Buttons

Yeah, although I truly dislike what falls under christmas movie section, well... Katie McGrath it seems has a wonderful way of making you watch whatever she starred in... And if it was not for her appearance in the movie.... Otherwise, this is truly truly badly done and badly assembled movie, not even the fabulous cast could have saved it...

There was so much promise for this film. Some really great actors, the story is heartwarming and the message is clear. I was in tears at the end. However, it felt like a chore to watch. 10 minutes in and I had the urge to fast forward. The musical numbers on their own weren't bad, but they felt forced into the story, with the exception of "work" which was by far the best number. The songs definitely had strong undertones of other musicals to the point I wonder if they were original or actually from other musicals. The acting- honestly the stars in this film are wonderful in other roles I've seen them in, so I don't know what fell so flat- direction maybe? It was a weird mix of super talent and super horrible acting that made many scenes feel disingenuous and awkward. The sound- this was the WORST. Sound is one of those things you don't normally notice, so when you do, you know it's BAD. Everything sounded like it was recorded in a studio and placed on top of the film or something. It was disconnected and echoing to the point of distraction. This is definitely a very low budget movie (or they blew their budget on a few actors and had none for editing/sound). If you like tear-jerker orphan movies with musical numbers spattered about and happy endings, it's worth a watch, but fair warning about the production value. If it weren't for DVD and Angela Lansbury, I wouldn't have made it through this movie.

What's bound to be far more interesting than the dreadful Buttons is an article about the making of this movie: Why are Kate Winslet and Robert Redford BOTH narrating? Who snookered the venerable Angela Lansbury and Dick Van Dyke into appearing in such a ramshackle production? How are there no credited writers or producers for this film? How did a movie with such an impressive cast manage to play for one night in US theaters before disappearing to DVD and cable? Why is this film so consistently cheap-looking? Who decided to make this a musical when the songs are consistently rotten? And why does director Tim Janis give himself name-above-the-title placement on both the opening and closing credits? (Is the official title supposed to be TIM JANIS BUTTONS?)

Sheer catastrophe, and not of the so-bad-it's good variety. Don't subject yourself or your unwitting families to this disasterpiece. It's enough to ruin your Christmas.

I'd been looking forward to Buttons: A Christmas Tale for such a long time! Dick Van Dyke and Angela Lansbury playing guardian angels, a heartwarming tale about orphan girls, and a festive musical - what else could I ask for? Well. . . I could ask for a decent screenplay, and acting that wasn't cringeworthy, and perhaps subject matter that wasn't so depressing. The two reasons that drew in every audience member didn't disappoint, and while it's insultingly obvious to say they shole the show, they did.

The bulk of the movie is told in a flashback format, as Angela Lansbury visits a sick orphan on Christmas Eve and reads her a story to cheer her up. She tells the story of a little girl, Alivia Clarke, who has one run of bad luck after another in what ends up amounting to a terrible life. But, since she has a guardian angel, Dick Van Dyke, she keeps her spirits up and knows someone's on her side. It's inspiring, heartwarming, and downright lovely to see Dick singing, dancing, and brightening up the screen during the musical numbers. And Angela is perfectly charming as a combination Mary Poppins and Mrs. Potts, caring for her sick charge. The cinematography in Buttons was beautiful, with lush landscapes, pretty costumes, and saturated colors and lighting that added quality to the production.

Now for the bad news. The dialogue sounded like it was the first draft of a church play. Most of the cast acted very contemporary, despite the period setting. Those whom you don't recognize probably had very little experience before trying out with the pros, or at least that's what it seemed like. And now the songs: Every single number blatantly ripped off a previously successful song from an established musical - from "Bring Him Home" to "It's a Hard Knock Life" to "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life", the songs from Buttons can almost be sung simultaneously with their originals. Isn't anyone going to shout "plagiarism"? The supposedly sweet story that Angela reads aloud is far from it. It's very depressing, hardly appropriate for children at all, and not at all festive for Christmas. Why did the movie have to so much of a downer? Also, I don't know why the title was settled on Buttons, when the segment that honors it is extremely brief.

Yes, everyone is going to want to see this movie. Dick Van Dyke and Angela Lansbury are adorable. And surprisingly, there's quite a supporting cast that agreed to attach their names to such a mediocre project: Jane Seymour, Robert Picardo, Abigail Spencer, Paul Greene, John de Lancie, and very, very brief narrations from Robert Redford and Kate Winslet.

DLM Warning: If you suffer from vertigo or dizzy spells, like my mom does, this movie might not be your friend. The very first minute of the movie features an intense spinning camera effect, and that will make you sick. In other words, "Don't Look, Mom!"

I, too, had high hopes for this film, but was also sadly disappointed.

The film's greatest assets are, not surprisingly, its wonderful cast: It was great to see Dick Van Dyke and (the late) Angela Lansbury continuing to give it their professional "all," along with so many other talented artists.

Other high points go to the set and props, costumes and hair styles, which are all period-appropriate, and its lovely score (more on that below)

Its liabilities, however, are too many to be ignored. The makeup work (notably Van Dyke's) is inconsistent to the point of being splotchy and, therefore, distracting. The film and sound editing, especially in the scenes with singing, are lacking; the actors (especially Ioan Gruffudd) tend to look and sound dubbed, and the sound is at times inconsistent with the scene's contexts.

While the film has all the trappings of a charming family movie, it could have been told in less than the nearly two hours it occupies. While the double story works acceptably, since it is only peripherally parallel, there is no real reason for it, and I think the film would likely have been more successful had it followed a more Disney- or Hallmark-ish story line telling only Annabelle's story.

I was unfamiliar with Tim Janis prior to this film; while I give him fine marks for the score (he is best known as a composer), I wouldn't recommend him as a director. Also, as other reviewers have observed, there are no writing credits listed in the film-or here-but they're provided on Mr. Janis' website; since no other attribution is given, one must assume that it is their original work. I find it interesting that Mr. Janis has the ego to put his name above the title but somehow fails to list himself and his wife, Elizabeth Demmer as the writers.

This is one of those occasions when the writer should not be the director of his own writing, as he apparently lacks the objectivity to see the flaws that could so easily have been corrected during the filming. This might have been minimized with the oversight of an established studio but, with Ms. Deming, an otherwise uncredited, sole producer, many of the film's flaws appears to be the result of a vanity production.

I would like to see this film re-edited under the guidance of a more experienced producer and/or director to keep all that works well-including, of course, Van Dyke's and Lansbury's appearances-but cut what doesn't ... or (though I'm generally not big on remakes) for it to be reworked entirety.