Natal na Realeza

While there were parts that were good, and I've watched it a few times (silly but sometimes heart-warming and cute), Hallmark made the American characters appear warm-hearted but classless, goofy, and downright stupid. Royalty doesn't float around the US falling in love & marrying classless, poorly-dressed dolts who would call a queen "your majesty-ness". Further, it's highly unlikely that Prince William walked into Buckingham Palace with Kate on his arm without Kate having some serious coaching, and untrained staff would likely never serve a queen. As for the comparison to 'a princess for Christmas', the only thing I will mention is that both movies portrayed the (American) women as weak and sloppy with neither having a decent career or job, and the costumes were hideous. Jane Seymour had some good lines, but she is portrayed a heartless witch with no other purpose, and the staff is portrayed as incompetent idiots. Victor and the Baroness are the only characters I really liked. More work next year Hallmark.

I love Hallmark Christmas movies, and I especially liked this one. It seemed a little too short, though. I noticed one of the other reviewers said that Disney should take lessons from Hallmark--guess what? Disney owns Hallmark and ABC FAMILY. Just different target audiences. But back to the movie... I liked all the actors, but it would have been nice to see Emily,s dad and her friend a little bit more. The castle and clothes were beautiful. The only thing that I found hard to believe was the village scene where nuns are selling things to raise money for an orphanage. If they are supposed to be near France (an industrialized country), why does the village look like it's set in the 1600s? Whenever an American movie has a scene in another country it always looks like something from "A Tale of Two Cities." Yes, I know, that was around 1812. Still, I really liked the movie. I watch Christmas stuff all year long. Just could have been longer. I recommend this film!

A Royal Christmas is a glossy piece of holiday fluff. It's Christmas and who doesn't like a well put together, seasonal movie. Well to start with, some of the critics don't. But we always look for that next classic Christmas movie to go along with Miracle on Thirty-Fourth St., Alistair Sims' or George C. Scott's Scrooge, The Bishop's Wife, Christmas in Connecticut, The Holly and the Ivy and a few more recent ones that come close to being in the classics range like Home Alone or The Santa Clause. Of course, the great ones don't come along every year.

As for this one, I really did take to the leading characters and actors in the movie, with longtime movie stalwart Jayne Seymour as the Queen, adding icing and some icy behaviour to this Christmas cake of a movie. She was impressive in her role as the mother from hell combined with her other role as an elegant and charming Queen of a fantasy land that reminds us of Monaco or Liechtenstein. Lacey Chabert, as the fun-loving seamstress/designer, is a girl with talent and personality who charms the Queen's son and the palace staff (if not the guards) and Stephen Hagan as Leopold James, the Prince Charming who certainly filled the bill as the tall, well-tailored prince madly in love with the girl of his dreams. Katharine Flynn as the wannabe bride, the Duchess of Warren, was the only weak link in an otherwise fine cast. The young couple in love are polar opposites in background and personality but a perfect example of two young people in love, in a fairy tale world of course.

The music, the sets, and the upstairs-downstairs characters and everything about the movie were smartly arranged. The supporting cast was great, from Simon Dutton as the butler (watch for a surprise!) to the family of the commoner in love with her prince. Of course, it was all in the Hallmark tradition of giving us something Christmassy to wallow in for the holidays. See it and just let yourself enjoy the treat.

I liked this despite myself, it was just so horribly addictive even though you knew exactly what was going to happen about 5 minutes in, right down to the little orphan girl and the Queens first love. This has a fairy tale (Cinderella or Pretty Woman) like quality to it which I guess we all secretly covet or at least Hallmark thinks we do.

Here a prince posing as a common (college student) must reveal the truth about his royal lineage to his girlfriend -a seamstress from Philadelphia- who then must try to impress Leopold's mother, Queen Isadora when the couple travel to the castle (in the made up land of Cordinia) to spend the holidays with his family.

I did enjoy Stephen Hagon who played the Prince, just a nice guy and his love interest (Lacy Chabert) was okay too, a bit too perky maybe. Jane Seymour was actually very good here, she gave me several laughs with her sneering, cold, bitchiness.

There are some fun 'Upstairs Downstairs' or 'Downton Abby' moments as "Emily" bonds with the castle staff and I suppose this couple is meant to resemble William and Kate to further pull us into the fantasy. Regardless, I enjoyed this is a very simple sort of way. 12/16/14

Princely boyfriend brings 'regular girl' home to the castle. Lacey Chabert character seems like such a defenseless 'victim' here of not knowing how to speak to people who just really live in a much larger house? She cowers and seems not to have any poise at all !

Would this 'Prince' really want to be with her at all? Would anyone?

They make her so mousy that when she learns anything ( like how to dance or eat an hors doeurves?). She has come into a whole different world? Really?

It's outdated and although this character comes from the 'real world' she should have basic confidence in herself which makes me feel why is this guy interested in her at all!

I wanted to like this movie but it's frustrating to see this young girl as such a 'victim!'