Miracle at Sage Creek

Michael Landon's "Little House on the Prairie" is similar in concept, and "Miracle at Sage Creek" producers should have watched a few of those shows to learn how to make a viewer's heart feel a story. And too many production liberties were taken. For example, the only thing cold about the weather was the conversations about how cold it was.

I like a "feel-good" story, but it needed more showing and less telling. The characters simply were not developed very well, so it was difficult to share their troubles or feel great about the resolutions of those troubles. And time was wasted on meaningless "excusions". For example, we were given a rather lengthy introduction to the Judge's wife early, and then she never reappeared.

This is the kind of movie I like and pull for, but this one was B Rated at best.

The filming locations (Arizona, standing in for Wyoming) are indisputably gorgeous, and I appreciate the set design and decoration. Fine detail went into costume design, and James Intveld demonstrates a keen eye for some artful shots. Why, hats off to cinematographer Virgil L. Harper - his contribution is very noteworthy; all we see looks fantastic. Michael Parks is a name that should be a boon for any cast, and while David Carradine's countenance doesn't necessarily guarantee value in a picture, especially in the latter years of his career (see: 'The last sect'), it's nonetheless a pleasure to see him here. With that said, I think everyone before the camera gives performances of welcome sincerity.

Would that I could say I felt 'Miracle at Sage Creek' was more remarkable, and more deserving of specific praise. I don't think it's bad. But nor is it really noteworthy. Outside of the actors, much about the movie feels a little too staged and inauthentic for its own good. The themes and story ideas, and their application, are very familiar: loss, faith, injustice, racism, interpersonal conflict, hardship, hope, and so on. Scenes of drama are a little overbearing, scenes of action are underwhelming - and yet with that said, the chief feeling I get from the picture isn't "balanced," but "middling." More than half the length had passed and still it felt like I was waiting for the movie to properly begin. No doubt there are viewers who find this very satisfying, and fulfilling; I found the experience to be about as equivalently meaningful as checking off a to-do list of household chores.

These feelings extend to the scene writing, characters, dialogue, overall narrative, and Intveld's orchestration of scenes and the guidance of his cast. Honest though all the assembled actors are in their portrayals, I don't know that I can say anyone especially impresses here; at some critical junctures their delivery appears stilted, dampening the impact a story beat should have. This seems so much like a film one can "watch" without actively engaging with it, and still see all while retaining nothing. Once more - none of this is to say 'Miracle at Sage Creek' is outright bad or wholly undeserving. Clearly there's an audience for this title, and I'm just not it. However, I plainly find it less than engrossing - unexceptional - undistinguished.

Is 'Miracle at Sage Creek' worth 90 minutes of your time? You could certainly do a lot worse. You could just surely do much better, too.

OK a hundred things wrong with this movie; and a hundred things right. But, in the end everything works out the way everyone wants. The high point of the film is David Carradine, an exceptionally under-rated actor. His character transformation is too sudden, but hey John Ford didn't direct this. There is nice cinematography and good acting all around, backed by a story that is fairly believable and satisfying. Wouldn't watch it again, but didn't feel cheated watching it this time.

From reading previous comments it seems as though every relative, friend, and casual acquaintance of anyone even remotely connected with this movie has pulled out every superlative in the book to recommend it.

In actual fact this is a slow, plodding, uneventful film without out a single character to identify with. It has too many characters -- none of which have really been developed sufficiently for us to care about any of them -- too many stories going on at the same time, and too many clichés. Add to this continual references to God and prayer and one gets the feeling we're being not so subtly preached to.

We'd all like to see clean and wholesome family oriented movies but that doesn't mean we'll settle for substandard fare.

A fine cast is totally wasted here. Rent this film before you consider buying it. I'm betting you won't put out money to own it.

This was, to put it lightly, unwatchable garbage.

My crap detector first went to orange alert when the two boys look for fire wood by sitting down and picking up the sticks in there immediate area and pile them together. This was then followed by a gun fight where people take cover behind barren shrubbery and don't get shot. Not only do they not get shot, they add in rickashay sound effects meaning that they aren't just retardedly bad shots, but the twigs are actually blocking to bullets.

Who ever directed this film should be black listed and maybe checked for Alzheimer's or blindness.