Christmas with a Capital C

What in the name of cheez-its were they thinking? You have to be trying to make a movie this bad. But the fact that some people like this movie is interesting to say the least. In this garbage, an atheist guy comes back to his old town and tries to "ruin" Christmas for his old high school rival . His plan? Take down the nativity scene in front of the church for some reason. Quick question... why does he still have a grudge? It's been probably many years since they were in high school, just get over it dude. Throughout this movie, he continues to jump the shark. Heck, he even calls the police because a 6 year-old was singing in town. This caused me to laugh harder than ever before, I swear this dumb movie makes zero sense. Spoilers I guess ahead, but who even cares? In the end the town feels bad for him and line up at his house and burn it down. The End. Jk, they instead help him by giving him goods. Heh? Didn't see that comin'. And so, the huge bully is stopped because of love, cool, whatever. If you like this, whatever, it just makes me cringe.

BEWARE OF BOGUS REVIEWS. SOME REVIEWERS HAVE ONLY ONE REVIEW. WHEN ITS A POSITIVE REVIEW THAT TELLS ME THEY WERE INVOLVED WITH THE PRODUCTION. IF ITS A NEGATIVE REVIEW THEN THEY MIGHT HAVE A GRUDGE AGAINST THAT PRODUCTION. NOW I HAVE REVIEWED OVER 200 Christmas MOVIES. I HAVE NO AGENDA. I AM FARE ABOUT THESE FILMS.

This film is not a love it or hate it film. What this film is passable entertainment with a lesson about??

In this film Christmas has always been an exceptional time of love and tradition in the small town of Trapper Falls, Alaska. Hometown of Mayor Dan Reed (Ted McGinley) looks forward to each year with enthusiasm. Together with his brother Greg (Brad Stine), they dedicate time away from their adventure tour company to drape the town is Christmas cheer. When Dan's old high school rival Mitch Bright (Daniel Baldwin), a mean-spirited and embittered militant atheist returns home after 20 years, Dan is immediately suspicious. Mitch is a highly successful big city lawyer who has never wanted anything to do with Trapper Falls. The rivalry re-ignites when the frustrated Mitch takes offense to what he sees as the town's violation of his rights. Mitch wants the Nativity scene removed from the front of City hall and the word Christmas switched to Happy Holidays on all signs. Fifty years of tradition are now challenged not by an outsider but a former member of the community. As the conflict escalates it goes beyond one person's opinion but magnifies into an entire town problem when Mitch enters into the mayoral race to have Dan replaced.

Now I am very liberal. I liked this film. Its not great but it is sweet. The motivations of everyone in this film is understandable. Now people who made this film had an agenda to say that there is a war on Christmas which is not true.

"Retailers Love Christmas". I worked all over the USA and have always said "Merry Christmas" and nobody said "I shouldn't" and no customer ever complained.

Now my Christians readers would you get mad if a Jewish Person said to you "Happy Hanukkah"? I doubt it. Normal people would say "Thank you" or "Same to you".

Happy Holidays came about only because it was cheaper for stores to have a window painted with just one message and no re-paint for Hanukkah. That's all. When I worked at stores I never got in trouble for saying "Merry Christmas".

Now back to the film. AS film the plot is passable. the film moved quickly along. The film has a conclusion that I find almost laughable but the message isn't laughable.

Small Children will be bored. Some adults too. But what comes through is that "Christmas is a time where we should open our minds and our hearts"

Why is it that Christians don't seem to get the long-settled Constitutional issue of not putting religious displays on public property? And that said issue doesn't affect private property, including privately-owned stores? The very premise of this movie is based on a lie. It doesn't matter if it's a "tradition" to put a nativity scene on the grounds of city hall; the Supreme Court ruled decades ago that it violated the First Amendment. Also, not even the most hardcore atheist is "offended" by Christmas; pointing out that it's unconstitutional is NOT the same as being offended.

In the film's defense, though, it does feature a drug-addled Daniel Baldwin attempting to act, Ted McGinley acting out every "regular Christian guy" trope and Brad Stine acting like a crazy homeless guy. I assume he's just aplying himself.

Rather than actually watching this movie, I suggest watching Hugo & Jake's review of it on You Tube. They explain the issues in a much more entertaining fashion than I.

This movie was done really well. I loved the message about taking Christ out of Christmas. I was equally pleased with the presentation of the Bible. There were only 2 parts in this movie that I think could have been written more accurately to portray Christianity. The first situation was at the beginning when the family was talking about the book that they were reading (vampires falling in love) which is easy to see as supporting the Twilight series. This to me is distasteful and didn't need to be in there. Any other thing could have been discussed between mother and daughter instead of promoting Twilight. If you truly love God, why would you want to put this demonic stuff in a Christian show? The second situation I wish was rewritten was the part when the dad was talking with the son about his "girl" friend. The father asks his son if she's cute. He responds with a yes. Then the dad (without knowing anything about the girl) comes back with, "That's my son!" This portrays to all boys that you should look for a good-looking girl and to all girls that acquiring physical beauty is important if you want to find a guy. What does it say in the Bible about beauty? Beauty is deceitful, but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised. If these 2 scenes were taken out of this movie, I would have rated it probably a 9. I am just tired of seeing weak Christianity portrayed on television. Now, Courageous is not a weak Christian film and I would give that a 10!

Awful, simply awful. The atheist who returns to the town after 20 years, seems like an embittered and angry man, out on a personal vendetta against the heroic Christian mayor.The premise is that the mayor is building (and using some city funds) to build a stand outside of the town's city hall, for Christmas. There will be Christian decorations displayed along with more secular Christmas decorations. So this evil atheist type files an injunction to stop work on this stand.

Now, atheists aren't the only people who support keeping government and religion untangled, many Christians (though usually not evangelical types) also favor that. Atheists aren't out on personal vendettas against some Christian mayor or politician when we do so. Also, the "Merry Christmas" banner is moved because of this injunction. Frankly, no atheist has ever objected to a "Merry Christmas" sign, even in front of a courthouse.

In fact, I don't know if any church/state or atheist group would even object to this stand, unless it solely has Christian symbols. Atheists just want neutrality or at least, an open forum. Have Christian symbols such as a nativity scene, fine, but allow a display of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The Christian mayor in one scene recites the free exercise clause of religion, which for some reason makes this evil atheist type, say touché. That seems to imply the atheist knows he is violating the free exercise rights of the residents, but there is of course no free exercise right to have the government put up a display, even if not centered around Christian images solely.

This movie was produced by people who seem to have never met an actual atheist in their lives. Full of fear and straw man. If I could give a negative star, I would.