baddeley (Mrs. Cratchit)

John Charlesworth (Peter)

Catherine Leach (Belinda)

Moiya Kelly (Martha)

Luanne Kemp (Mary)

Glyn Dearman (Tiny Tim)

Kathleen Harrison (Mrs. Dilber)

Michael J. Dolan (the Spirit of Christmas Past)

Francis de Wolff (the Spirit of Christmas Present)

CzesÅ‚aw Konarski (the Spirit of Christmas Yet to Come)

Rona Anderson (Alice)

Carol Marsh (Fanny)

Jack Warner (Mr. Jorkin)

Roddy Hughes (Mr. Fezziwig)

Brian Worth (Fred)

Olga Edwardes (Mrs. Fred)

Peter Bull (Narrator)


Director: Brian Desmond Hurst

Production company: George Minter Productions


Based on: A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens


Wikipedia page


Watch on Archive


Setting/Aesthetic/Feel: 5/5

Excellently portrayed Victorian England. 


Characters: 5/5

Everyone felt exactly like the book, and I was delighted. The Cratchits were all sweet; Scrooge was hateful at first and loveable at last; the Ghosts were well done; everyone was wonderful! 


Plot: 5/5

I haven’t read the book in about a year but I saw very little that had been changed or adapted; in fact, I was very impressed by how closely it followed the book. I couldn’t help feeling sorry for poor Scrooge—just a little—because of his past, and his mistake was very human—such a warning to remember. I used to be bothered by the ghost thing but I realized that they aren’t actually ghosts—Scrooge dreams all of it. The “spirits” merely show him what his life used to be, what it is now, and what it will be at his death. You could except Marley and insist he’s a real ghost but as ghosts don’t exist, Scrooge plainly dreamt him. (Though that part is a little less obvious in the film than the book.) 


Theme/Message/Topics: 5/5

Splendid moral, really, about not losing love and faith in people, and being willing to remember your roots, and give grace, and not try to make up for the trials you went through in the past by reaching a status where they “can’t reach you” or living with the assumption that everyone is out to get you and you have to be sharper.


Content: 4/5 (low)

A few shots of dancing + women in low-necked (1860s) dresses. Slight spookiness involved with all the “spirits.”


Overall: 5/5

A delightful, moving Christmas film about the true meaning of Christmas (and a well done film to boot).