MovieChat Forums > Scrooged (1988) Discussion > Am I missing something?

Am I missing something?

posted 8 years ago by antetches18
37 replies | jump to latest

Watched this for the first time last night. It's supposed to be a Christmas classic, so I was sure I would enjoy it. I couldn't wait for it to end.

I didn't find it funny, the main character was not particularly funny and his change from bad to good seemed rushed and forced. I didn't even like the ghosts that much (the design of Christmas Future was quite cool). His relationship with his ex girlfriend also didn't seem believable.

I feel like I should have loved or at least liked this film but it just didn't connect. I love a lot of Christmas films from the sentimental to the cynical, but this just didn't do it for me.

[–] dave4248185 8 years ago

I enjoyed this but I know what you're talking about. This version is good but only because Murray is funny, Allen is a charmer and Woodard is hot. I prefer the more traditional 'Scrooge' movies. This one takes too much license. For example, in those earlier versions Marley and Fezziweg are separate characters, here they're fused into one...Lew Hayward. Also the character of Bob Crachit is separated into two, Grace and Elliot. The context of the story is changed when that's done. But the worst change was that Scrooge reunites with his ex-girlfriend at the end. In the original stories Scrooge is forced to see her happily wedded to another man. For the viewer that creates HUUUUGE (I sound like Donald Trump) sympathy for Scrooge that you don't get here.

[–] antetches18 8 years ago

I had actually just finished reading the original Charles Dickens book before watching. Maybe that is a reason why it didn't really work for me.

[–] shlbycindy 8 years ago

I completely agree with you. I tried watching it for the first time tonight and after about 45 minutes I had to turn it off. I think Bill Murray was a great comedian but, in my opinion, nothing was funny in this movie. I kept waiting for it to get better but it didn't.

[–] FrankBooth_DeLarge 8 years ago

I enjoy this movie, though that is largely because of Bill Murray's performance. The script has some very funny lines and absurd gags, such as "TV for cats," which I thought was hilarious. I also get a kick out of Frank Cross's overall cynicism and I enjoyed the way they portrayed the ghosts, but as an adaptation of "A Christmas Carol," it is generally weak, especially given how rushed and unconvincing his change of heart was in the final scene.

My latest movie: Available internationally here!
https://vimeo.com/ondemand/primordial

[–] shlbycindy 8 years ago

It may be that I just wasn't in the mood for this movie. I might try it again when I'm in a better mood and not laying on my sofa with my annual Christmas cold.

[–] haynese_98 8 years ago

I saw this movie on opening night in Nov(23?) 1988 and it was probably the most disappointing movie that I saw in the 1980's. I don't know if the movie was rushed or if Murray was just extremely difficult or what.

What's almost as bad is that I saw Cocoon 2: The Return the very next night!

Worst holiday movie season EVER.

Shall we play a game?

[–] badfish274 8 years ago

yes, you are missing something. this movie is funny as hell, bill murray is awesome in it, and it is a holiday classic.

[–] PopperTheKungFu-Dragon 8 years ago

I liked the movie, but I do agree with you about the change from bad to good seeming rushed and forced. And the ghost of Christmas Present was rather irritating.

I'm not really a fan of Bill Murray's comedy either, but he was pretty good in this.

But there are a lot of funny scenes and I love the ending. That's what really made the movie for me.

Anyway, it has its flaws and I can totally see why you didn't like it.

Poorly Lived and Poorly Died, Poorly Buried and No One Cried

[–] ChristmasStan 8 years ago

There was no heart or soul in this. Classic is now used as marketing for older Christmas titles

[–] Torres89013 8 years ago

I tried watching it for the first time two days ago. I think this maybe one of the worst "christmas" movies out there. Bill Murray tries too hard to make me laugh and I have no connection with any of the characters.

Life is a movie. Write your own ending. Keep believing. Keep pretending.
-Kermit

[–] TwoThousandOneMark 8 years ago

I don't think you're missing much. It was a comedy for its time which is now passed. It easily qualifies as one of the most stereotypical 80's comedies out there. There's a stuffiness to it which probably isn't very accessible to some now.
The ghost of Christmas past is a wiseass & scene chewer, the romantic flashbacks are slow & rather monotonous. Murray is the best thing about the film & unless you're buying in, not sure what's left.

...my essential 50 http://www.imdb.com/list/ls056413299/

[–] search53-1 8 years ago

Just because this stars a comedian does not mean it's a comedy. After all, look at all the non-comedy films that Robin Williams starred in.

[–] huzdaman 8 years ago

I love this one too, but I can see why the OP wasn't on board. Maybe it didn't age well, after all, Murray made lots of pop culture references that won't click with you if you weren't old enough to remember most of the 80's. For the most part, it's Bill Murray being Bill Murray, so if you don't care for his brand of humor it won't resonate.

Personally, I love it. I saw it opening week and have the DVD now. I watch it every year. While it has its flaws, it does have a certain charm. But then I've got kind of a dark sense of humor, and this is one of the first "dark" comedies I saw, though it's tame compared to today's movies.