Miracle on 34th Street

I thought the Thomas Mitchell version as OK as we'll, while Richard Attenborough's left a bitter taste in my mouth. What stood out was that it's set up blended so well into the 70's era. I confess, I always thought of David Hartman as a newsman, but here I realize he wasn't a bad actor at all. Cabot's Santa? Loved him! Convincingly kind and gentle, and showed brilliant Santa magic.

In some ways it does feel like you'd get lost following this if you didn't already know the story, because you don't get a lot to tell you just what the characters as set up are all about, and you don't get hardly any exposition of Karen Walker as an unbeliever, but familiarity saves it. As well, I feel like i wouldn't like it as much if not for wanting some reprieve from the forced resolution I got out of the Attenborough version. The Post Office miracle doesn't feel as brilliant, but still different enough to feel fresh, a nd believable enough to appreciate as a miracle.

I won't put as much diligence into making this a Christmas season must-see, but I'll definitely get to a point where it feels like another go is in order. Not a bad version at all.

With all of the comments about this version not being the original acknowledged, this one is still my favorite version of the story.

Maybe its because I grew up with David Hartman on Good Morning America and in all those sappy commercials....or maybe its because I have always been a fan of Sebastian Cabot.

Regardless, the update did a good job of bringing the story into the '70s and, even 30 years later, I find it comforting on the very rare occasion that it is shown during the Christmas season....Sebastian Cabot is fine throughout, and the updated setting, while not outshining the original, at least makes us feel like we could have been there.

So, I wouldn't place it in my "top 10" list of movies, or even consider it any kind of competition with the original.

But it does have its own, somewhat subdued, charm, and its always a pleasure to see Cabot in one of his later roles.

First let me begin by saying that nothing exceeds the original black & white 1947 version of MIRACLE ON 34TH STREET. It is rare when a movie remake is better than the original. The 1973 version of this film by no means is better than the 47 version, for that matter nor is the 94 version. In my opinion the 94 version is the worst but I'll not comment on that here.

I feel that the 74 version does bring some good things to the table. I find the color here better than the Ted Turner coloring of the 47 version. I believe that movies filmed in black & white should stay in black & white. Turner does an injustice to movie making with his colorization process. I also like the selection of the actors for this film. Both Alexander and Hartman give good performances and come off across as ordinary looking and yet are an attractive couple. Davis did seem to overact a bit in the role of the lead child but she is tolerable.

When looking at a film I like to be able to identify what era it was made in. Both the 47 and 73 are identifiable by the autos, clothes, toys and parade floats & balloons. While not alive in 47 I was a kid in 73 and it's nice to watch a film and be reminded of images from my own youth.

So, while it is true that the 73 version does not do better than the 47 version it does not flop either.

Mirricle is my favorite Christmas movie, the 1974 version i think is my least favorite but i have only seen it once a very long time ago. I just wish there was a set I could buy with all the versions on it, because sometimes I wish I could watch them all back to back. Just a thought corporate America PUT OUT A BOXED SET!!!!!!!! All of the versions have their strong suits. The original is the most widely recognized and beautifully written and I believe most everyones favorite, but I have never even seen the fifties TV version, and I would like that opportunity. The 74 version has some nostalgia for the people who saw it when they were little, and the most recent version is easier for small children to identify with. It would even be nice if they could have a version of the Broadway play but I doubt there are any copies of it running around.

Yes, I saw this the night it aired in 1973, and not again until I found it you YouTube tonight. We'd just watched the 1947 original with Edmund Gwinn, and recalled Sebastian Cabot's shot at the role.

Cabot did a very fine job here, but the revised script suffered greatly by comparison with the original ... plus ... Jane Alexander brings NOTHING of the fire or acting ability to the role that Maureen O'Hara did. Where the lines are the same, Alexander comes off as very flat.

Early on, when Bill (the lawyer) meets Karen, the parade coordinator (and why did they find a need to rename these characters??), this script introduces a lady friend doctor of Bill's who acts in a very proprietary manner. One sees a personality conflict coming, but the doctor never appears again and is never mentioned again! LOL One can only suppose that later in production, that storyline was dropped but they were too cheap to film the "after parade in Bill's apartment again".

Next, we have alcohol in what is surely a kid's movie, and Karen asking for a vodka cocktail in the morning hours? Another mistake.

Roddy McDowall was a fine actor, but he just wasn't the right choice for Dr. Sawyer.

Finally, they made the decision to hold the hearing in a closed courtroom? No Gallery? How does Macy's decision about testifying that Kringle is Santa Clause play in an empty courtroom? It doesn't. It made no sense at all.

Again, Cabot did a nice job. David Hartman did a nice job. David Doyle overplayed Macy in a ridiculous fashion. Jane Alexander was flat throughout. Susan (the little girl) doesn't hold a candle to Natalie Wood. Jim Backus does a nice job as Shellhammer, but the byplay between the judge and his political advisor contains NONE of the humor of that element of the original. The final speech when delivering the 'letters to Santa' was repetitive and overplayed, especially when being delivered to an empty courtroom. One can only surmise the producers were too cheap to pony up for extras.

Skip this and watch Edmund Gwinn again. You won't be sorry.