It's 1949. It's early television. They are trying to present a classic novel in 23+ minutes. Yet, that doesn't excuse its problems. The actors recite some of the lines from the book and give a very bare bones rendition of the story, so credit for that but not much else.Vincent Price, in that honey-ed voice of his, "reads" the story as if reading to a child. Taylor Holmes playing Ebeneezer (more about that later) Scrooge is from New Jersey so he can be forgiven for not sounding particularly English but why does he sound like Gabby Hayes ? His reactions smack too much of silent screen acting to be acceptable in a 1949 production. His laugh at the finale is more crazed than amused.The prize for worst performance ever as one of the ghosts must go to one George James. He has the look and stance of Superman and seems angry rather than the usual jovial presentation of this ghost. Another prize for bad acting would go to young Bobby Hyatt as "Tiny" Tim. The kid looks so pleased with himself after remembering his Bless Us Every One line that ... well... strangling comes to mind.Back to the extra EEs. Not only is Mr. Scrooge called that in the credits but on his tombstone as well.To top it off the title cards call it "THE Christmas Carol".Got a list to check off? Remember, you've been warned.

The Christmas Carol (1949) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Vincent Price hosts and narrates this made-for-TV version of the Charles Dickens' classic about Ebeneezer Scrooge (Taylor Holmes) who is visited by his former partner and warned that three spirits will visit him. I've seen so many versions of this story that you obvious begin to feel a bit of deja vu but I've always felt that the story itself is so strong that it's not too hard to bring one into it. This version here has several good things going for it but it's obviously done on a pretty low-budget and the wooden sets and some poor acting certainly doesn't help. I thought that all of the sets were rather cheap and fake looking but I think a lot of the television shows from this period suffered the same fate. Just take a look at the chains around Marley and you can see that there wasn't too much imagination going on. Another weak thing was the performance by George James who is so still as the Ghost of Christmas Present that you'd think they really dug him up out of some grave. With that said, the performance by Holmes was actually pretty good. He's certainly not one of the best Scrooge's that I've seen but I enjoyed his performance. I also thought Price did a good job reading from the book and just check out the way he keeps reminding us that Marley is dead. I'm not sure why they changed the "A" to a "The" in the title but fans of the story and Price will want to check this one out.

The problem with "The Christmas Carol" (1949) is that it's a VERY familiar tale--with quite a few versions out there--including the classic versions with Alistair Sim as well as Reginald Owen, a musical, some wonderful made for TV versions and it's probably the most ripped-off plot used in sitcoms! So, because of this, a SHORT version with cheap sets is already at a huge disadvantage--even if it had Vincent Price narrating. Most of the acting (except for the Ghost of Christmas Present) is decent and it's okay for 1949 TV. But, shoving this into such a short time slot and the poor ending at the Cratchit ending didn't help. Overall, it's worth a look if you are curious but my advice is to see the made for TV version starring George C. Scott--I really think this is the best of the lot.This show is like white bread--inoffensive and a bit bland.

It is interesting to compare this version with the Frederic March/basil Rathbone version. Granted, Vincent Price's version is less star-studded, but it is interesting to see how different adaptations occur. Vincent as narrator reads from the book, much as Frederic March did. Vincent seems to be enjoying himself, though. It is great to hear him say (Marley was dead." Mind you, this film was shot before Vincent became a horror star.There are many liberties taken with the script, but when you have limited time, cuts are necessary. Fezziwig is cut out, as are the scenes with Fan. The ghosts are interesting if uninspired compared to other versions.All in all, it's hard to ruin Dickens, and while this version is very abridged, it moves.