'Miracle maker' reunites director John Lyde and screenwriter Sally Meyer, plus several cast members, from 2013's 'Christmas for a dollar.' I won't hold a grudge against anyone for what was a holiday movie so unyielding in would-be charm and good will as to be pretentious, and bereft - but the connections are notable. Keeping that in mind, and based on the premise, I admit I definitely had unfavorable presuppositions when I sat to watch this - but, I'll sit for just about anything. So how is it?
The setting and scenario is established quickly: a frontier town of many decades past, facing hardship on account of the elements, and the hardness of the town's foremost capitalist pig. In addition to that goon, we're also introduced to all the characters, and get a pretty clear picture of their persons and circumstances. We have the hopeful children, the town gossips, the separated lovers, the struggling families, and so on. Beyond that we get eyefuls of rounding details; in general I appreciate the attention to aspects like set design and decoration, costume design, hair and makeup, and so on.
With that said - given the time and place, interiors and wardrobe seem a bit too pristine and impeccably free of soil, dust, or clutter. For as much emphasis as is placed on one character's appearance, the supposed blemish is barely noticeable. Similarly, between a somewhat indelicate hand in Meyers's writing, and a somewhat brisk pace owing to Lyde's direction, scenes and character moments that should have impact are inhibited from naturally manifesting, breathing, and resolving. In turn, the cast's performances are also then dampened. I can't speak to everyone here, but I've seen many in no few other pictures, and found their skills at least adequate, if not admirable. In 'Miracle maker,' the range, nuance, and personality they would bring to their portrayals are broadly artificially restrained, and the depictions are kind of flat as a result.
I don't want to cast aspersions, and even if I did, I'm not sure that any one person's contributions should be singled out as especially deficient. I think it's more that various elements of the movie are sufficiently flawed that the confluence of them all subdues the whole. The heavy-handedness is unfortunate, because were the screenplay given due care, I think the tale would be most fruitful indeed. Characters, dialogue, scene writing, the overall narrative - all show great potential. That potential is not fully realized, and the assembled actors are caged within the bounds of the unfinished space.
None of this is to say that I dislike 'Miracle maker' outright. Actually, as low as my expectations were, this exceeds them. I see the value that just wasn't entirely brought to bear, and I like it nonetheless. It's just that I want to like it more than I do; the feature could and should have been more than it was. Strong ideas, strong themes, a strong cast, and an engaging and heartwarming story are sadly weakened.
How is 'Miracle maker?' Well, I think it is worth watching - not to go out of your way to find, but a fair way to spend 90 minutes if you come across it. Just keep your expectations in check, and maybe you'll be pleasantly, mildly surprised, as I was.
The setting and scenario is established quickly: a frontier town of many decades past, facing hardship on account of the elements, and the hardness of the town's foremost capitalist pig. In addition to that goon, we're also introduced to all the characters, and get a pretty clear picture of their persons and circumstances. We have the hopeful children, the town gossips, the separated lovers, the struggling families, and so on. Beyond that we get eyefuls of rounding details; in general I appreciate the attention to aspects like set design and decoration, costume design, hair and makeup, and so on.
With that said - given the time and place, interiors and wardrobe seem a bit too pristine and impeccably free of soil, dust, or clutter. For as much emphasis as is placed on one character's appearance, the supposed blemish is barely noticeable. Similarly, between a somewhat indelicate hand in Meyers's writing, and a somewhat brisk pace owing to Lyde's direction, scenes and character moments that should have impact are inhibited from naturally manifesting, breathing, and resolving. In turn, the cast's performances are also then dampened. I can't speak to everyone here, but I've seen many in no few other pictures, and found their skills at least adequate, if not admirable. In 'Miracle maker,' the range, nuance, and personality they would bring to their portrayals are broadly artificially restrained, and the depictions are kind of flat as a result.
I don't want to cast aspersions, and even if I did, I'm not sure that any one person's contributions should be singled out as especially deficient. I think it's more that various elements of the movie are sufficiently flawed that the confluence of them all subdues the whole. The heavy-handedness is unfortunate, because were the screenplay given due care, I think the tale would be most fruitful indeed. Characters, dialogue, scene writing, the overall narrative - all show great potential. That potential is not fully realized, and the assembled actors are caged within the bounds of the unfinished space.
None of this is to say that I dislike 'Miracle maker' outright. Actually, as low as my expectations were, this exceeds them. I see the value that just wasn't entirely brought to bear, and I like it nonetheless. It's just that I want to like it more than I do; the feature could and should have been more than it was. Strong ideas, strong themes, a strong cast, and an engaging and heartwarming story are sadly weakened.
How is 'Miracle maker?' Well, I think it is worth watching - not to go out of your way to find, but a fair way to spend 90 minutes if you come across it. Just keep your expectations in check, and maybe you'll be pleasantly, mildly surprised, as I was.