User Reviews

With so many people upset with the fact that they enjoyed the original and have been watching it on TV their whole lives, this remake should never have been made. Remember that the beloved one is also a remake. I agree that the former was superior, but like other holiday movies, isn't it fun that we try to update and try things differently? Think about something like "A Christmas Carol" which has had numerous incarnations. For me the Alistair Sim version still rests on top, but does that mean we shouldn't have Albert Finney's version or, especially, that of George C. Scott (quite well done). I know that actors and directors interpret things differently. We are in a different world now, and personalities are going to be different. There are still the trials and the usual naysayers and the tools of the government presented in their utter humorlessness. It isn't perfect but it's still worth watching. Also, I enjoyed watching Mara Wilson as the little girl.

The late Lord Richard Attenborough looked like he enjoyed himself in the role of Santa Claus aka Kris Kringle in this delightful updated remake. With a solid supporting cast, the film included a believable love story between Elizabeth Perkins and Dylan McDermott. Mara Wilson was wonderful as the child. There are other notable performances like Robert Prosky, Allison Janney, Mary McCormack in her first film role, J.T. Walsh and others. The film was shot on location in New York City. Instead of Macy's there is a Cole's Department store and a rival with Jane Leeves. The film has a charm all its own.

To give the movie its deserved credit, Richard Attenborough is a wonderful successor to the iconic Kris Kingle as played by Edmund Gwenn in George Seaton's seminal Christmas classic "Miracle on 34th Street" and Mara Wilson is just as good as the little girl who doesn't believe in Santa but wishes she could and only asks for a proof. In fact, she embodies our very attitude toward the film, we love the original, we want to embrace this one with the same enthusiasm, so we're waiting for the script to charm us.

And it's only fair to have high anticipations, the film was made in 1994 when commercialism was as preeminent as five decades later, and written by John Hughes who could give a subtle dimension of satire and benign cynicism, all these elements could have given an edge to the 1994 remake. Unfortunately, the film doesn't really manages to deliver: when it's good, it's just as good as the original, the rest of the time, it's just a pale copy that fails to capture the the taste of its era. This film could have been made in the 80's or the 70's as well because the story is timeless, but not in the 'appealing' meaning of the word.

It's incredible but "Miracle on 34th Street" manages to feel more dated than its glorious predecessor, the 1947 version starring Edmund Gwenn, Maureen O'Hara and young Natalie Wood. Maybe the remake was liable to feel dated because the 1947 classic was already ahead of its time for its take on Christmas consumerism, its portrayal of a divorced mother and a precocious girl (tired tropes today), so any attempt to duplicate the charm of the movie was likely to fail... unless it tried to modernize the original premise a little bit.

The problem with Les Mayfield's movie and John Hughes' screenplay is that the two men seem to be in awe with the original and never really dare to make the original structure shatter, not a bit. As a result, we have quite exactly the same movie, and the changes operated in this one never feel as improvements but rather inspire the opposite feeling. For instance, the climactic trial scene with the bags of mail delivered on the courtroom is only replaced by a parallel drawn between the existence of Santa Claus and the faith in God which, as smart as it is, is anticlimactic and leaves many things in wanting.

We all know the story is heading toward a heart-warming and magical conclusion but there's just something curiously depressing in the turn of events that lead the gentle Kris Kingle in jail and the way his aura immediately fades while the set-up of his downfall is quite obvious. There was a moment where I expectedKingle to tell that the man he assaulted had just literally accused him of the worst possible crime and had the punch coming, but the scene dangerously flirts with the idiotic plot where the lines that can get you off the hook aren't said, for no other reason that they're waiting for the right moment.

I feel a bit guilty to be so judgmental, again there's that snow beard in Richard Attenborough and that glee in his eyes that makes many scenes with him very touching, I loved his interaction with the deaf girl (a smart remake of the Dutch scene), his chemistry with Mara Wilson hit the right chord, and that little girl is a genuinely good actress conveying the right mix of smartness and innocence (a bit like a real-life Lisa Simpson). But the film reminded me of that scene where Kingle and Bryan, the lawyer enamored with Susan's mother, and played by Dylan McDermott, discuss about the mother (Elizabeth Perkins) and say there's something quite sad about her.

There's something sad in the film as well, sometimes, Elizabeth Perkins overplay that feeling and make any scene she's in a killjoy, even her romance with Dylan, while integral to the original happy ending, are only inserted in the movie as an 'obligation' but it's obvious these moments slow down the script more than anything. There are a few good characters in the film, the judge played by a scene-stealing Robert Prosky, the so underrated J.T. Walsh as the prosecutor but the film loses its way in many unnecessary plot points, and escalate to a trial where we feel cheated because we didn't have our bags of mail, after all, there was no Internet yet in 1994, it could work.

The film is still an enchanting moment that can please any child of any age, but it lacks that little sharpness, the taste of modernity it needed, and luck, too. Macy's didn't want its name associated with the film so they had to come up with a fictional company had to invent a and make the rival an evil businessman, missing the opportunity of the 'marketing policy' subplot that made the first film so ahead of its time. It's like Mayfield and Hughes didn't trust their own material, they had so charming protagonists who could carry the film alone, who needed villains? Especially when the "system" or the world's cynicism was good enough an antagonist.

A good film nonetheless, but so one-dimensional in its treatment it feels dated by the original film's standards.

A pretty darn awesome remake. It may bring some extra 90's cheese, mostly due to the needlessly dramatic music, and it may be overlong in places, but this certainly works. Attenborough is the only person I could imagine taking over this role. He comes across as a genuinely kind and considerate man, with nothing but kindness in his heart. Like the original, it keeps silent as to whether he is Santa or not. The court scene is particularly funny, with a few fist pumping moments. I'd still pick the original, but if you can't sit your whole family down in front of a black and white film, this certainly doesn't offend the original.

Richard Attenborough returned to acting after 14 years behind the camera in "Jurassic Park", and followed it swiftly by daring to challenge comparison with Oscar-winner Edmund Gwenn in this remake.

As a heartwarmer for those inadequates who won't sit through a 60-year-old monochrome movie-- albeit one which rivals "It's a Wonderful Life" as Hollywood's answer to "A Christmas Carol"-- this John Hughes revamp will probably serve. Anyhow, there are plenty of copies on sale at the checkout of my local supermarket. But it is a bit too laid-back and, latterly, too bogged down in argument for younger kids or older boys. It may warm more cockles among the grandparents.

The main thematic interest is how Hughes chooses to tweak the original screen story as adapted (unusually for the time) by the director, George Seaton. Whether he sought to or not, the remake has thrown up some intriguing twists for a more skeptical and secular time.

The oldie caught the mood of an America yearning to get back to normalcy amid the perils of the post-war, Cold War world. Location shooting in New York City, with much co-operation from Macys, gave a touch of realism to the fantasy, whereas in 1994 it's an imaginary store and (for Americans, at least) an incongruously "veddy British" claimant to the chair of Santa Claus- although his nationality is not the issue when the legal meanies of the State of New York try to get him confined to the bughouse.

What is striking is the judge's rationale for allowing Kris's plea for freedom. Because US bills have "In God We Trust" on them, he reasons, it means New York is allowed to have blind faith in the existence of a supernatural being who lays presents on 1.7 billion children in one night, operating from invisible workshops with reindeer which cannot be made to fly in a courtroom demonstration of his powers because it isn't Christmas Eve. Besides, the sneery prosecutor's kids were raised to believe in him, so there- case closed.

In real life the ACLU would be appealing such a judgement all the way to the Supreme Court for allowing too much religion into the law and the public square. "In God We Trust" was only put on the money during the Cold War, to cock a snook at "Godless bolshevism"; but this film is refreshingly disrespectful to the newer orthodoxy of playing down most Americans' beliefs in their films.

Kris asks if he should swear in the Bible, the Pope's ruling on Nicholas's sanctity is debated, and the ethos is quietly but unmistakably Christian. No "spiritual" Santa or "Happy Holidays" here. In a very light fashion, the film does revolve issues of how far it is legitimate to maintain a metaphor as a source of inspiration when rationalism of the Dawkins and Hitchens strain is sniping at it. The screenplay also looks quite beadily at the way commercial operators use holy myth to make money, even if the message comes muted from Hollywood.

That is the good news. There's plenty to carp at as well.

Attenborough's quiet, gentle but firm performance (most atypical of one who spent his previous acting time mainly playing unreliables or martinets) suffuses the film. He gets little competition, save from the contrasted crustiness of Windom. Most of the support is so-so, on the level of a Yuletide TV special, and not excluding little Wilson as the girl who has faith in Mr Kringle's claim to be St Nicholas. She is no Margaret O'Brien, if no worse in her way than the kewpie-doll Natalie Wood. In fact, she's a John Hughes moppet who did little later and nothing since 2000.

The narrative's departures from the well shaped original are no help. Once off the legal hook, Kris, wearing a brown suit, just disappears-- we don't see any triumphal sleigh ride to bid him adieu-- while attention shifts to a ridiculous post-midnight-mass impromptu wedding in a Catholic church. Then follows a trip out to a dream house in the snowy country, ushered by a silly salesman. The film does not seem to know when to call a halt, and there's not so much as Clarence's tinkling bell to bring back Kris at the close. It's as if the whole object of the exercise was to unite two bland characters in matrimony.

Dorey Walker (Elizabeth Perkins) is the producer of the Christmas parade for Cole's department store. Kris Kringle (Richard Attenborough) is shocked at the drunken Santa in the parade. Dorey quickly puts Kris Kringle in to replace the drunk. Her daughter Susan (Mara Wilson) doesn't believe in Santa because her mother explained it all to her. Bryan Bedford (Dylan McDermott) is Dorey's boyfriend. Dorey hires Kris Kringle as the store's Santa who becomes popular for recommending shoppers to other stores. Susan is taken with the new Santa and starts to believe that he's the real deal. There is a rival store Shopper's Express which tries to sabotage Kris Kringle by getting him arrested.

There is the great Richard Attenborough and a cute little girl. There is nothing wrong with the acting. The script is a little dated. Some of the simpler elements seem charming in the original but seem naive in the modern version. This one has very little to offer other than Attenborough. Also for some reason, they got rid of the post office plot line. The mailbags piled into the courtroom is probably the most compelling scene in the original.

I watch it every year. I've read negative reviews of Mara Wilson's performance but I think she is charming and smart but not at all obnoxious or know-it-all as others have said. She is acting over maturely as she was raised by her no-nonsense and jaded mother. Her subtle winks and expressions are very apropos to her role and she interacts very well with Mr. Kringle. (Perhaps I like her because she looks like my daughter when she was little.) Regardless, I love the way this story is told and Mara makes it for me. Even though logically she was taught that Santa was not real, as a little girl she was still willing to believe. Take a little joy in believing! I hope you enjoy :)

On a normal level of cinema, this film is only mediocre. Where it fails is that it is a terrible remake of a well-known, well-loved film. And even worse for this film, it's a lousy remake of a well-known, well-loved film that just happens to be my favorite Christmas film of all time.

It has a few positives. All right, it has one positive, and that is Richard Attenborough. He brings a genuine delight to the role of Saint Nick, and it is not hard to believe this guy could be the genuine article. Unfortunately, his performance highlights the lousy performances of many of the principles.

Dorey Walker is played by Elizabeth Perkins with none of the sympathy given to her by Maureen O'Hara. It's impossible to even dream of her getting married to anyone. Some of this is to be blamed on the script, though, which spends so much time establishing Dorey's cold heart that it forgets she's supposed to be getting our sympathy, not our scorn. Which brings us to the flat performance of Dylan McDermott. He could be replaced with a cardboard cut-out without affecting the flow of the movie. Then we have Mara Wilson. She tends to be more snobby and over-confident than confused, but Wilson is up against Natalie Wood. To be fair, we never get to see Wilson chattering like a monkey for comparison purposes. That delightful scene was excised from the modern version.

A rather ridiculous subplot has been added to this remake with a rival store, Shopper's Express, trying to put Cole's out of business (Macy's refused to have their name put in the film). It is headed by the popular 90's villain of choice, the Greedy Evil Mean CEO, Victor Landbergh. He doesn't play much of a role, yet he is supposed to be the encompassing bad guy, evoking images of Lex Luthor plotting the demise of Superman. He even has his own flunkies who attempt to sabotage the department store, skittering around almost like Boris and Natasha. This subplot tends to weigh down on the film, feeling forced in rather than meshing with the film. The pompous psychiatrist of the original works because it was simply one guy with a chip on his shoulder instead of a wicked retail overlord. The former is funny, while the latter is overkill.

Actually, that addresses another problem with this film - it takes its subject matter far too seriously. The original film was an enjoyable farce. This one is a somber story, filled with the right glurgy turns to renew our souls or something. Basically, it's way too serious considering the subject matter (an old guy who thinks he's really Santa Claus.) The original had some laugh out loud moments of sharp humor - this one instead attempts to force you to shed tears of sadness and joy. It usually just shed tears of boredom from me.

The court decision at the end of the film is not only anti-climactic, but doesn't really address the actual issue - Kris is on trial for lunacy. The only decision to save him is to prove he's REALLY Santa Claus, thus making him sane. This movie can't seem to make up its mind why he's on trial and its ultimate answer for Kris obvious acquittal would fall upon under the lightest of legal scrutiny, where the original film made a compelling legal argument. I can't answer that, but I will say that this film's answer is far off the mark. Please, I beg of you-if you have NOT seen the 1947 Black and White original, then please correct that. This is not an adequate substitute to a film that didn't need one in the first place. They even colorized the old one, so if you hate black and white, then you still have a color option without wasting your time on this.

I can't see why a retelling of a really good story gets panned. It stayed true to the original concept, that believing in something good, even if it only comes once a year, can make us better. If I may reference another Christmas classic of which there have been several worthy interpretations, "Scrooge" (1951), the young Scrooge says to the young Marley upon their meeting, "I believe the world is becoming a very hard and cruel place...". If it was that way in the 1800's, it's ten times worse today, and therefore all the more reason to be reminded of our better nature. I especially enjoyed the scene where the streets of New York City were filled with throngs of people, traffic on the bridges was stopped, all waiting for the verdict. I know NYC well, and how its people rise to such occasions. These scenes were not in the 1947 version, and I think they added a uniqueness to this version. Better, worse than the 1947 version? Neither - just different, and just as valid.

As far as remakes of classics go this is certainly one of the better examples. The great strength of this film is the casting which throughout matches the excellent class of the original, and this is no mean achievement.

Occasionally the writers felt the need to deviate from the original - perhaps once or twice too often, because the original story was quite modern anyway, i.e. it did not need much updating. Some of these deviations work pretty well (the midnight wedding was a great new idea although left a bit underdeveloped), others very much less so. Using Joss Ackland as a cross between Ebenezer Scrooge and Ernst Stavro Blofeld was a bit daft, but the only real disaster is the resolution of the court case, one of the highlights of the original and a MAJOR let-down in this version.

I remember seeing the original movie Miracle on 34th Street, that movie could never be replace with this version. This is the best updated remake of a classic story. There are some difference between the movies, but it is almost the same plot. If I could not find the original movie playing on TV during the holidays, this is the one worth watching.

This remake is for me one of the better remakes out there, but it lacks the charm, magic and heart of the original, which I consider one of the best Christmas movies of all time for several reasons(Edmund Gwenn's performance being a pivotal one).

So what were the film's flaws? Well while I thought the last act was very well done and strong, the first act especially is rather juvenile and is hard to get into. The script lacks sparkle and could have done with more sophistication, and I found Dylan McDermott rather flat as Bryan Bedford.

However, it is beautifully filmed, perhaps looking a little more slicker than the original, and the score is sweet. The direction is good on the whole, while with the exception of McDermott the acting is fine. As Kris Kringle, Richard Attenborough positively twinkles and is easily the best actor in the film(though I still prefer Edmund Gwenn), and Mara Wilson, a very talented child actress, is undoubtedly charming as Susan. Elizabeth Perkins also gives a good performance as the somewhat cold-hearted yet sympathetic Dorey Walker.

Overall, a decent remake but lacks the sparkle of the original. 7/10 Bethany Cox

The original Miracle on 34th Street didn't need a remake, but this version isn't terrible. I actually think Richard Attenborough makes a great Santa Claus, and Elizabeth Perkins portrays a skeptical mother pretty well. However, this new adaptation makes some unnecessary additions that don't really add anything to the story (though they certainly add to the runtime) and it changes some parts that lessen the overall impact of the movie. I'm not surprised that people still choose to watch the classic 1947 film each year instead of this, but I don't mind watching the 1994 version every few Christmases.

Faith is believing when common sense tells you not to! This movie has always inspired me to believe, and I have grown up watching it time and time again. If... you can't believe, if you can't accept anything on faith, then you're doomed for a life dominated by doubt. Kris Kringle tells us this, and the movie tells us this. It shows us that Kris Kringle, Santa Clause, Saint Nicholas.. is a symbol. A symbol of faith, and a symbol of hope. Christmas is not for children, or for those who are young. Christmas is for all, and if you believe Christmas Miracles can come true. Hope is the greatest of the gifts you'll receive. Christmas and Santa Clause gives us hope.

No. Simply...no.

This is was wrong, so wrong, in so many way. Dull, overacted by everyone but Attenborough. A miserable and mean DA and bitter "tension" that really doesn't belong in this movie. Telegraphed acting and sloppy writing (please stop telling us what is going to happen!)..and it ends with a golf ball from Cartier?? And bonuses. And an expensive new house..."they can afford it now"?? It *was* all about the money.. Tasteless..

Awful, awful awful - No whimsy. No fun...nothing as simple and heartwarming as watching the little Dutch girl from the fabulous 1947 original—geez, I just hated every moment of it.

Yes, this is modern. Yes, it has color. Yes, it's made by *your* generation for *your* kids.

So is Velveeta.

Every time that I start to watch this movie I cannot stop. I have spent many late nights watching this wonderful movie. This is truly a film for the whole family to enjoy. A must buy for every family that enjoys Christmas.

What a wonderful movie this was. Richard attemborough is a perfect santa. He has a warm and calm about his performance. His unsucpecting but you know its him. Maya was great too and they had a real bond. So in this film santa gets a job as a santa for a mall. But a rival toy shop wants him too, of couse nobody relized he is indeed the real santa. There are some hilarius bits here and there and it was nice seeing daphne from fraiser in it aswell. It all leads to a courtroom battle that was pretty fun to watch and had some festive cheer to go along with that aswell. Overall miracle on 34th street was a warming and sweet film.