Miracle on 34th Street (1947) (Movie Review)

 

  A common staple in Christmas specials is an element of fantasy or magic, with stories or settings that embraces a sense of wonder and imagination. While I certainly enjoy the more fantastical elements associated with the season, I also feel that the sign of a truly great Christmas movie is one that has no magical elements at all, and yet … still feels like a magical experience. In this regard, the 1947 classic “Miracle on 34^th Street” stands out as one of the all-time best, as there’s no magical elements in the film at all, but the experience still feels very wonderous and enchanting all the same. Like a fine wine, it’s one of those old pictures that just seems to get better with age. For me, I actually find myself forgetting I love this movie … until I sit-down and watch it again for the holiday season, and I’m like … “Oh Yeah, this movie is still great.” There’s definitely a reason it continues to appear on lists of the best Christmas movies. While I might have one or two reservations with this film, I still feel it holds-up as a classic. By extent, it has a place among my Christmas favorites too, and is well worth revisiting and discussing.

  We open on Macy’s Annual Thanksgiving Day Parade, and everyone is in the spirit for a new holiday season. However, before the parade can get going, the leading Santa is caught drinking, and removed from the event. At the last minute, the parades manager Mrs. Walker singles out a kind old gentleman from the crowd to stand-in for the jolly one, and by extent take a position as the Macy’s department store Santa Claus. Not only is the guy a picture-perfect Kris Kringle, but his warmth, and persona is simply brimming with the spirit of the holiday. Things get interesting when this kind old man reveals himself to be the genuine article … the real Santa Claus. While he has no real magical capabilities to back-up his claim, he still insists that the people of New York just need to have faith in him. This comes much to the irritation of Mrs. Walker, who only believes in practical things, and views fantasies as harmful. Caught in the middle is Mrs. Walkers young daughter Susan, who wants to see things her mother’s way, but is also very open to the kind words and thoughtful ideas that Kris Kringle provides to her. However, the longer Kris claims to be Santa, the more he turns some worried heads, resulting in him being put on trial, to determine once and for all if he really is Santa Claus.

  As a quick side note, when this movie was first released in the United Kingdom, it was originally called “The Big Heart” … kind of ironic as the films story was written by a man named Valentine … Valentine Davies to be precise. He came-up with the original story for the film, and would later write a short novelization of “Miracle on 34^th Street”, which was likewise a best-seller that same year. 

Back when I was a little kid, I was first introduced to the story through the 1994 remake, staring Richard Attenborough, which I had a great deal of fondness for. As such, it took me a while to finally sit-down and watch the original classic. Needless to say, this film quickly won me over, and has its place among my annual Christmas re-watches. The film is honestly quiet engaging for such an old 1940’s picture. Director and screen writer George Seaton knew just the right tone, with a fine balance of both hummer and drama, without going too far on either front. It’s hard to put into words, but there really is this infectious charm to the film. This was also one of the very first Black and White movies to be colorized, and for me, it only adds to the appeal of the film. I usually prefer when original Black and White movies are left alone … in fact, many old movies look better without color. However, “Miracle on 34^th Street” is an exception, as it’s so decorative, that the color really makes the visual design pop with all these greens, reds, golds, and brightly colored outfits. Honestly, this film looks like it was meant to be shot in color, and they just didn’t have the money for it back then … but that’s just me speculating. Most DVD releases have both colored and Black and White versions attached, so you can have your pick, and for my liking, I always go with the colored version.   

  Aside from the technical details … the main appeal to this film without question is it’s cast of characters. Maureen O’ Hara stars as Doris Walker, and she finds that perfect balance as a mother closed-off to the world of imagination and fantasies, but she isn’t a dry stick in the mud either, and still shows signs of being hopefully optimistic. I also grew-up with many of John Wayne's classic movies, and Maureen O’ Hara was always my favorite reoccurring actress to appear in his films … my sister was even named after her character from “The Quiet Man”. She was also very memorable in the role of Esmerelda from the 1939 version of “The Hunchback of Notre Dame”. As such, I loved seeing such a familiar actress to me in this film. Maureen O’ Hara was actually reluctant to the role at first, mainly because she had just moved back home to Ireland post World War 2, but was quickly won-over to the film once she read the script. Acting opposite her is John Payne as Mr. Gailey, who’s a subtle love interest, and later a representative to Kris Kringle when he eventually goes on trial.   

  All the supporting actors in this film have their own screen appeal, including Gene Lockhart as Judge Harper, who’s legally bound to rule a verdict on Kris Kringle, and all while subtly showing signs that he’s rooting for him. Porter Hall plays the antagonistic Mr. Sawyer, who views Kris Kringle as a crazy loon, and while he’s a nasty worm, he isn’t a one-note mustache-twirling crook either. This is a guy who certainly comes off as slimy, but also deludes himself into believing he’s doing the community a favor. In comparison, the 1994 remake has stock, one-note bad guys, who wear all their tropes on their sleeves, and it just never worked for me.  

  Of course, I can’t forget the young Natalie Wood in her breakout role as little Susan. She has amazing chemistry with all her co-stars, and naturally is quite lovable, without ever being too cute in her delivery. The first time I ever saw Natalie Wood was in John Wayne’s 1956 Western classic “The Searchers”, then I really took note of her in the 1961 musical “West Side Story”, and finally, I became a big fan of the actress when I saw her comedic chops on display in the 1965 comedy “The Great Race”. It took me a while to discover she was one of the most cherished child-stars of the late 40’s, and her role in “Miracle on 34th Street” was definitely a high-mark for her.

  At last, rounding-up this incredible cast is Edmund Gwen in the role of Kris Kringle. This is easily one of the all-time great portrayals of Santa, and rightfully won him the Academy Award for best supporting actor. This is the movie that presented Santa on the human spectrum, and it’s Edmund Gwenn’s performance that makes the character feel so convincing as a normal man creating this illusion of being so much more. I also love that this Santa is something of a schemer, one who sets-up ideas and motions, and then watches everything fall into place. He knows he can’t perform real miracles, but his gears are constantly turning, and he’s always thinking of ways to pull-off what seem like impossible feats for one man. Being a warm screen presence would have been fine enough, but it really is the subtle details in Gwen’s performance, that of a quiet mastermind, which makes this Santa feel so unique among all the others I’ve ever seen on film.

  Once we segue into the films third act, the movie becomes a courtroom drama, but it still maintains its signature charm that can appeal to younger viewers. There’s a very cute moment when the prosecutor’s son is called to the witness stand, and a moment where we visually see what the manager of Macy’s Toys thinks when asked about Kris being Santa … which is kind of cheesy, but delightful all the same. At the end, the court house receives several hundred letters addressed to Santa Claus (they were part of the postal services dead letter collection), all now meant for Kris. Thus, the argument is made that the Post Office, a branch of the U.S. federal government has acknowledged Kris as the one and only Santa. This admittedly brings me to one of my reservations with the film, as I feel the final verdict is more cleaver in legally proving a case, but doesn’t really tie-in with the moral of the film. The overarching theme is about keeping one’s faith and beliefs alive in a practical world, and while the letter argument is fine, I just never felt like it complimented the message.

 This is where I want to put a spot-light on the 1994 remake, because while it’s overall not as good a movie, I do feel the final verdict more suitably compliments the films message. 

In the remake, the judge gives a passionate speech about the collective faith of people who believe in something greater than themselves, like the belief in God, which is based solely on faith alone without any real facts. He then determines that be a similar example, there is a Santa, and that he exists within a man named Kris Kringle. Back in the original, the judge is very quick to dismiss the case without any speech, and it just never felt as satisfying by comparison. Thankfully, when the original dose convey it's moral, it comes from Mrs. Walker, highlighting that this was her story, and now she's ready to live in a practical world, while still keeping hope and faith alive. That's all very good, and we get a traditional happy ending with everyone coming together in a new house as a family at the end, and it's hinted that it was all Kris Kringl's doing. Once again, I must confess, I don't like where the film chose to close-out, with Mr. Gailey commenting "Maybe I didn't do such a good thing after all." ... that always felt kind of off-putting to me.

  Putting aside those little hang-ups, I still love this movie all-around, and there’s no denying that “Miracle on 34^th Street” has its well-deserved place among all the classic holiday offerings. In 2005, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as “culturally, historically or aesthetically significant”. Along with Edmund Gwenn wining the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, Valentine Davies won the Academy Award for Best Original Story, and George Seaton won the Academy Award for Best Screenplay. 

The film was even nominated for Best Picture, but lost to the 1947 Drama “Gentleman’s Agreement”, staring Gregory Peck. I personally would have rather seen “Miracle on 34^th Street” win Best Picture, but it was still a cool rarity for a family Christmas movie to even be nominated … although, I should probably note that “The Bishops Wife” was also nominated that same year, and that too is a holiday staple. In the end, if your someone who loves watching Christmas movies during the holiday season, I’d say the original “Miracle on 34^th Street” is required viewing. It’s able to convey a thoughtful message without being overly sentimental, it’s visually appealing, and the cast is extraordinary. More to the point, like I said in the opening, it really is one of those rare Christmas offerings that leaves you feeling like you experienced something magical, without any real fantastical elements on display.     

Thanks for reading my review of the 1947 Christmas classic “Miracle on 34^th Street” … and continue to enjoy the holiday specials and movies you Love!