jacobjohntaylor1 This is a great movie. It has a great story line. It is very scary. It has acting. It also has great animation. 7.7 is a good rating. But this is such a great movie 7.7 is underrating it. I give it 10 out of 10. It is a great movie. See it. A Christmas carol (1951) is better. A Christmas carol (1986) is better. A Christmas carol (2009) is better. But still this a great movie. It is scarier then The Shinning. If it dose not scary you then no movie will. This is one of the best ghost stories of all time. See this movie it is great. I need more lines and I am running out of things to say. Great movie great movie great movie great movie. See it.

Horst in Translation (filmreviews@web.de) "A Christmas Carol" is a half-hour television special that won an Academy Award almost 45 years ago. It was directed by Richard Williams based on the famous Dickens novel and was Williams first of 2 (plus 1 honorary) Oscars before he won almost 15 years later for the special effects of "Roger Rabbit". Anyway, the animation here looks even older than this film is in my opinion. But that is not a negative criticism. It's very subjective if you like the style. There is absolutely nothing wrong though with the action. You can't go wrong with Dickens' story. lots of heart in here and some drama occasionally as well as the old miser become a nice person in the end. I am surprised this won an Oscar as I thought television productions were only Emmy eligible. Anyway, solid little movie and I recommend it overall.

Michael_Elliott A Christmas Carol (1971)*** (out of 4)Animated version of the Charles Dickens' tale about the mean-spirited Scrooge who is visited by three ghosts who will try to teach him the right way to live. While this isn't the greatest version of the story that I've seen, those such as myself who enjoy watching different versions should enjoy it. I think the main interest here is that Alastair Sim does the vocal work of Scrooge. Most fans consider his performance from the 1951 film to be the greatest ever so getting to hear him do another version of it was quite nice. He does a very good job with the vocal work and Michael Redgrave also does a fine job with the narration. The animation here is quite good throughout and I really enjoyed the more simple, laid back approach. There's nothing in the animation that's going to jump off the screen at you but I thought it fit the story and the pacing quite well. Another benefit is that there's really not any downtime in the film as the screenplay pretty much sticks to the high points of the story and go to them without any smaller pieces sticking together. As an example, as soon as Scrooge is done with the first ghost he immediately goes to the second without there being any time between the two. A Christmas CAROL hits the best parts of the story and manages to keep its heart and message in place.

MartinHafer This animated version of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" was directed by the legendary Chuck Jones, though the film doesn't at all appear like any of his typical work. This is NOT the Chuck Jones of Looney Tunes or Tom & Jerry!! For this nice rendition of the classic story, the film received the Oscar for Best Animated Short. In many ways the film seems a bit ordinary today, though for 1971 it was a rather extraordinary film. In other words, at that time, low frame rates and cheap animation was the norm and compared to the rest of the animated films it was lovely--particularly the painstakingly drawn backgrounds. While the characters lack some smoothness in animation, it isn't that bad--especially for the day.The only real problems I see with the film aren't really the animation but the story itself and its presentation--it is a bit on the dull side. That's because much of the film is word-for-word Dickens and is like so many, many other versions. Plus, a few places where it could have been more dramatic or warm, it wasn't. But, this is a minor quibble and some of the scenes in the film were very, very good--such as the old ladies talking about the haul they got off the corpse--the voice work was excellent here. And, speaking of voice talent, some of the voices were weak--with too little energy--especially Scrooge himself. Marley and the old ladies, however, were very good.Overall, I'd give this film a 7--though it's almost good enough to get an 8. It's well worth seeing--just don't expect anything particularly better (or worse) than most of the other 247392 versions of the tale. However, if you are looking to see perhaps the best version of the story, the George C. Scott version is terrific--and really emphasizes the social commentary aspects of the story. In other words, the film makers realized it's less a film about Christmas and more a tale of greed and concern for your fellow man.