I noticed the actors' deliveries to be different this year. Yes, they do feel a bit over the top, but I like them. I felt this show was getting stale and often skip it, but the new changes renewed my interest.
Scrooge No More!
- Thread starter BGW Family
- Start date
TheCoasterNerd
HAPPY PRIDE! Have I told y'all I'm nonbinary?
A few comments about this I learned in my research:
For 1: funny enough, the Christmas Past song is not a relic! The only song that remains from the OG storyline is JLMA.
2. That was the choice of the main Scrooge actor himself, improvised during rehearsals!
3. Did you get the understudy? I’ve found that the Scrooge understudy overdelivers his role a bit while the main actor has better balance imo.
Last edited:
Interesting notes for 1 and 2!
It must’ve been the understudy. Tall, young guy with a deep voice. “Overdelivered” is the perfect way to describe it — lots of words overly emphasized and drawn out. He’s a fine singer though! I just found the delivery distracting.
I believe you’re talking about the main Scrooge. The understudy has a short beard and is a little shorter than the main Scrooge.
TheCoasterNerd
HAPPY PRIDE! Have I told y'all I'm nonbinary?
If you think the main Scrooge over delivers you might be surprised by the swing. He's an amazing singer (better than main scrooge even imo cause he takes some notes up an octave) but his variation of the character is performed in a way that just doesn't fit the mood of the music/lights/story at certain points. Also when I saw him some of the lines were very overdelivered (shouted a line that could have been spoken for more realism etc)
(edited to be more polite)
Last edited:
A few clarifications, since there seems to be some confusion being repeated here:
First, different Scrooge performers intentionally bring different interpretations to the role. That’s how live theater works. An understudy is not meant to be a carbon copy of the principal actor… they are a fully cast performer with their own artistic choices, vocal technique, and acting direction.
Second, labeling an understudy’s performance as “overdelivering” because it’s more expressive or stylized is a matter of personal taste, not a flaw in performance quality. Many audience members specifically connect with that heightened style and find it emotionally effective.
Third, repeatedly framing a committed, trained performer as “distracting” while simultaneously acknowledging their vocal strength says more about viewer preference than performer capability. The role of Scrooge has always supported multiple tones depending on casting and direction.
It’s completely fair to say a particular interpretation wasn’t your favorite however, it’s not fair to reduce it to misinformation or imply lesser skill. Scrooge No More has endured for years precisely because its performers bring individuality, not uniformity.
Just wanted to add some balance and accuracy to the discussion.
Last edited:
TheCoasterNerd
HAPPY PRIDE! Have I told y'all I'm nonbinary?
I'm not saying that he's not good at it, but in a moment that in all iterations of A Christmas Carol I've ever seen is somber, for him to perform it laughing and grinning, it's just what I'd consider overdelivering. Nothing against him, I know he swings between multiple roles, but it's just a strange tonal shift from the way the show/story itself is written. I also know that if the director found a problem with it there'd be changes made, but as someone who's seen the show 200 times in the last three years and spoken to most of the current show cast and the original composers, I've seen like five or six different actors in each role and the different styles with them, and idk, I just find the swing Scrooge slightly weaker. Also could partly be the accent lol it's hard to fake a british accent
On the other end of the spectrum, I almost prefer the understudy Marley/Young Eb to the main actor.
Last edited:
I do want to gently push back a bit in defense of the swing here. Swing and understudy performers aren’t “lesser” versions of a role, they’re fully cast professionals making intentional choices under a lot of pressure and with limited rehearsal time.
You mentioned that you only saw Scrooge once this year, and that’s where I think context matters. One performance gives a valid first impression, but it’s really just a snapshot, especially in a long-running show where energy, cast combinations, and pacing can change each show. A swing’s performance can read very differently across multiple shows.
In a role like Scrooge, heightened expressiveness or tonal contrast doesn’t automatically mean overdelivery, it’s often a deliberate character choice. Totally fair to have a preference, but I don’t think it’s accurate to frame the swing’s portrayal as weaker based on a single viewing this year.
I’ll also add, for transparency, that I’ve seen the show dozens of times this year with the swing across all four of his tracks, including Scrooge. Based on that broader view, his performances are consistently strong, intentional, and emotionally grounded. He does an excellent job across roles, and what you’re describing reads to me as a stylistic choice rather than a lack of control or effectiveness.
And to be clear, the performer who mainly plays Scrooge is also highly expressive and brings his own distinct strengths and choices to the role. The two portrayals are different in tone and emphasis, but both are effective, thoughtful, and well executed. That contrast is part of what makes seeing the show multiple times interesting… neither approach is “right” or “wrong,” just different interpretations that both serve the story well.
Last edited:
TheCoasterNerd
HAPPY PRIDE! Have I told y'all I'm nonbinary?
I misunderstood earlier, and I see now that you’ve seen the show many times. Thanks for clarifying that.
Where I still differ is in how some of the choices are being framed. Not every actor approaches Scrooge’s darker moments with restraint; some lean into discomfort or contrast to show how emotionally unprepared he is, which won’t land for everyone but is a valid approach. Accents and expressiveness also tend to read differently depending on pacing and the energy of each show.
Totally fair to have a preference. I just see the role as one that supports a wide range of interpretations rather than a single correct one.
I’ll also add that being a frequent audience member doesn’t equate to insight into the performers themselves. It just offers a broader viewing context.
Last edited:
AmyUD06
|--🩵🩷🤍🩷🩵-- | |----🩷💛🩵----| Credits: 373
Says the person who just created an account to make this comment. Not that the other user is much better.
TheCoasterNerd
HAPPY PRIDE! Have I told y'all I'm nonbinary?
Responding to you because the post you quoted is gone, but what @Bgw24/7 said is exactly my thought. If someone said "I think Trey Curtis is not quite as good at playing Hamilton as Lin Manuel" and a brand new account responded "You're wrong, it's just his acting style, everyone acts differently and everyone does every role differently that's how live theater works!!"... I was just expressing my preference that sometimes it seems like the swing overacts some of the lines. Not that deep. I will admit my original posts weren't the most polite so I have since edited them to the tone I was intending.
Also, I definitely think that account might be the swing himself, in which case, again, nothing against you in particular, just prefer the main actor. If BGWRegular is the swing, you're a great singer, I just think that there might be improvements that could be made with tone. Simply my opinion, wasn't trying to be rude or say anything as if it were objective
Last edited:
Just to clear this up. I am not a performer in the show, and I’m not commenting on behalf of anyone involved in it. I’m simply an audience member sharing my own perspective.
That’s really all I intended to add here.
This isn’t meant to be deeper than a discussion about differing audience perspectives.