The Man Who Invented Christmas (2017)

"Write on over all obstacles." 

Director
Bharat Nalluri

Cast
Dan Stevens – Charles Dickens
Morfydd Clark – Catherine Dickens
Jonathan Pryce – John Dickens
Ger Ryan – Elizabeth Dickens

Justin Edwards – John Forster
Christopher Plummer – Mr. Scratch/ Ebenezer Scrooge
Miriam Margolyes – Mrs. Fisk
Simon Callow – John Leech
Anna Murphy – Tara
Donald Sumpter – Mr Haddock

Watching the 2017 movie, "The Man Who Invented Christmas" is a welcomed change of pace after sitting through eight versions of "A Christmas Carol" this year. 

Oh, by the way, I finally did have the opportunity to watch the 1938 version of "A Christmas Carol" with Reginald Owen which I mention in my last post. 

I wrote up a quick review, but readers will have to wait until next Christmas to read it. 

I've already set up a sequel post to my last, "Tidings of Comfort, Joy, and Too Many Christmas Carol movies: The Multiverse of Scrooges" and my thoughts on Reginald Owen as Ebenezer will be thrown into that. Stay tuned! 

I've seen this biographical movie, "The Man Who Invented Christmas" back in 2018. With Scrooge's holiday redemption fresh in my mind, again and again, this seemed like a suitable film to comment on next. 

In this movie, Dan Stevens plays Charles Dickens. The story begins four years after publishing his last novel, "Oliver Twist."  

Like most brilliant writers, he's going through financial difficulties and mounting debts. So, he needs to write another novel and he wants to write a story set at Christmas. 

However, his publishers aren't thrilled at the idea of a Christmas novel. And Dickens will likely not meet his publication deadline before Christmas. With that being the case, he decides to self-publish.  

Dickens struggles as he goes through the writing process for what will ultimately become, "A Christmas Carol." 

Dickens pulls inspiration for his holiday redemption story from people and experiences he encounters or lived through in his younger days. The movie is a depiction of the process Dickens undertook to give the world the best Christmas ghost story ever told. 

"The Man Who Invented Christmas" is the story behind the sweat and frustration that ultimately led amazing and unforgettable holiday specials like "A Flintstones Christmas Carol," "A Muppet Christmas Carol" and that one with Mr. Magoo.  

It's an engaging and fascinating movie which is kind of remarkable as it's all about a guy writing a book. To make it as engaging as it is, is a respectable accomplishment. 

It's also a believable illustraion of Charles Dickens's methods which involves him engaging with his imaginary characters all inside his head. Meanwhile he has to address his unrelenting self-doubts. Writers can be a frustrating and frustrated bunch. 

Dan Stevens and Christopher Plummer in "The Man Who Invented Christmas."

The first thing to talk about so I can get it out of the way is the title, "The Man Who Invented Christmas." It sounds clever. It's not, though. 

Some of my Catholic acquaintances don't like it because, obviously, Charles Dickens didn't invent Christmas. It's a misleading title for sure.

Obviously, it isn't implying that Charles Dickens actually came up with the whole concept of Christmas as a holiday - the day celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ. And I really don't believe it's a malicious title. It sounds awkward though. It either needs something to clarify it, or it needs to be tweaked. 

Either way, I see where the title is coming from. 

First, the movie is based on Les Standiford's 2008 non-fiction book "The Man Who Invented Christmas: How Charles Dickens's A Christmas Carol Rescued His Career and Revived Our Holiday Spirits." 

I think that title explains the purpose a lot more but still doesn't quite make sense as far as the word "invented" goes. How does that relate to Dickens rescuing his career and reving our holiday spirits?

I think the real implication is that "A Christmas Carol" did play a part amidst many other traditions and customs before and after its publication in shaping how the modern world treats and celebrates Christmas and the Christmas season. 

I'll add here that one of the joyous perks of being a Catholic is that the celebration of Christmas doesn't end on December 25th. There are 12 days of Christmas following Christmas day, mind you. The liturgical calendar celebrates the Christmas season all the way to February 2nd, the Feast of the Presentation of our Lord in the Temple. 

Eight days after Christmas, January 1, is the Feast of our Lord's Circumcision. And the 12th day after Christmas is the Feast of the Epiphany. So, the celebration and glad tidings carry on when the rest of the world whines about being exhausted and takes all the decor down December 26th. It's disappointing to see people shedding Christmas as soon as possible after the 25th.  

As far as England goes in the 1840s when the film takes place, and the decade when "A Christmas Carol" was published, Christmas didn't have the celebratory status and morale quite like it does today. Keep in mind, Catholic readers, that the Church of England was the guiding moral compass of England. That's not to say Christmas and the Christmas season wasn't important in Victorian England. People had their wassailing among the leaves so green, and their feasting, and all that. 

The elements in Dickens's story really hammered in ideas such as generosity toward the poor during the holidays outside of government poor laws and workhouses. There wasn't quite the emphasis during the era on spending time with the family around Christmas, nor widespread consideration that the season is a time for generosity and charity. 

I guess its celebratory status back in Dickens's day depended on regions and classes. Industry workers certainly didn't get a day off on Christmas, I don't think. No wonder Bob Cratchit was thrilled that Scrooge finally gave him a day off on Christmas. That one small act of generosity on Scrooge's part, I like to think, is what prompted Heaven to send the spirits in that very night to nourish that small ounce of selflessness so it could grow and flourish within old Ebenezer. 

No doubt Dickens's book helped give the Christmas holiday such elements that can be shared across classes and social statuses.

"A Christmas Carol" made quite a lasting impact where all these things are still synonymous with Christmas. 

So, again, I can see where the title is coming from. There's even a line in this movie when Dickens's publisher says in so many words that Christmas is not really an important holiday, and there's not much of a market for Christmas books as hardly anyone actually celebrates it. I don't think that was quite the case in Victorian England, and the proof is in the pudding. My apologies for the cliche but it seems to fit. Still, Dickens's book certainly has a place behind modern Christmas inspirations. 

I sympathize with those who are bothered by the title. The Church has known for centuries how to celebrate Christmas. Some Catholic customs are still very much practiced to this day. For instance, it was St. Francis of Assisi who began the tradition of the nativity scene. Look it up! It's quite a heroic story, actually.  

Perhaps "invented" is the wrong word because it gives Dickens way more attribution than he actually accomplished with his book when it comes to the origins of Christmas. Even with all that, he didn't invent anything except the story itself as far as Christmas is concerned. 

Maybe "The Man Who Changed Christmas" is a better title? Well, no as that basically sounds lame. Reawakened Christmas? Maybe. Or "The Man Who Wrote Christmas?" I know, "How Dickens Saved Christmas Before Ernest Did!"  

Anyways, aside from the title, the movie is enjoyable. I particularly found it engrossing as I who would never dare even think of comparing myself to Charles Dickens, can relate to the writing process seen in the movie. Though I have started a few books here and there, I've never yet had anything published...let alone actually finished. 

The way Dickens is consumed by his own thoughts, considerations, and the people around him who inspired characters in his story is something I could connect to. Plus, the difficulty of where to take one's own story, and most importantly how to end them, is so spot on thanks to the movie's writing and Stevens's acting. 

Personally, I think the best way to come up with ideas isn't to sit at a desk and stare at a monitor, or typewriter, or blank sheet of paper. It's going out, listening to the public, experiencing things, and actually using it all as writing tools. 

You know, I once sat in a diner in Council Grove, Kansas during breakfast one morning with my wife and not only listened to all the small-town banter around me, I also wrote down topics of conversation and phrases I eavesdropped on to save for later.

The movie is almost ideal as an instructional film in writing a novel. I've scrolled through a number of fiction writing courses with lessons in understanding your character and their goals and wants, or what'll happen to them so they'll develop through the story. I also recall lessons in pulling inspiration and ideas from personal experiences and things that you know. So, the writing process isn't as far-fetched in this movie despite all appearances and eccentricities. 

From what I read, the movie stays pretty well on track as far as accuracy is concerned. I admit the only source I'm using to compare facts versus fiction is historyvshollywood.com. 

It seems, based on this one source, that the majority of what's depicted in the movie is spot on at least as far as the major details are concerned. It's even accurate when it comes to showing how long it took Dickens to write the story. Six weeks. 

One liberty the movie does take occurs when Dickens revisits the Warren's Blacking Factory while he's an adult, where he was sent as a child to work. It was a miserable and scarring experience for him; one he's clearly haunted by in the film. However, according to "Dickens's Victorian London: 1839-1901," the building was torn down in the 1830s. But another source, liamofarrell.com claims it was demolished in the 1860s to "to make way for Charing Cross railway station and the railway bridge, built in 1863."

Anyways, I loved this movie for both its performances, and on a more personal level for its relatability.  While I am certainly not even close to Dickens when it comes to writing, I've had my own struggles in the art of book writing. I've started a few. I've also never finished a single one. Not yet. Time is running short. But like every other novel writer, I understand the stress, frustration, the journey through self-doubting and the hang-ups on details and getting it all just right. 

The best part of Dan Stevens's performance as Dickens is his ability to jump from one emotion to another so fluidly. He's burdened by financial hardships in one scene and then acting silly for the sake of children in the next, then screaming in absolute frustration at this one book of his later on after swimming in his own thoughts and imagination for a bit too long. 

The real drawtakes place when Dickens and Ebenezer Scrooge (Christopher Plummer) converse through the movie trying to figure each other out. Dickens tells Scrooge what he wants to put him through, while Scrooge antagonizes him. Their on-going confrontations culminate as Dickens tries to think of an ending to his story. The resolution drops on him as he imaginges Scrooge in a lonely empty grave while Scrooge relents to his creator's will, lamanting that he doesn't want to die alone. I find it an iconic scene that arouses a bit of sympathy for Scrooge. It's the moment Dickens's character realizes he's wasted so many opportunities more priceless than money. 

It's not solely the historical accuracy, or any lack thereof that makes or breaks this movie. It's watching the writing process. Sure, Dickens was suffering financially and did have a few pieces flop before embarking on "A Christmas Carol." But the aftermath of having a book, let alone several books, withstand decade after decade and still be just as renowned and respected is simply amazing for lack of any better words.