55 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
Don’t hold back DKL tell us what you really think. Seriously, I found the movie a bit dull so the message, or lack thereof, did not sink in one way or the other. |
Never watched this movie … but I’ll take DKL’s word for it. |
I have to agree with you on the movie. I’ve never made it all the way through it. It’s just too freaky. But I wholeheartedly disagree with you about the book. The story is about believing in the unbelievable, and isn’t that what Christmas is really about? |
Preach it brother. |
DKL–I agree 100% thanks for posting |
How do you get to “the notion that it’s primarily attached to receiving presents”? The kid seems to eschew present-greed when, given the chance to demand any gift (say a Porsche Boxster or a hippopotamus), he asks for a single jingle bell. You are wrong about the book. It is a charming little story about the magic of Christmas mythology. It is not great literature (even as far as picture books go), but so what? It does not make a comprehensive argument about the relative merits of the Savior of the World, seeing my grandma, honey-baked hams, Adeste Fideles, brown paper packages tied up with string, jolly old elves, and all of the other good things about Christmas. Your attempt to read such an argument into the book fails. Of course, the fact that the movie was unbearably loud, stupid, and creepy is old news. DKL, this post reminds me of lame bloggernacle posts of Christmases past. Of course, pitting the Baby Jesus against Santa in a cage match makes for saucy blogging. Unfortunately however, it is possible to “put Christ back in Christmas” and “remember the reason for the season” and “[insert additional nauseating cliche here]” without trashing Christmas mythology. |
I kind of enjoyed it as light entertainment. I think you took it too seriously. |
As a confirmed member of the Church of Santa Claus of Mystical Railroads I am shocked and appalled at DKL’s blatant attack on my religious beliefs. The literal truth of our sacred text, The Polar Express, is blatantly obvious to even the most jaded skeptic. As a literal account of our founders vision it adds to the traditions of Islamic, Christan and Jewish journeys into the realm of the spiritual, providing a final testament to the ultimate goodness of mankind and the rewards we are given for being nice. Truth is truth. Santa Claus will prevail! |
I don’t hate the book. I hate the movie more than DKL hates the book. |
I find the book to be annoying, for some of the reasons that DKL mentions. But I find the movie to be absolutely terrible, and not for the reasons that he mentions. I can get over the uncanny valley, but the ways in which the story was expanded to get it to movie length are simply terrible. For instance several new child characters appear, and all are annoying. There is the nearly mute stupid child, the very bright “leader” child, and the nasally nerd child. Each is more dreadful than the next and seem to exist primarily to do stupid things in order to advance the plot. Next are the Tom Hanks characters. First is the conductor, who is more than a little threatening, for no apparent reason. Not only is he always implying that others are slowing him down, but at one point he appears to kidnap the girl because, through little fault of her own, she has lost her ticket. Next is the dead hobo on the top of the train, who is in addition being dead, is clearly insane. He must be some sort of brother of the conductor because he’s menacing in the same way. Finally, Santa is probably the most sympathetic of the Tom Hanks characters, but seems like a glory hog and isn’t especially nice to the children for being Santa. Plus, what’s up with singling one child a year out for special treatment? What a jerk. Finally, the ancillary characters serve mostly for very bad comic relief. We have the crew of the train, who are incompetent and stupid, and we have the elves, who are not only more menacing and threatening towards the children than any of the other characters, but they actually push the around in a mean spirited way. In short, while the book attempts to depict a journey of wonder to the North Pole, the movie shows a journey in which children are yelled at, belittled, abused, and put in danger, all for no apparent reason. The movie serves to teach children that if a magic steam engine pulls up to your house, you should probably pull out your Red Rider BB Gun and shoot the conductor. In short, it isn’t the animation that makes the movie terrible, it is the writing. You could take the same movie, have Pixar re-render it without the dreadful faces and expressions such that it was a visual spectacle, and it would still be an offense to Christmas. |
Oh the movie is much, much worse than the book. At least with the book, you have Chris Van Allsburg’s fantastic illustrations to look at. With the movie, all you have is subpar animation and various creepy Tom Hanks personae (Creepy Train Porter, Creepy Father, and Creepy Hobo, to name a few). |
DKL sayeth: Why should children believe in Santa and not in Jesus? I say Why should children believe in Jesus and not Santa? In both cases, you are asking the child to suspend skepticism and take things on faith. Perhaps this conflict is why the story offends you so much? |
Measure, I implicitly answer your question in the final sentence of my post, and I conclude that you didn’t read the entire post. Perhaps you should not assume things on faith about my post and my religious outlook. arj, that’s a great analysis of the movie. When I read it, I feel your pain, the pain of having had to actually watch it. I have to confess that I’ve never paid close attention to the movie; unless it’s by Pixar, I’m surfing the internet while my children watch films. BTD and Orwell, I agree with you on the creepiness, but I didn’t have as strong a reaction about the movie — mostly because I’ve never paid close attention to it. bloggernacleburner, Santa Clause will be relegated to the ash heap of history, along with Communism, Islamo-fascism, and many popular Ronco products. S. P. Bailey, let’s make a deal: Don’t confuse me with “put the Jesus back in Jesusmas” types and I won’t confuse you with complete idiots. Jon W, the movie was nothing if not un-engaging. Danithew, you’re lucky. |
Marjorie Conder and Steve Evans, Thanks for commenting. I’m glad we agree. |
Perhaps I misunderstood your last paragraph, DKL, reading it again, you seem to hold off from declaring that Jesus lives. My apologies for the misunderstanding. |
Jesus does live, of course. |
Thanks for a laugh, DKL. I just watched the movie with my neice and nephew and concluded that, were Jesus not in the picture (as far as a belief system goes) the movie does promote a sort of faith in the supernatural by other means. For children and adults alike, connecting the holidays with magic and some sort of supernatural “spirit of Christmas” can only benefit them. Telling a story that promotes that spirit and watching a movie that provides a variety of children participating in ridiculously dangerous adventures in an effort to treat each other well can’t be all that bad. If that’s the case, Harry Potter must be #1 most revolting. The fixation on presents for children is hardly an effect of Santa, it is and effect of giving presents during Christmas. It is an effect of all the pagan wackiness we participate in during this time of year with our families and friends. And it is all harmless, unless singular families or individuals find no other focus for their holiday celebrations. If Santa must go the way of the ash-heap of history along with communism, at least put them in separate piles. Although who is to say Santa is more of a fairy tale than baby Jesus? This reminds me of the review of Wall-E someone did recently… |
Totally agree about the movie and book. And the animated characters are the creepiest things I’ve seen in a theater. |
You’re setting the bar too high, DKL. Most living people have less charm than the zombies in The Evil Dead. They rock. |
I just think the story tries too hard to be the be-all, end-all, ultimate “here’s the real story of how the whole Santa Claus thing works” explanation. It’s almost as if the author dares every other author to “top this one, buddy, if you can”. That said, there are days when I really do want to like the movie, and I’ll just try to watch it and take it at face value and leave my desire to judge it somewhere else in the house. |
The thing that bugs me about the movie is what I took away as its message: “If you just believe it in enough, ANYTHING you want will be true.” |
I found it a delightful romp through the Old West. |
The Bloggernacle needs more Evil Dead references (preferably to part 2, but I quibble). Thanks for doing your part, DKL. AB |
My children basically believe SC is stupid (I won’t type his full name). I believe that means I’m doing my job. |
I like this book. Really like it. The movie, I must admit, made me wretch. I could barely sit through it, and now, when my kids watch it, I avert my eyes. |
fwiw, I’m with DKL on this one: TPE = not fit for human consumption. Same applies for anything inspired by Roald Dahl. That entire industries rely for profits on certain notions regarding American schoolchildren is something to be resisted, not embraced. What DKL misses is that these are choices educated liberal parents make every day in the privacy of their own homes without feeling the need to trumpet our superiority to the rest of the world. |
When we first had children, we decided to just leave Santa Claus out of Christmas and see how it would go. When the second child was three, he saw a stuffed Santa in a store, and said “Look, it’s a Christmas goblin!” The red and white were Christmas colors, and the peaked cap made it look to him like one of the goblins Maurice Sendak drew in the Little Bear books. For the most part having the ho ho guy be just a fun Christmas story has turned out fine, except that the boys are too haughty in their disdain for the “pretend Santa is real” routine that other people do. |
Well, gag a maggot. What a lot of emotion for a harmless childrens’ story. Christmas without the warmth of family does suck, no matter the greatness of the gifts but a little fantasy never hurt any kid. For most families it never was about Jesus–I suppose kids have to take what they can get out of it, even if it’s only a truckload of presents. I don’t think this story is any more revolting than all those preachy picture books at Deseret Book. It just bothers me how many people make money off other peoples attempt to find the spirit outside themselves and pat themselves on the back because they own more such books than the rest of the ward. If a book inspires a kid to feel hope and warmth, maybe they’ll be more apt to believe in Jesus when they finally learn of him. For those of us who already know, of course, the responsibility is larger. You might be right, DKL, as far as that goes, but revolting is a big word, especially if you compare it to all the really crap childrens’ books there are. I mean, it’s Tom Hanks, he’s the bomb! |
annegb, Couldn’t agree more… Chino Blanco, That was a hilarious attempt at boasting moral superiority with humility. Melissa, That sounds more like Cinderella, no? :) |
Shame on all you anti-magical Santa people!!! Same for you DKL for not liking The Polar Express!!! I hope that you all get coal in your stocking for Christmas!! |
No, I agree with DKL. Revolting. Just because it’s got (a) Tom Hanks and (b) just because other books are also crap, doesn’t make it any less revolting. (Plus, seriously, people. Tom Hanks ain’t all that. Need we *really* analyze his ENTIRE corpus?) |
I am talking especially to you Queuno. You are seriously the Grinch. |
JA, your logic doesn’t resonate. The grinch thought that by destroying the commercial crap, he’d destroy the holiday. Obviously, that failed. See, I want to save Christmas by destroying the commercial crap. Santa’s a blight upon the season. |
Queuno, you know that I love you, but you are still the Grinch. I am rarely logical during the holiday season. Sentimentality and emotion reign. As for me and my house…we want it all Baby Jesus, Santa, Polar Express, Hannukah etc…the whole kit and kabootal. There is room for all and some to spare. Merry Christmas to you and yours. |
#34 JA Benson, Speaking of Channukah, growing up in a predominantly Jewish neighborhood, our school seasonal musical performances were always entitled “The Festival of Lights”. It was interesting being a minority Mormon. And I agree. It’s a season for traditions and festivities, including gift-giving and superstitions. The Heber Creeper does a “Polar Express” ride this time of year that is a ton of fun for kids. |
See, I eschew “traditions” that don’t have any relevance. And it’s really hard to get one’s children up for “Santa Claus” when it’s probably going to be in the 60s or 70s (it’s been cold this week – mid-50s). We live in North Texas for a reason — we love the weather. But if I have to hear one more lousy rendition of “White Christmas”, I’m going to go punk a Salvation Army volunteer. Santa Claus only “works” if you’re up north. And if killing Santa off means that the commercialism is lessened, then I’m all for it… |
Amen Nasamomdele. We have ordered Hannukah cookie cutters and a Menorah from Crate and Barrell for this year. When the Menorah arrives it will sit next to the Nativity. Two witnesses of God’s Love for his children. I love the story of the Festival of the LIghts and we are looking forward to celebrating Hannukah at the same time we are celebrating Christmas. We would do Kwanza if I wasn’t too tired by that point. Maybe a non-Hannukah year. Queuno Loosen up, have some egg nog and live a little :) I guess some of us are party animals and others are not. I hear ya about the weather and moods. We lived in Plano 20 years ago. North Texas in December is just too pretty for “White Christmas”, but good for golf and still good for Santa. They had the best Santa at the Northpark mall. He was a professional storyteller with a big snowy beard. We still live in the South, but it is not as warm here as North Texas. |
#37 JA Benson – Seriously? Kwanzaa? I’d be happy to celebrate Channukah (especially since I have Jewish roots) but I can’t bring myself to recognize Kwanzaa as a legitimate holiday. Channukah and Christmas (even though Christmas was originally a pagan holiday) have been practiced for centuries and hold religious significance. Kwanzaa was created in 1966 specifically to be the first African-American holiday in existence. No religion and no real reason for it. Therefore, I don’t buy it. |
Queuno, you should watch the Killers’ video of “Don’t Shoot Me Santa.” |
#36 Queuno, Seeing as though Jesus was born on April 6th, we might just throw out this whole darned thing for the sake of relevance! Let’s face it, it’s all pagan. Happy Festivus for the rest of us! |
#28, Paroled from the Primary Presidency, actually, the word “Kwanzaa” is African for Jesus. I wouldn’t have known this myself, except that I bought a book on how to speak African. You should brush up on your African, because it will soon become as important to speak African as it is to speak Asian and European. As soon as Africa solves its problems with AIDS, inflation, warlords, pirates, genocide, and infrastructure, Africa will quickly become the wealthiest metropolitan area in the world, and then you’ll be sorry if you don’t speak at least a little African and don’t know how to celebrate Kwanzaa. |
Sorry DKL but I believe you are mistaken. According to History.Com (and several other sites including the “official” Kwanzaa website) the name Kwanzaa is derived from the phrase “matunda ya kwanza” which means “first fruits” in Swahili. Kwanzaa is meant to be a non-religious holiday celebrating African-American culture. Also, there are over 2,000 languages found on the continent of Africa so I would be happy to brush up on my language skills but did you have a specific language in mind? As far as I can tell, “African” alone is not a language. I doubt I’ll ever be sorry I don’t know how to celebrate Kwanzaa but go ahead and light your candles! :) |
Regarding the meaning of the word Kwanzaa, I realize that it’s politically correct to say that Kwanzaa comes from “matunda ya kwanza.” But please, let’s not take the Christ out of Kwanzaa, too. Before it became politically correct to identify the holiday with the virtues of agrarian socialism and Marxism, scholars of African recognized that Kwanzaa was African for Jesus. I’ve heard from a credible source that Africa has a first rate airport. If there were actually more than 2,000 languages in Africa, then the restrooms in Africa’s airport would require more than 4,000 different labels to differentiate the men’s room from the women’s room. And the restaurants would need menus in more than 2,000 languages. Therefore, there cannot be more 2,000 languages spoken in Africa. A first rate airport requires linguistic simplicity. Therefore, if you visit Africa by plane, you’ll see that the signs in Africa’s airport are clearly labeled in African. |
Face it, DKL, you’re just wrong. Sorry. Take it like a man! |
Next you’re going to try to tell me that Asian isn’t a language. Racist! |
Rats, I’m sorry I missed the opportunity to stick it to DKL for implying that “African” is a language. Oh well, I think he was kidding about the whole thing. And I love the airport argument, even though it’s total nonsense. As for The Polar Express, I just can’t bring myself to be that outraged over the book. I remember reading it as a very young child, and the illustrations still evoke a certain nostalgia for me. So, yeah, I just don’t care enough to over-think it. (Not that I can cast any stones at people for over-thinking things – there is no shortage of little things in this world that most people don’t care about that I perpetually and deliberately over-think… ) The movie? Total crap. I hated, hated, hated it. arJ (#10) has already done an excellent job of breaking down some of the things that I so despised the first time I saw it. There will never be a second. |
Orwell, I’m puzzled. I wrote a comment where I said,
Seriously: Africa is a metropolitan area? Or how about the fact that I say that Asian and European are languages, or that Africa has just one airport, or that there are books on how to speak African. So good for you. You know that African is not a language! |
You’re puzzled? I’m puzzled.
That’s just the first of many references in #41 to “African” as a language. As you know, since you’re the one that said it (or rather “implied” it, I know you never said “African is a language” in so many words) prevailing Bloggernacle etiquette demands that I point it out as evidence of why you’re the worst person in the world, or something like that. That’s all I was getting at. |
I didn’t imply that African is a language. I presupposed it. And I really don’t appreciate your insistence on pushing Kwiest out of Kwanzaa (Kwiest is likely the way that our word “Christ” was originally pronounced among the children of Jesus’s contemporaries.) Orwell: prevailing Bloggernacle etiquette demands that I point it out as evidence of why you’re the worst person in the world, or something like that. Well, geez. Then why didn’t you just say so? |
Okay, you did that, too. You’re not only refusing to acknowledge the diversity of a developing continent, but you have the audacity to suppose something about it from the skewed, West-centric perspective of your imperialist throne. I’m not sure where I insisted on pushing “Kwiest out of Kwanzaa,” but it’s because of people like you that children like those don’t have access to speech therapy. You are the worst person in the world. You probably hate puppies, too. |
ON that happy note. To take Nasamomdele advice (LOL) “Happy Festivus for the Rest of Us!!! |
Well this is really a lot of posts for a simple innocent Christmas story. Really. |
[...] I love the myths of Santa, elves, flying reindeer, sleighs, and toy factories. I delight in certain feature films that others abhor. I do really hate shopping, but like the idea of Christmas gifts. In this regard, the internet [...] |
[...] I have seen this one panned hard of late.  Some think the animation is creepy and the story insipid.  I disagree. I thought the [...] |
Mormons are christians. what ever you say about the church is wrong. i am a mormon. |