Inappropriate Children's Christmas Movie

Boy, you just never know what you're going to get when you sit down with family to watch a G-rated Christmas cartoon.  

I see a cartoon reindeer, some snow and Santa waving and think the family and I are in for a holiday treat of cuteness.  Taking a break from all the horrible news to just enjoy a cute Christmas cartoon movie. 

The movie I watched with my teen+ kids this weekend was no Frosty the Snowman.  Had my children been young I would have been upset to sit them down to watch it thinking I was getting a cute family friendly G-rated movie.  That is not what the movie "The Flight Before Christmas" delivered.  I had never heard of this movie before, so I had no idea what it was about- I was just going by the cute cover image.  Looks cute right?  As the saying goes, looks can be deceiving.

I am still rather shocked by the basis of the story.  And while I was watching it, I wondered how some parents dealt with the story line, so after the movie my oldest daughter looked up some reviews for me on Amazon. More on those later...

The story is about Niko, a little reindeer boy who doesn't have a father in his life. The reason he doesn't have a father in his life is because his mother had a one night stand (honest, its in the movie), got knocked up by one of Santa's reindeer (she never got his name so she can't even tell her son the name of his father) and had little Niko the following spring unknown to the reindeer she had sex with.  

Here is the scene of little Niko hearing his mother tell the story of how he was conceived when one of Santa's "Flying Forces" reindeer "took her for a spin" one day resulting in her pregnancy - no really watch the video clip she really says that: 

Nice kids Christmas story eh?  There's more. 

Niko wants to fly to prove to other little reindeer (who are teasing him) that his father really is one of Santa's "Flying Forces" reindeer -you see the flying gene gets passed from father to son, so if little Niko can fly he can prove his father is one of Santa's flying reindeer.

After putting the herd in danger from vicious wolves, little Niko decides its time to find his father.  A little flying squirrel has been a step father to little Niko his whole life, but Niko doesn't want a step father, he wants his biological father, so off Niko goes on an adventure to find his biological father.  The step-father squirrel goes with him and along the way, they meet up with Wilma the weasel.  They flee numerous times from a pack of horrible wolves who want to eat them.

(According to some reviews on Amazon, this wolf terrorized more than one child.)

Niko and friends overhear the black wolf's plan for his pack to eat all the flying reindeer to gain their power of flight for themselves and then to eat Santa, thus taking Santa's place on Christmas eve.  The plan finishes with the wolves going home to home eating all the little children sleeping in their beds waiting for Christmas morning.  Did I mention this was rated "G" for little children??

Niko and friends make it to where Santa and his reindeer live only to get in the way of the drunken reindeer (they drink a lot) making a trial flight.  The "santa" falls out of the sleigh, plummets to the ground then bursts into flames.  There is no indication that this is a stuffed or dummy Santa- so children everywhere (read the Amazon comments) were greatly disturbed to see Santa plummet to his death and go up in flames. 

This movie's holiday cheer continues with a lovely DNA song to finger who is Niko's father- all the reindeer admit to taking the ladies out for spins, but none of them will fess up to fathering Niko. 

Nice song for the kids to learn and sing for Christmas eh? 

The reindeer all deny being Niko's father, breaking his heart.  Then they decide to test him- by making him jump off their landing strip into oblivian.  If he flies, one of the reindeer is lying and really did father Niko. If he plummets to his death the Flying Force are in the clear.  

The story goes on...blah, blah, blah, until Niko shows some spunk, believes he can fly and does. There is a battle against the wolves- all the adult drunken reindeer run for their lives leaving little Niko, the squirrel and the Wilma the weasel to fend for themselves.  

Zero moral fiber in these flying reindeer.  

Long story short, they do all manage to survive- even the evil wolves.  Prancer fesses up to hooking up with Niko's mother and Santa talks to Niko thrilling him by giving him a place on the team to pull the sleigh. 

When Niko tries to talk to his father about coming home and seeing Niko's mother again so they can be a happy family together, Prancer stammers and makes excuses about being really busy with fly practice. The perfect Christmas cartoon version of a deadbeat father.

Niko returns home and declares his real father (the squirrel) had been right there with him all along.  

The end. 

Now for the customer reviews on Amazon: 

The Maury Povich review: 

The "hussy" review: 

The kill and eat Santa review:

In Christ and sticking to the Charlie Brown Christmas movie, 

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner 

Bill O'Reilly's dumb Jesus

...that is how Bill O'Reilly portrays God Incarnate in his movie "Killing Jesus".

I recorded "Killing Jesus" and tried to watch it the next day, but it was so awful- truly the most horrible "bible" story I have seen in years.  So horrible that I couldn't make it through the first hour, let alone watch the entire three hour debacle.

Besides all the fiction, O'Reilly rewrites the scriptures and changes the order of things and worst of all depicts our Lord as some clueless mere mortal stumbling through life not knowing anything until his cousin John the Baptist attempts to fill him in.

It was pathetic right from the beginning.

-Mary has amnesia and doesn't recall the Angel Gabriel's words to her (Luke 1:28-38).   Nor does she remember the angels, shepherds or the three Kings who came to pay homage to the new born king - you'd think something like that would leave a lasting impression but not in O'Reilly's version.  Nope, Mary is depicted as clueless and dull-witted as Jesus in this movie.

-Jesus is not shown presented at the Temple where Simeon takes Jesus in his arms and proclaims that salvation has come or his prophecy to Mary about the suffering she will endure because of who she gave birth to. (Luke 2)

-The escape to Egypt happened because Joseph was worried and antsy to get out of there, no angel of the Lord telling them to go and not return until they were told by God (Matt.2:13 and Matt.2:19).  The return is based on a chat worry-wart Joseph had with some traveling Jews after Herod's death.  Pure fiction.

-The worst is poor dumb Jesus...clueless about who he is.  No one remembers the amazing facts surrounding his birth, the prophecy fulfilled, the angels, the wise men...nothing.  It's all a blur as he works hard to be a carpenter like his step dad Joseph- only he's so clueless he doesn't know Joseph wasn't his real father.  Mary with her amnesia forgot to mention the miraculous virginal conception of God Incarnate by the Holy Spirit.  Just slipped her mind!

I gotta give it to the actor playing Jesus, he does a perfect job of looking confused, baffled and just plain old dumb as O'Reilly seems to believe Jesus was.

But I just couldn't take Jesus being depicted as dumb as a pile of rocks.

In all my life, I have never imagined Jesus as walking around confused not knowing who he was/is.  I never imagined Mary forgetting everything that happened to her!  Who could forget an angel telling you you've been chosen by God to carry God Incarnate in your womb?  O'Reilly's Mary manages to forget it all and more.

The movie is insulting and I felt disgusted watching it- especially during Holy Week.

The movie is like an anti-Christian depiction of what an anti-Christian might portray as THEIR VERSION of the story of Jesus minus Christ's Divinity and lots of Sacred Scripture re-writes.  I have to wonder if O'Reilly used a Bible at all or if he wrote this fiction from some pagan anti-Christian source.  This movie is NOT in any way, shape or form something a Christian who knows the Bible and story of Jesus could ever enjoy or recommend.

It's deplorable.  Even worse than the book O'Reilly's publisher asked me to review for him (HERE).

I turned it off and deleted it before I shoved my foot threw my new flat screen.

My time was better spent watching reruns of The Rockford Files on MeTV (I save Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" movie for Good Friday).

Practicing Catholics know its bad when The National Catholic Reporter likes it and declares it "remarkable"!

Remarkably bad maybe!

In my opinion, O'Reilly needs to stick with shouting at his Fox news guests and stay away from a religion he clearly knows little about.



In Christ,


Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner

Why is Fr. Barron endorsing a profanity filled fornication movie?

I just don’t understand Fr. Robert Barron at all.  I know of Fr. Barron from his appearances on EWTN, his assorted DVD's and his "Word on Fire" series.  I did not expect to see him support a teen movie that clearly goes against Catholic teaching for Catholic parents.

As a Catholic parent, I read A LOT about what the Church teaches and has taught on Catholic parenting.  One thing is very clear, BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ALLOW YOUR CHILDREN TO BE SUBJECTED TO (this includes books, movies, television shows, video games etc.).

So when I saw Fr. Barron make a Youtube video ENDORSING the movie "The Fault in our Stars" I was not only shocked but extremely disappointed in Fr. Barron.  This is another example of the Church teaching one thing and a priest doing the opposite.

How can a priest put his stamp of approval on a movie that 1) takes the name of the Lord in vain, 2) depicts fornication (two teens having sex), and 3) uses terms like “a$$hole” and “bulls**t” and “freaking douche”?  

Is this what Fr. Barron (according to his Youtube video) wants our Catholic youth watching?  Really?

The movie “The Fault in our Stars” is about two teens dealing with cancer and what, if anything awaits them (all of us) after death.  But the issue I have is what else is included in the story- as mentioned above.

Movie clip: 

Here is Fr. Barron’s Youtube video endorsement of the movie:

Christian review of “The Fault in our Stars” by Christian magazine Thriving Family writes:

Authority roles:  Both Hazel's and Augustus' parents are loving, caring, and long suffering. Augustus' parents make him watch television in the living room rather than in the basement when he first brings Hazel to his house. Hazel's mother has devoted herself to taking care of her daughter. She insists Hazel attend the support group when she thinks Hazel is depressed. Later, Hazel discovers that her mother has been taking courses from a college and that she will soon get her degree in counseling so she can help other families in similar situations to theirs. Although Hazel's mother accompanies them to Amsterdam, she has no hesitation about leaving Hazel and Augustus alone. In fact, they have sex in his hotel room while she explores the museums.

Profanity/Graphic violence:  The dialogue is laced with profanity. H---, b--ch, bulls--t, b--tard and a variation of the f-word are used. A-- is used alone and with bad, hole and clown. God's name is used alone and with d--n and oh my. The phrase sweet holy Lord is used as well as sweet Jesus Christ. Other objectionable words are p---, p---ed, sucks, freaking douche, dumbbutt crap, gosh dang, boobs and boobies.
The only violence in the book is in the descriptions of the video game that Augustus and Isaac like to play. There are some fairly graphic descriptions of Hazel's and Augustus' illnesses. When Hazel is in the ICU, Augustus describes the black cancer fluid being drained from her lungs. Augustus soils the bed and vomits on himself as his body deteriorates.

Kissing/Sex/Homosexuality:   Isaac and his girlfriend kiss outside the church after a support group meeting. Hazel can tell that Isaac is feeling his girlfriend's breast while they kiss. Hazel's friend alludes to wanting to have sex with Augustus. Hazel looks up pictures of Augustus' old girlfriend on the Internet and sees several of the couple kissing. Augustus jokes that he thinks his grand gesture of including her in his wish should have gotten him laid. Augustus and Hazel kiss passionately in Anne Frank's house. Later that afternoon they have sex in his hotel room. It is intimated they have sex the following morning as well. When Augustus learns that Isaac has a computer program that will read his emails, he tells him that he'll send Isaac porn. After Augustus dies, Hazel and Isaac play his favorite video game but tell the characters to do sexual things like hump the wall instead of actually trying to win the game.

For me, this is NOT something a Catholic priest should endorse.

I am very disappointed in Fr. Barron for the grave scandal his endorsement might give to our youth.

Catechism: #2353 -Fornication is carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman. It is gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children. Moreover, it is a grave scandal when there is corruption of the young.

In Christ,

Julie @ Connecticut Catholic Corner



PS - fans of the book who want to tell me about the "love" the book and movie depict can save your rantings and hate mail- you won't change my mind.  Anyone who fornicates and doesn't repent is GOING TO HELL.  
Fornication depicted in books and movies is CORRUPTING society. That isn't love, it is hate. Catholic priests, laity and parents NEED to teach that reality, not the misguided lie that 'if its love God is ok with it'.  If you love someone, you don't fornicate with them.  God is NEVER ok with fornication- its a mortal sin that sends people to hell.  Period.

Movie Review Source:  http://www.thrivingfamily.com/Family/Media/book-reviews/f/fault-in-our-stars.aspx