Transparent heart icon with white outline and + sign.

Life's busy, read it when you're ready!

Create a free account to save articles for later, keep track of past articles you’ve read, and receive exclusive access to all RP resources.

White magnifying glass.

Search thousands of RP articles

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ.

Open envelope icon with @ symbol

Get Articles Delivered!

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ. delivered direct to your Inbox!

A A
By:

Christmas Carol: the movie

Animated
2001 / 81 minutes
Rating: 7/10

Dickens’ classic tale gets a child-friendly brush up, with a couple of cute mice companions added to the mix, and just a touch of romance too.

Though 95% of it is animated, it is book-ended with a set of live action scenes featuring author Charles Dickens doing a reading of his Christmas Carol novel to an appreciative audience. He offers them a story of ghosts, but the first scare of the night comes from a little mouse skittering through the theater. Responding to the excitement, Dickens decides to adapt his novel just a smidge, to begin it with a mouse, “making its way through London town.” And then off we go, into the rest of what is an animated tale.

For those who don’t know the story already, rich miser Ebenezer Scrooge has quite the Christmas Eve, getting visited by four ghosts, one after another.

Cautions

The two big concerns for Christians here would be Dickens’ portrayal of ghosts and his portrayal of Christmas.

The story’s repeated ghostly appearances can be divided into two sorts. First up, there’s Jacob Marley, Scrooge’s every-bit-as-evil but no longer living business partner who comes by with a warning about the three ghosts that will follow. So, what does the Bible say about ghosts? Only one ghostly visitation occurs in Scripture: Samuel appearing to Saul, with the involvement of the witch of Endor in 1 Samuel 28, and the text does seem to indicate it really was Samuel. While Samuel had his own warning, he didn’t have any of Marley’s chain-rattling theatrics.

Then there are the three spirits that follow, the ghosts of Christmas past, present, and future. The Bible speaks of an unseen spiritual dimension, where angels and demons alike exist. But spirits of Christmas? They don’t exist, and if they did, they would steer Scrooge towards Jesus, not simply generosity. That’s the biggest error in this, and every other version of Dickens’ tale – it offers Scrooge a works-based way to earn his righteousness, rather than the blood of Jesus to wash him clean.

So if you have young ones with you, a conversation will need to be had about Dickens’ “artistic license.” The author isn’t trying to teach us about the afterlife, but he is trying to teach us what it looks like to live right in the here and now. So kids will need to be alerted to what Dickens gets wrong about ghosts, but more importantly, what he gets wrong about the point of living. God does tell us to love our neighbor as ourselves, but that is the Second Great Commandment, and this story elevates it to the point of completely obscuring the First (Matt. 22:34-40).

Conclusion

So why would a Christian want to watch Dickens’ ghostly tale? Because it is a cultural icon, on par with the Greek myths, the tales of Sherlock Holmes, or Shakespeare’s plays – this is a story worth watching, and discussing with your family, simply because everyone knows it.

And while other accounts are more famous, this animated version is the most family-friendly, with the mice, and the romantic angle, taking just a bit of the edge off the ghostly apparitions. Check out the trailer below.

Enjoyed this article?

Get the best of RP delivered to your inbox every Saturday for free.


Up Next


Red heart icon with + sign.
Animated, Movie Reviews

The Lord of the Rings animated "trilogy"

Peter Jackson wasn't the first to put J.R.R. Tolkien's books on film. Two decades before the first of Jackson's live-action/CGI films hit theaters, three animated versions were crafted in the space of three years, and by two different animators. The first two are well worth checking out. The third is not. THE HOBBIT Animated 77 minutes / 1977 Rating: 7/10 The Hobbit was the first Tolkien book to be filmed, in 1977. Director Authur Rankin chose a particularly cartoonish style of drawing that made it clear from the start that this was intended as a children's film. But his work had some humor to it – just as the source material does – which makes it pleasant enough viewing for adults too. Our hero Bilbo Baggins is a Hobbit, creatures that look much like humans, though they are half as tall and have far hairier feet. Normally Hobbits like nothing better than to stay close to home, but when the wizard Gandalf brings 12 treasure-seeking Dwarves to his doorstep Bilbo signs up for the adventure. And with the help of a magic "ring of power" Bilbo finds, he helps his new friends fight Orcs, Elves, and even a dragon. At 77 minutes long, readers of the book may be disappointed as to just how much the film condenses the story. However, as children’s films go it is quite a nice one, and a good introduction to Middle Earth. There are some fairly frightening bits, including attacks from trolls and goblins, and giant spiders and a "Gollum" that want to eat our heroes. But the animators have softened some of the villainy – e.g., the spiders have fuzzy bunny ears, and the goblins look vaguely cat-like – to tamp down quite a bit on the scariness. That meant my 8-year-old, not a fan of anything remotely tense, was able to endure these bits of action and really enjoy the overall film. So, while this isn't suitable for the very young, school-age kids will generally be able to handle it (though, as always, parents will want to preview this to see how suitable it is for their children). This is a children's film, which is in keeping with the intended audience of the original book. For them, the elementary school crowd, this might even rate an 8 (one of my girls even gave it a 9) but I've rated it a bit lower because it doesn't work as simply a children's film. This isn't one you can pop in the DVD drive and get back to loading the dishwasher - the scary moments mean that mom and dad will have to come along for the ride. And for them, this is only going to be okay. THE LORD OF THE RINGS Animated 133 minutes / 1978 Rating: 7/10 A year after The Hobbit was released, another animator, Ralph Bakshi, decided to try his hand at The Lord of the Rings.  The story begins with an aging Bilbo Baggins passing on his magic ring to his nephew Frodo. Shortly after, the wizard Gandalf shows up to warn Frodo of the ring's danger. It turns out this ring is so powerful that whoever holds it could use it to rule the world. This is why the evil Sauron wants it, and why the good Gandalf knows that it must be destroyed – this all-encompassing power is too much of a temptation for even the best of men to contend against. It is up to Frodo, who as a little Hobbit is far less tempted by the pull of power, to take the ring deep into the enemy's lands to destroy it in the lava of the mountain where it was first forged. And on the journey he has the company of hobbits, men, an elf, a dwarf, and a wizard to help him. Animator Ralph Bakshi used a style of animation that involved filming scenes with real actors and then tracing over each frame of film to create a line-drawing picture of it. This "rotoscoping" allowed Bakshi to incorporate the endless possibilities of animation with the realism of live-action. The realism also meant that this is a scarier film than The Hobbit. The lurching Ringwraiths (see the picture) are freaky, and some of the combat scenes, especially at the very end, are quite bloody. Though this is animated, it is not for children. There is one major flaw with the film: it is only half of the story! The director planned it as the first part of a two-film treatment, but the second film was never made, so things wrap up abruptly. While it lacks a proper ending, the story it does tell is intriguing. THE RETURN OF THE KING Animated 97 minutes / 1979 Rating: 4/10 This is sometimes treated as a sequel to Ralph Bakshi's film, but it isn't. Arthur Rankin directed, and he returned to the cartoonish animation style of The Hobbit. And while the events in this story do, loosely, follow after the events of the Bakshi film, Rankin seems to have been envisioning this as a sequel to The Hobbit, so he begins with an overview of everything that took place between it and The Return of the King. Or, in other words, it begins with a quick summary of two 500-page books – as you might expect this overview doesn't do justice to the contents of these enormous tomes, and the continuity of the story is completely lost. If a viewer isn't already familiar with the books he'll have no idea what's going on. Things don't get any better once the overview is complete - there is no flow to the story. Huge plot elements are skipped over, and random snips of scenes are stitched to other scenes with stilted narration and cheesy ballads. In addition, Frodo Baggins twice calls on God to help him. Some might argue this could be an appropriate use of God's name, but in the context of a fantasy world in which God is never otherwise mentioned, this seems a misuse. In short, The Return of the King is a dreadful film that is not worth anyone's time....


We Think You May Like