Well ... for anybody with any doubt as to which version of 'A Christmas Carol' (and there are many) is the one most likely to stand up to repeated and repeated and repeated viewings, the best thing you can do is have a look at just a few of the favourable reviews on here of this extraordinary and magical film.
Detractors' comments (the very few) are not worth taking seriously, and it can safely be said that this utterly English production is a true classic of cinema. So what if it's over 50 years old ? What's the problem with that ? Dickens wrote the original story nearly 200 years ago, and we don't turn round and quibble that it's 'dated' or 'old-fashioned' ... we enjoy it for what it is. Some works is any medium are timeless. This is one of them. The production values are high, the design is superb, and the photography is stunning.
You can safely sit back and revel in this. Not least because of the delicious central performances. Alistair Sim is a remarkable character actor with one of the most expressive faces in film history: the slightest twist of his countenance allows the audience to see into Scrooge's very soul: you will suffer with the old miser, cry with him, fear with him, and ultimately laugh with him. This is true star quality - a rare thing indeed.
Worry not that somebody had the wonderful idea of improving upon the original by drenching it in colour. You don't have to have it, and why this silly fashion has come into being, I haven't a clue. It smacks of contempt for the audience's taste and judgement. As a discerning viewer, be above all that: steer well clear of the colourised version - however much of a technical marvel it may be - and remember what is often said about radio drama: the pictures are better. In the case of 'Scrooge' (1951), the colours are better - in black and white.
I suspect that this version of 'A Christmas Carol' will outlive most of the others. Rightly so.
Merry Christmas, Every One!