The Christmas Cottage

This movie moves slowly. This is a VERY different type of thing. Sometimes I am in the mood for a slow-mover (so, this one rises to the top of the list). Also, there are no "kookie" gimmicks used to fill-it-out. These things, alone, make this a special viewing.

Beyond that, I enjoyed Peter O'Toole's role (dying inside because of his wife's death, looking for inspiration to paint again). Add to that, a familiar cast of faces, including: Ed Asner as a bright (but subdued) role of an art dealer. Chris Elliott also stands out as the large-ego'd mayor of Placerville

Shake, and pour into a tall glass. In the world of Christmas movies with $12 scripts, this one stands out.

"Christmas Cottage" is an autobiographical film about Thomas Kinkade (1958-2012), the "painter of light." I had seen Kinkade's work in shops when I lived on the West Coast from 1987 to 2007. I've also heard and read some of his recent history – up until his death at age 54 in 2012. Based on newspaper reviews, it seems that some critics loved his painting while others didn't. I'm not an art expert or even an aficionado. But I do like some of his work that I've seen.

Kinkade came from a broken home with poor to modest beginnings and rose to super success as a commercial artist. In the course of that, he had a religious experience of some sort that molded his character and guided much of his work for many years. He spoke of the importance of family, and he and his wife had four daughters. But his success might serve as a classic tale of fame and fortune bringing ruin to one's life. In his last years, his character changed. He became an alcoholic, had extra- marital relations, was separated from his wife, was living with a girlfriend, and had run-ins with the law. He died in Monte Sereno, CA, on April 6, 2012. An autopsy fixed the cause of death as "acute intoxication" from alcohol and Valium.

In watching this film, I set aside what I knew about Kinkade, his life and his art. I don't know how close this film is to real events, but the opening credits say that the movie is inspired by true events. It takes place over one Christmas holiday season when Kinkade would have been 19 or 20 years old. Everything else aside, this film is a good story that stands on its own. Its Christmas setting makes it a good film for this genre. Indeed, the location around Placerville in California's gold country is ideal. I've been to Placerville, Plymouth, Sutter Creek, Ione, and Jackson. The seasonal climate in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains evokes a holiday atmosphere.

Others have described the plot, which is very good and original for a Christmas story. The screenplay, direction and camera work all are very good. The acting is excellent for the most part. Jared Padalecki is very good as Thomas "Thom" Kinkade. Marcia Gay Harden is superb in the role of his mother, Maryanne. Aaron Ashmore does very well as Thom's brother, Pat. The one role that seemed overly played, maybe even hammy, was that of Thom's father, Bill. Richard Burgi played the part. Kinkade's father may have had such a hammy personality, but it comes across in the movie as far too exaggerated.

A real plus for the film was getting Peter O'Toole to play Glen. This was a sizable part in the movie as Glen Wesman. It's based on Glenn Anthony Wessels who was an established painter, muralist, instructor and mentor of Kinkade. He lived out his remaining years in Placerville, dying at the age of 87 in 1982. Whether or not the real Glenn said some of the things that O'Toole does here, some lines are real gems.

In one scene, Glen says, "Don't reduce art to something that's about the artist. Art isn't about the artists. It's about life. Life … beauty … love … emotion. Art should bring emotion that can topple tyranny." Tom, "I had forgotten, Glen." Glen, "Art crosses all borders, surpasses all languages." Later, he says, "An image can change lives. You can introduce men to their souls." And, he admonishes Thom later, "Give your very best always."

I noted a couple of reviewers who thought O'Toole's performance wasn't very good. Because someone may not like a character, or how that character is portrayed, doesn't mean always that the actor didn't perform the role well. I think that must be the case with O'Toole in this role. Peter O'Toole surely didn't need the money – whatever amount he was paid for his role here. Nor did he need to keep acting. No, O'Toole took this part because he wanted it. He said so in an interview that came with the DVD of this film. On that basis, I would trust this great actor to give a performance that he thought befitting of the role, the character, and the time and place. I saw him as thoughtful, philosophic and funny. He was a man dealing with his diminishing abilities brought on by age with a sense of humor and perhaps reluctant acceptance of the inevitable. But never did his spirit wane or falter.

This is an interesting and entertaining film for the holidays. It's one the whole family should enjoy over Christmas. Older children from broken families may find a message of hope and peace for their lives, families and futures.

Thomas Kinkade's Home for Christmas is an old fashioned film, yes. It fits very well with Kinkade's art; indeed, the film is a wise nod to his magical paintings. Much like his work it can draw cynics and negative, self-proclaimed pundits like a magnet draws iron filings. The story is essentially the inspiration behind Kinkade's central work and his raison d'être…how it all came to be. For many of us, especially those puzzled by the scribbling and bizarre compositions that pass for abstract art…work that must come while the artist has his tongue deeply embedded into his cheek, and further, work that can be analyzed and described in 1,000 different ways, each a product of the imagination… the charm of the alternative Kinkade depictions of the dream-like reality of a place where the heart wants to be is a respite and a place for us to rest in this weary, war-torn world of endless crime and violence.

As a filmmaker and writer of some note I found the production a bit uneven but then there were moments that were spot-on and in the balance the film succeeds very well. The cast is fine, the production values are very acceptable and the story, which could have used a bit more imagination and forward thrust, ends well and succeeds to give the film its reason for being.

The story of how Thomas Kinkade obtained his gift is fine but there's a far more salient, exciting and bigger story to be told because the man happens to be one of the most successful creative commercial artists ever produced by Americana. We look forward to that story on film, perhaps with a bigger budget, more exciting production values and a stronger script. There is nothing that pleases the American (and perhaps to a greater degree today) world audiences… like the story of success up from the bottom rung of the ladder.

We watched this movie in on TV and thought it was a good family film. Many of the reviews shown here were written by people who wrote the criticisms of the movie before seeing it. Many wrote awful reviews before the movie even came out. Doesn't seem too smart. It seems a lot of reviewers didn't like the movie because it was just too "nice." (No sex, violence or cussing) Again, I have to wonder about these reviewers intelligence when they know it is a movie about Christmas. What did they expect? Sure, it may have been a little corny in places but that's OK, it's designed as light entertainment, not a major Hollywood production. If it had been written to win awards in Hollywood then it would have had the sex, violence and lots of cussing. Kind of nice this movie didn't.

This biographical TV movie takes a look at artist Thomas Kinkade (played by 'Supernatural''s Jared Padalecki) and how he was inspired to paint his most famous piece: The Christmas Cottage.

While not a fan of Thomas Kinkade myself, I am a fan of Jared Padalecki and thought this looked like an interested piece of work to see him in. It's a rare time to not see Padalecki fighting demons or serial killers, so it'd be good to see him trying something new. While Padalecki did a fairly good job, the film was simply mediocre. The narration was annoying and trite and the overall story was far too hokey and cheesy to be taken seriously. It will work well with fans of Hallmark Movie-of-the-Weeks and the like, but anyone looking for some quality, illuminating cinema. . . move on, this one isn't for you.

Final verdict: 6/10.