Posted on 12/18/2006 7:42:45 AM PST by qam1
I’ve heard all the talk about the “War on Christmas” and the battle of “Happy Holidays” vs. “Merry Christmas.”
All the while, the real war on Christmas was going undetected. I’m talking about the war on classic Christmas specials.
This year’s victim: “The Year Without a Santa Claus.”
MODERN SCHLOCK
On Monday, NBC aired a live action version of the 1974 stop-motion animated classic. The story line was basically the same: Santa gives up on Christmas, thinking kids don’t care about him anymore, while his elves, Jingle and Jangle, set off to find kids full of Christmas spirit. The elves are nearly thwarted by warring brothers, Heat Miser and Snow Miser. In the end, a boy named Iggy rediscovers the magic of Christmas, and Santa finds out people love him after all.
That’s about where the similarities end.
The show was billed as “a holiday family event” and rated “G,” yet one scene depicts a video game battle where a man gets his arm and his head ripped off, complete with spewing blood. The dog warden offers Iggy a beer. Jingle eyeballs a female gym teacher and is told by Jangle that it’s no time for a “booty call.” Heat Miser and Snow Miser’s back-up dancers are no longer smaller versions of themselves, but women in tight metallic tank tops and miniskirts.
Throw in that the movie was two hours long and started at 9 p.m., and you can’t tell me this was made for children — and especially not for us kids-at-heart who grew up with the holiday staple.
LET IT BE
Sure, holiday classics have been redone for years. But changing a black and white film to color or adding a few modern touches to the story line doesn’t ransack the fundamental feel of those beloved films, as it did this time. The original “Year” delivered more heart and soul in an hour with its low-tech animation than this yawner could muster in two hours with an all-star cast.
With this remake, the network basically stole the proverbial candy from the babies of my generation. Much like the now-available chocolate-coated Pop Rocks, a true classic has undergone a painfully unnecessary makeover that renders its fans baffled and disgusted.
Don’t believe me? Go to any Generation Xer and say “Heat Miser” and see if they don’t start singing “I’m Mr. Green Christmas, I’m Mr. Sun.” Then tell them those favorite Miser characters — who make this a classic in the first place — were reduced to bit players in bad stage makeup and see what happens.
The bottom line: Don’t mess with the animated classics. There’s a reason they’ve stayed favorites for decades, and it has nothing to do with being “modern.”
First we had Jim Carrey in creepy makeup for Ron Howard’s version of “Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas.” Now, this.
Someone needs to tell Santa’s favorite reindeer he’d better “run, run, Rudolph” or he could face a worse foe than the Bumble.
Throw in that the movie was two hours long and started at 9 p.m., and you can’t tell me this was made for children
If they're showing it after 9 pm, and it's 2 hours long, it's a pretty safe bet it was not made for children in the first place.
There's little that Hollyweird offers that's appropriate for any age or sensibility. BTW, don't waste you $$$ on the third installment of the Santa Clause.
all week long, National Geo and History Channel are replaying all the bogus documentaries obviously created to show no Moses, no Temple of Solomon and no Jesus. sad.
Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations (i.e. The Baby Boomers) are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.
Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.
A friend of mine watched some of it and said it looked like that production number they were making in Bill Murray's "Scooged" (with Mary Lou Retten and the Solid Gold Dancers!)
Somebody has too much time on their hands.
Nice generational warfare, there.
Boomers are not your enemies.
Lord of the Rings demonstrats that you are wrong.
We will NOT ALWAYS be disappointed.
As a general rule of thumb, Hollyweird prefers to display sex to children whenever they can.
Chocolate covered Pop Rocks??? Have people no shame!
I just love the Rankin/Bass Christmas specials. I remember one year when I was in high school, I was home sick and got to watch "Year Without a Santa Claus", "Rudolph", "Rudolph's Shiny New Year", "Nestor the Long Eared Donkey", and that story of Santa's origins where he takes on the Burgermeister Meisterburger! It was a good day. :)
*sigh* People just can't leave well enough alone, can they? These classics were made in the sixties and have brought joy to kids all the way through the nineties. Obviously they're just fine as they are thank you. I worry about the crapola that will be around for my little one when she's old enough for specials in a few years...and she's not even born yet ;)
Now there's a fresh idea...blame the parents. After all, you didn't ask to be born. ;-)
I'm glad someone else said it first.
Me too. I know my younger siblings liked it, though. One Christmas television special that I *do* remember fondly has almost entirely vanished: the original pilot for "The Waltons" series, titled "The Homecoming".
It was available on VHS and even DVD for a while, but good luck finding a copy. Just recently I saw it available for download on UseNet, if anyone is interested in hunting it down.
Had it been one hour, it might've been watchable. Two hours is way too long. Same goes for the Grinch movie. But if you're spending that kind of money and getting that many "name" actors, you need two hours to get your money's worth (or so they think).
War on Christmas aside, this isn't a part of that. This was pure capitalism. Grinch did well enough to greenlight a Cat in the Hat movie. And the Grinch made it to Broadway. So why not try another live-action movie? (Answer: because it will suck dingos kidneys.)
I watched "Charlie Brown Christmas" last nite. I had DVR'd it a while back and noticed it was on again so I fired up the recording from the beginning.
The first half hour was the normal special from the mid sixties. This is my favorite Xmas special so I watch it every year (along with Rudolph, the Grinch, Frosty and The Year Without a Santa Clause). Goofy I know since I am 42 but I love those old shows and the nostalgia puts me in the Christmas Spirit.
Anyway, ABC must have decided they needed to milk old C.B. for a few extra $$ cuz they made a new half hour to go with the old one. I was appalled but decided to watch a bit of it anyway. Man was it awful. The animation was the typical crappy animation of today. It was painfully obvious that the writers were trying to catch the wit and feel of Mr Schulz. They failed miserably. But the biggest offense was this. They failed to give Linus his blanket. My wife and I debated about whether this was simply an oversight (since I'm sure the 25 year olds who wrote the piece of crap did not grow up on Peanuts) or if it was some sort of PC "message" that indicated Linus' new "empowerment". What a joke. To quote Charlie Brown when he misses the football for the hundredth time, "AAAAAAHHHHHHH".
Here's a message for ABC and whomever was responsible for this: LEAVE OUR TRADITIONS ALONE! As a kid that grew up in the seventies, these specials are as much a part of our tradition as "A Wonderful Life". Maybe ABC can replay that film with digital appearances by George Clooney and Susan Sarandon.
Thanks for the rant, Big Red Clay
Not quite. You are allowed to watch third installments as long as the subtitle starts with "Return of the ..." (cf. "Jedi", "King") or the title contains the words "Harry Potter and the ..."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.