kfo9494 Sure, this was not the best adaptation of Dickens' classic tale- but for a made-for-TV movie, this western theme story was not bad.We all know the details of Charles Dickens work but in this version it takes place in a rural western 1800's town where Ebenezer Scrooge runs a saloon and cheats people out of money. And like in all the writings, Scrooge is a miserable miser that controls the money and people in the town. And as the story goes, Scrooge will meet up with three ghosts that will show him the way his life is heading. It will be up to Ebenezer to take the information and change his ways.There are a few changes that differs from the usual tale but overall the theme of the story rings out very clear. Jack Palace does a nice job of playing the villain in this show and actually makes the movie much better with his performance. With the small budget for the film, there are a few rough spots during the production. However, these take nothing away from the story and the true spirit of the classic novel comes through in the end.This movie can not compare to the larger budget films that most remember of 'A Christmas Carol'. But in the end, the film got it's point across and the viewer was entertained. That is why this film was made.

Magila_guerrilla I have a feeling that people who trash this movie are doing so out of a deep seeded love for the Alistair Sim classic, and a refusal to enjoy any other version. This is an interesting adaptation and worth watching.I especially enjoy the fact that the story continues after Scrooges transformation, showing how people deal with an overnight change in someone they have long feared and stopped trusting.Hey, I like the 1951 version too, watch them both for Christmas!

Amos_Dundee I caught this umpteenth reformulation of the Dicken's tale quite by accident--and it was truly like watching an accident happen. Awful does not capture the turgidity of this misbegotten project--"A Christmas Carol" set in the Klondike. True, it does have Jack Palance as the Scrooge character; but even Mr. Palance needs a script and a director--both of which are missing here. His performance, over the top and nasty though it is, is the only thing worth watching. The script captures none of the detail / feeling of the original story and Scrooge isn't very interesting--just mean and nasty. No original innocence. The actors, as in alot of made for TV movies all have a cookie cutter sameness--like they were mostly gotten from modeling agencies. The idea "might" have been workable if a little humanity and humor been present in the script and few decent actors been hired. Watch Alastair Sim, George C. Scott for great Scrooges--or Michael Caine (no slouch) in "A Muppet Christmas Carol" if you are in a more whimsical vein--but pass this one by.

fleister This was a very good re-telling of the "Christmas Carol" story. I really liked the slight changes in the end and think others will as well if, like me, they take every opportunity to watch Scrooge! Take a chance on this one and live a little.