Merolliv I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Candida It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

atinder Miracle On 34th Street 1973I have seen the other two movies, never saw this movie before l , this was not as good as the original or 1994 remakeI just could not get into this movie at all, This movie was missing something, I can not put my finger on it!I just didn't enjoy it, while i was watching, it took me while to get into the movie, as most of the movie scene from scene remake but scenes felt empty and stillthe acting was okay from the cast 4/10

tforbes-2 The 1973 version of Miracle on 34th Street was not the first remake, as one was done for television around 1959 or so. Remakes are not necessarily a good idea, and this might be the case here.However, this version cannot compare to the 1947 original because it is a sort of different animal.Think of a Christmas special with some of the grittiness one finds in such a movie as The French Connection. Yes, this was shot in New York in the early 1970s, complete with the battered urban landscape to go with it. Unlike the 1994 version, there is no cheery cinematography; instead, we have a bleak urban landscape. And the bleakness is most appropriate, since the 1947 original has a noir side to it as well.I prefer to take this version on its own terms, because my memories of 1973 are so vivid. I found it a fascinating, rewarding time. Hence, like one of the other reviewers, I am going to be prejudiced. And believe me, one could do worse when it comes to Christmas specials.One note: I saw toward the opening sequences a 1974 AMC Matador coupe. It makes me wonder if this was actually shot on a tight time schedule, since the coupe would have been new in the fall of 1973. Definitely a fascinating touch!

Donal Fagan Except for his interaction with the staff psychologist, Sebastian Cabot seemed an affable enough Santa Claus, but the writers removed any hint of magic from his portrayal of Kris Kringle. Speaking Spanish wasn't nearly as surprising as speaking Dutch, and the possibly divinely-inspired intervention by the post office was changed into a ruse by Bill, his lawyer (David Hartman). Given Kringle's condescension towards Dr Sawyer (Roddy McDowall), I almost didn't blame Sawyer for taunting the old man.The little girl was cute, but not a great actress. Jane Alexander must have had a no touching clause in her contract because Karen's romance with Bill was hard to discern. At the end when he proposed, she sort of nodded while they were standing at least three feet apart - which made for a clumsy ending.Of the supporting cast, Jim Backus was almost invisible, McDowell was fun to watch as always, the actor playing Alfred seemed more like Quasimodo at first, David Doyle played Mr Macy like Scrooge, and Tom Bosley was fairly humorous as the harried judge. The DA and the old pol were very minor characters in this version.

ingrid-brooks This version is by far the best of Miracle on 34th Street! I like the original, but there was far too much 'acting', where in this version it was real. My children have asked many times why it is not shown any more, and where we could buy the DVD or download it if that fails. They would love for my grandchildren to see this version. One of my daughters could have been the little girl in this movie. She firmly believed in Santa Claus until she was 12, not the one at the mall or in the parades, but the real one that brought the presents that were under the tree on Christmas morning. We need to bring this version back to TV to bring magic back to Christmas.