pinkarray This is one of Margaret O'Brien's weaker films. She's the little girl that played in Meet Me In St. Louis, but although her character here is not as annoying as the precocious girl in Meet Me In St. Louis, she's still cloying and appears to have been surrounded by a wise family.Margaret O'Brien was 9-10 years old here, this movie had had production problems which kind of ruined the film for her because at times, she doesn't look much like an 8-year-old. Though, I still loved her marvelous performance and the expressions and emotions she conveys are real.This just strikes me as something that they have wasted Margaret's talent on, the director didn't seem to get her to perform her scenes as well as she did in other movies. And the script could've been rewritten in order for the movie to be a great one.

jhkp Warm film with the usual top MGM production values, strong cast.When I finally saw this film I was surprised it was described as a "bomb" by Leonard Maltin. While it's not the greatest movie ever made, it's hardly a bomb, despite the problematic production history. Because retakes took so long, Margaret O'Brien is noticeably taller and older in some scenes than in others. The character's belief in fairy tales strains credulity in the scenes where little Margaret seems to be aging rapidly.One could argue, as well, that, despite the hardships supposedly being endured by the characters in their poor New York neighborhood, at the height of the Great Depression, they seem reasonably well fed, dressed, and housed. The apartment where Flavia (O'Brien) lives is quite large, for example.But there are some very true things in the film, the experience of being an only child, living among adults; the realities of readjustment for an ex-con (George Murphy). Many of the realities are not in the scenes or the lines, but in Margaret's and George Murphy's faces.The cast is great and there's a nice Christmas atmosphere in the scenes that wrap up the story.

tmj-9 I guess I'm just old-fashioned, since this is the kind of movie that appeals to me. I haven't gone to a theater in years due to the crap they put out now. What's wrong with a sweet little film that leaves you feeling good about life? It was quite inspiring. I like to watch movies that are as I would imagine things to be without all the harsh and ugly realities that are out there.I can't stand most newer movies due to the bad language. (many times put in only to give it a more restrictive rating) I would like to see the return of this style of movie with a modern day setting. At least you could take your kids without feeling embarrassed about it.

Chaser101 One user comment contains an error that should be rectified. The character of Steve, played by George Murphy, is not the child's (Flavia's) father. His original relationship to the family is unclear, but he's a potential uncle, and the point is that he is a big favorite of this little girl's. Flavia's father appears early in the film, very briefly. He appears to be a music teacher. Steve is unmarried, and one of the major themes in the movie concerns whether he and Susan (the unbelievably pretty Angela Landsbury) can build up a life together after he has been released from prison.Maybe my tolerance for smaltz is higher, I don't find the film to be that cheezy or obvious. It's hard for children to know the difference between fact and fiction, how fiction is often truer in spirit than facts, and how stories help get us through rotten times. (If you notice, Flavia's mother uses stories mostly to console the child).Christmas stories are supposed to be schamltzy, aren't they?