They say money cant buy happiness…but it can hire a script editor. And that I feel is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the problems I encountered when I decided to give ‘A Christmas Tree Miracle’ a spin.

an HOUR AND 43 MINUTES is this films full runtime. It could have been an hour and a half and felt neverending. It could have been twice as effective running at an hour + commercials. But no. This film drags its heels for the FULL duration, paying lip service to the concept of it being better to give than to recieve. And even thats forced…

So, this film is essentially a low budget holiday picture aimed at one of three groups of people (these groups can overlap) Conservative Christian families who think they understand ‘Hardship’, The Elderly and women of a certain hormonal delicacy. For anyone else? Buckle up because its going to be a long one.

The film follows a humble ultra rich family who have it all, two story manor house, all of them that can drive have cars, the have a summer home, they want for nothing. Then, the husband (David) loses his job. cue a good solid 40-50 minutes of the family slowly falling deeper and deeper into despair, as they’re forced at first to cut back on luxuries, then essentials, then they raid the trust fund, before winding up in a motel…and they’re even set to lose that.

When their youngest cello playing daughter suggests throwing themselves to the mercy of the church for sanctuary, the family oblige and meet ‘Henry’ a christmas tree salesman who doesnt sell trees…he GIVES them away, and because of a passing random act of kindness on Davids part 12 months prior. Henry offers to bring them back to his place, give them food, shelter and pay in exchange for working on his farm.

Little does he know, that David is actually working with a shady senator seeking re-election, who’s offering to give David a full time high paid job developing the land which the christmas tree farm sits on, if David can convince Henry to sell…

And I wont go any further than that, because it’ll spoil the film. But heres the key facts you need to know about this one.

Not ONE character in this film is GENUINELY selfless or sincere. not to mince my words, but ALL of them are arseholes. It plays into the neoliberal idea of charitable. the concept of ‘giving lipservice’ to a cause, while realistically wanting nothing to do with it.

The entire family (our main characters that we’re supposed to be rooting for) are selfish, self centered and arogant. The father, David ignores the advice of his peers to find temporary work to keep the ship afloat, to the point that he’s willing to try and exploit an old man RIGHT up to the end credits in order to make a quick buck in the slimiest way possible…and the film never really absolves that issue. it makes up a technicality that gets David off the hook, had that technicality NOT happened, he’d have happily sold the farm, the house and everything in it for $3 and a ramen bowl.

The eldest son of the house Nick is just as bad, acting entitled when he thinks he has money, and furious that his family would treat HIM like a pauper when they dont have the money to pay for him to go to his girlfriends college or to let him keep his own car. They try to redeem his character by giving him one incident where he stands up to a bully, and one instance where he helps out on the farm. Its not enough.

If you want an idea where this films heart lies, around the midway point they introduce us (via the daughter of the family ‘Natalie’) to a new character by the name of ‘Tessa’. Tessa and her mum barely survived a house fire, they lost absolutely everything in the process and are now sad, lonely, frustrated and living out of a homeless shelter, reliant on welfare and food packages and barely functioning.

Natalie and Tessa have a brief introduction, where they seem to hit it off and you begin to think ‘Ah, Natalie is a bit self absorbed and Tessas a bit of a grounded goofy realist…maybe this will be what grounds Natalie’ NO! because Tessa then vanishes from the movie for 20 minutes, then is re-introduced for about 3 minutes in a scene where she explains she took several busses and an amish buggy to get to the tree farm to come and hang with Natalie, so THEN you’re thinking ‘Oh…okay, so she isnt going to be a prominant character…but maybe she’ll have some purpose? Maybe the family will come into a bit of money and use it to help give Tessa and her mum a second chance while setting themselves up in smaller, but modest living?’

NO! she finishes that scene and is LITERALLY never seen, mentioned or referenced again. For all I know Tessa and her mum blew their collective brains out 5 minutes off the end of the credits. It was at that point I realised that, even AFTER droning on about the importance of doing the right thing, hard working and good moral standing. This film was STILL completely self absorbed in the needs of its core characters, rather than ACTUALLY trying to prove its point by example and help the homeless folk out.

Theres a strong ‘christian’ cinema vibe across the runtime of this film, its subtle, but if you’ve seen enough christian funded films, you pick bits out. Stuff like a heavy reliance on the church, multiple moments where the characters discuss there faith and the power of the lord in detail. Muzak versions and variations on christian hymns (Lord of the dance was a particularly noticable one) Its the kind of coding where, if you wernt actively looking for it, you’d miss it. But its invasive and a little discomforting to recognize here.

AND THATS NOT EVEN MENTIONING, That the film collectively spends 20 minutes of it’s hour and 43 minute runtime ACTUALLY dealing with ANYTHING about christmas. We get 10 minutes in the opening, and 10 minutes at the end. And even then, we get one christmas day (featured in the opening) and the ending closes out a few days off Christmas day itself…the rest of the film? takes place between February and October. Making it probably one of the least christmassy christmas films i’ve seen since ‘The Bloody Exorcism of Coffin Joe’

I’ve prattled on a fair bit here. But to more ‘technical matters’ the direction and cine here are fine. they’re well above similar low budgeted features that came out around this time. its on the level, but doesnt exceed expectations. its just a fairly solid, if not somewhat cheap viewing experience. Same goes for the editing, its VERY slow, and absolutely could have done with some more pass throughs to get that runtime under control. But what IS here is reasonably cut, paced out fairly well. its just bloated.

The script is the thorn in this films side, Overly long, with poor messaging, DEEPLY unlikable characters, a somewhat aimless plot. The tones a bit all over the place, it ends poorly, the three act structure is seriously bent out of shape and the dialogue dances a VERY fine line between awkward, cheesy and cringey in ALL the worst ways imaginable.

But it also commits the cardinal sin. Its dull. Even ‘Henry’ the hobo tree salesman cant muster the amount of festive sparkle needed to really get this thing into the holiday swing of things. I dont know how badly you need to mess up you christmas film script, that you have to add a throw-away line in about three quarters of the way in to try and explain why a house would be fully decked with christmas ornaments in september…But this film took a running start at giving it a go.

Not even fun as ‘riffing’ mateiral with drunken friends. ‘A Christmas Tree Miracle’ coasts by on ‘mediocre’ technical ability that *JUST* manages to stop it COMPLETELY falling apart as a production. But that script on a technical, moral and spiritual level…is just hideous to me. I really wasnt a fan, I ABSOLUTELY cant and wont recommend this thing to anyone. If you want festive slush that (largely) has its heart in the right place, hit the hallmark channel this holiday season.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/a-christmas-tree-miracle/