I am a huge fan of Charles Dickens' 'A Christmas Carol'. I have read his short story many times – Always during the Christmas Season – Over the past few years, and it is my most favorite piece of literature ever written.<br /><br />It therefore follows, that I am also a big fan of the major cinematic productions based on the story, which I have seen over the years (Though that doesn't necessarily mean that I like them all).<br /><br />Of the many different cinematic productions of 'A Christmas Carol' I have chosen the following 8, based on their adherence to Dickens' original story: Under the title of 'Scrooge', there was the 1935 version, with Sir Seymour Hicks, the 1951 version,with Alastair Sim, and the 1970 musical, with Albert Finney. Under the title 'A Christmas Carol', there was the 1938 version, with Reginald Owen as Scrooge, the 2009 Disney version, with Jim Carrey, and the made-for-TV productions: 1984 – With George C. Scott, the 2004 musical - With Kelsey Grammar, and this one, which I rate at #7.<br /><br />Ten years ago, when I first heard that TNT had made a new version of Charles Dickens' timeless Christmas story, I got very excited, and looked forward, with great anticipation, to Patrick Stewart's turn as the miserly, cold-hearted Scrooge. What a tremendous let-down!! Stewart makes a fair Ebenezer Scrooge, at best (And that's stretching it, a bit). He's much better than Hicks, a little better than Owen, not quite as good as Finney, but isn't even in the same ballpark as Scott or Sim. At 59 (At the time – The 2nd oldest of the 8 to play the part), he gives Scrooge a new look, in that he's totally hairless, both on his head and his face, which gives him the appearance of being much younger than other Scrooges, a fact which detracts, visually, from his characterization. His acting leaves much to be desired, in that he makes the character more stuffy and snobbish, than mean, nasty, bitter, and hateful. He seems a bit unsure of himself with his line delivery, and looks, at times, as though he's trying too hard, and at others, like he's not trying hard enough.<br /><br />The strongest performance, here, is Richard E. Grant's, as Bob Cratchit. By comparison, Grant plays a less dignified, much less cheerful Cratchit, who lets his situation get him down, but manages a faint smile, here and there. Bernard Lloyd's appearance as The Ghost Of Jacob Marley is acceptable, though only due to some late-90s special effects. But, the scene wasn't nearly as scary as it should have been, and Lloyd doesn't make Marley regretful or remorseful enough for his life of greed and ignorance. Desmond Barrit's lack of light-heartedness tends to make his characterization of The Ghost Of Christmas Present somewhat of a downer, and is downright boring, at times.<br /><br />Among other notable performances, are Dominic West's, as a fine, cheerful Fred (Scrooge's Nephew), who doesn't allow his Uncle's attitude to affect his. Oscar®-winner Joel Grey appears as The Ghost Of Christmas Past, and fits the role almost perfectly, based on Dickens' description of the character, and Saskia Reeves delivers a strong performance as Mrs. Cratchit, the dedicated Wife and Mother, supportive of her Husband, despite his loyalty to his employer.<br /><br />The Christmas Eve dance, at Fezziwig's Warehouse is one of the few high points in this film. Ian McNeice's performance as Mr. Fezziwig is sufficiently jolly, but too much emphasis was placed on physical weight, here.<br /><br />Other performances in this production, such as: Kenny Doughty, as 'Young Scrooge' – Laura Fraser, as 'Belle' – Josh Maguire, as the 'Boy Scrooge,' and Rosie Wiggins, as 'Fran', are neither outstanding nor poor. Ben Tibber plays Tiny Tim, and, here again, he seems a bit too healthy for the role, but fits it, otherwise. All are acceptable, but merely average. Also, I must note Crispin Letts' brief, but amusing turn as 'Topper Haines'. Letts makes Topper somewhat of a womanizer, who seems a bit stuck on himself, and, with this, adds a bit more humor to the Christmas Eve party at Fred's home.<br /><br />The absolute low point of this production would have to be The Ghost Of Christmas Yet To Come. Tim Potter wears the black robe, here, but it's fortunate, for him, that he has no lines, and that no one can see his face, for his costume is utterly ridiculous. Had this movie been made 50 years earlier, this costume might have been borderline-acceptable. But the boxy, phony-looking headpiece, with eyes – Like two weak flashlight bulbs – Shining out from under the black hood, makes him look more like something from a grade-school stage play, rather than a terrifying apparition. It seems to me that, with the technology available in 1999, and considering the other fine special effects in this film, these scenes could have been made much more believable, with regard to this highly important character. Instead – Thanks to this laughable costume – They come off, at times, as almost funny.<br /><br />Overall, this film is quite well-made. Some impressive computer-aided special effects (The 'Wandering Spirits' scene is spectacular!) enhance Ian Wilson's superb photography, and Peter Barnes's teleplay is excellent, and almost perfectly faithful to Dickens' story, scene-for scene. But David Hugh Jones should have tried harder, with some of his Actors, to get better performances out of them.<br /><br />All-in-all, this movie isn't a bad way to kill a couple of hours, during the Holiday Season, but watch the 1935 version first, then this one, and get them out of the way, before you see the much better ones.