Christmas Eve in Miller's Point

There is literally no plot, no story, and no character development of any kind. What was the point of this? A full 45 minutes in, nothing has happened. It's just random people that we don't know, doing random stuff at a Christmas party, and none of it is interesting in any way. It starts with a family, so your thinking it's about the family, then we don't see them again for almost an hour after they walk through the door. Then we see a bunch of relatives in a typical Christmas gathering talking about people and things we know literally nothing about. It's like they just had a camera person walk into a random party and they just start filming. Who green lit this? If you want footage of some random family's Christmas where nothing happens, then this is the movie for you. Otherwise, pass.

Christmas Eve at Miller's Point was, unfortunately, one of the most disappointing movies I've ever seen. It lacked a cohesive plot, storyline, or any semblance of character development. The film felt like a collection of random, disjointed conversations, introducing characters only to abandon them moments later without any follow-through.

The strange videography added to the confusion, with awkward close-ups on irrelevant details and unnecessarily long shots of background decor that served no purpose. It felt entirely random and odd, leaving me wondering how this ever became a movie in the first place.

Overall, it was a waste of time that left me frustrated and regretting the experience. This is not a film I would recommend to anyone.

There is no plot. If you wait for a plot to arrive, you will be waiting until after the credits are over. If you are hoping for character development instead, prepare yourself for one dimensional characters some of which just disappear after being introduced never to return. If you want absurd scenarios that have no possible link to remote plausibility, then perhaps this is your show. I cannot understand how this was ever made if the script resembled this final product. And I can't understand what movie the positive reviewers were actually watching. Did we see the same show? First one star review.

Christmas Eve in Miller's Point is a stunning and strange film from Tyler Taormina, an uncompromising young filmmaker.

If you've seen Taormina's previous films, ("Ham on Rye" / "Wild Flies" / the dialogue-less "Happer's Comet") then you might have a sense of what is going to wash over you when you sit down for this, his first effort to see broader distribution.

Taormina's films exist outside of conventional genre and storytelling. They're funny, but they're not comedies, there's drama, but they're not dramas. Characters experience conflict and resolution, but no single thread that must be followed to its end.

Taormina's films offer an experience that feels totally alive, with characters you'll fall in love with, and moments that feel too ordinary to be Hollywood, as well as moments that seem to absurd to be faked.

This is a difficult film to share, because the press materials (accurately) depict a family Christmas movie featuring Michael Cera, but it's not what you'd expect from that at all. When trying to describe the film, it begins to sound "art house" and dry, but it's anything but.

It's a film I strongly recommend to anyone with an open mind and an open heart. Personally, the holidays are not a selling point for me (unless it's "Black Christmas" 1974), but the world Taormina and his excellent cast created was utterly enthralling.

A critic once famously described "Waiting for Godot", the absurdist two-act play written by Samuel Beckett in which the characters engage in much discussion but absolutely no action whatsoever and in which nothing is resolved, as "A play in which nothing happens...twice." Yet everyone, including the critic in question, consider the play as being a masterpiece of the 20th century. I, of course, apparently being a total dimwit, miss the point entirely.

The same can be more or less said of this film. Oh sure, a couple of things actually happen (a garishly decorated and lit fire truck, made up to look like Santa's sleigh, passes by an eagerly awaiting crowd, a bunch of teenagers manage to score some beer and drink happily in a parking lot before couples form to engage in some making out in various cars), but I can't help but feel it is nevertheless a film in which (almost) nothing happens...from beginning to end.

Indeed, the writer and director clearly mislead us into thinking that something WILL actually happen (the teens in question engage in some dangerously high speed racing, while two policemen who are expressly watching out for speeders are apparently oblivious to that), and you expect some sort of damage to ensue...and then the scene abruptly changes to another set of characters, and by the time we are back to the teens, they too are somewhere else.

I suppose the idea was to create a sort of "anti-film", in which various vignettes with no beginning are played out with no end either, but I can't but feel that this sort of "repeated slices of life" is, like Waiting for Godot, impenetrable to me. I hope it makes more sense to other viewers -- and apparently it does so, since other ratings on here are quite high.

So, as I said at the outset, I feel dumb -- never a pleasant experience.

One last point: the usual IMDB question "Does this review contain spoilers" made me laugh this time. In order for a review to contain spoilers, something actually has to happen in film that is exposed in the review. I don't believe that is possible for a film in which I have difficulty figuring out if anything of note actually happens.