One of the most polarizing Christmas movies ever released is *The Polar Express*. Based on the children's book of the same name by Chris Van Allsburg and directed by the talented Robert Zemeckis, known for classics like *Back to the Future* and *Forrest Gump*, the film premiered in 2004 and received mixed reviews. Critics often pointed out the underdeveloped characters and the uncanny nature of the motion capture animation. However, since its release, the movie has garnered more favorable reviews from audiences, particularly the kids who grew up watching it annually around Christmas time. I’ll admit that I was once one of those kids. It saddens me to say that I no longer see it as a true Christmas classic, but it's undeniable that the things this movie gets right still keep me returning almost every Christmas season.
On Christmas Eve, Hero Boy (Josh Hutcherson) is beginning to doubt the existence of Santa Claus when he is suddenly woken up by a train magically parked outside his street. A conductor (Tom Hanks) takes him aboard the train known as The Polar Express which is set on course to arrive at the North Pole to meet Santa. Hero Boy starts to have doubts but with the help of some unexpected friends, he’ll find his way to move past his doubts and believe once more in the magic of Christmas.
The Story takes the source material from the book and attempts to stretch it into an hour-and-a-half-long film, with varying results. The writers were genuinely trying to remain faithful to the spirit and message of the picture book. However, this dedication can also be a downfall, inadvertently creating issues in the story's narrative. The biggest problem with the movie is the excessive padding. The narrative often tries too hard to make specific scenarios feel epic, even when it doesn't need to do so. For instance, losing a ticket or the train sliding on ice seems a bit extreme compared to the book's overall tone. While some added elements, such as a mysterious hobo character representing the main character’s doubts and fears and a deeper exploration of the North Pole setting, sound intriguing on paper, they ultimately consume too much time and distract from the message that the book successfully conveyed in a shorter format. Fortunately, unlike many other children’s book adaptations from that era, this film generally avoids dated pop culture references and bathroom humor, which helps to keep the story timeless and faithful to Chris Van Allsburg’s vision. The Christmas spirit and messages are potent, but the unnecessary embellishments and the desire to make things more grandiose than they need to be, unfortunately, detract from the overall experience. It makes me wonder if "The Polar Express" story could have been better executed in a shorter format.
The Characters in the movie are somewhat underdeveloped. Most of them, especially the main characters, do not have names. I can understand this choice, as the writers aimed to remain faithful to the original book, where the characters are also unnamed. However, it is unfortunate that many characters lack depth, and their personalities are not strong. While a short story can afford to have unnamed characters with minimal personality, an audience spending an hour and a half with these characters would benefit from more well-rounded portrayals. The kids in the movie are quite underdeveloped, but it's not the fault of the voice actors. We only get to know four of the children and to be fair, they do a decent job of presenting identifiable personalities and interesting character arcs. However, their characters are too simplistic for a feature film, which restricts them from evolving beyond their one-dimensional traits and makes them feel less like real individuals. Tom Hanks, on the other hand, has a lot on his plate. Not only does he play the conductor and the hobo, but he also performs motion capture for the boy and other characters. I love Tom Hanks, but he might not be my first choice to portray multiple characters simultaneously. Was this a clever way to foreshadow that all the characters represent different aspects of the boy’s personality? Or was Robert Zemeckis simply too frugal to hire other actors for the roles that Hanks takes on? Regardless, Tom Hanks gives 100% in his performances, even if the quality of writing can vary between the characters he plays. I can see that every actor, especially Tom Hanks, is pouring their hearts into these roles; however, their personalities leave much to be desired.
The Animation is arguably the most polarizing aspect of the film, as it was one of the first movies to be animated almost entirely using motion capture. Motion capture involves live actors wearing special suits to record their movements, which are then used to create animated characters on screen. While this technique has been successful in live-action films like The Lord of the Rings and the Pirates of the Caribbean franchises, it is evident that this 2004 movie was attempting to achieve something that wasn't truly feasible at the time: creating digital humans that could express a wide range of emotions with realism. In my opinion, the humans in this film appear a bit lifeless and off-putting, which eventually makes the characters seem too uncanny for me to enjoy. I understand that this was not the filmmakers' true intent; rather, the technology had significant limitations that prevented them from fully achieving their creative vision. That said, I can at least appreciate that the backgrounds are beautifully designed and evoke a warm, Christmassy atmosphere. The colors contribute to a cozy and even timeless feeling throughout the film. I also commend the filmmakers for their effort to make things visually interesting and to take the viewer on a magical journey through the winter landscapes. While the uncanny nature of the human characters and the occasional distraction of the 3D elements could detract from the overall experience, I recognize that the filmmakers had good intentions. Their ambition to make this new animation medium work is admirable, even if the results are a bit mixed for me, and would have been better if they did this movie in live-action or a different animation style.
The Music and Songs are one of the biggest saving graces for me. Composer Alan Silverstein and songwriter Glen Ballard showcase their talents by creating a cozy yet epic score that combines beautiful melodies with some undeniably catchy tunes. Silverstein’s score is well crafted, even if it can become a bit repetitive to hear the movie’s main theme played every three minutes; it remains quite lovely overall. On the other hand, the songs are excellent and even iconic. Many of us recognize the song "Believe," performed by Josh Groban during the end credits, but there are plenty of other enjoyable tracks such as "Hot Chocolate" and "When Christmas Comes to Town." These songs offer a unique kind of enjoyment, regardless of the context. Once again, Alan Silverstein’s score shines in another Robert Zemeckis-directed film, and Glen Ballard has composed memorable songs that are sure to linger in the audience's minds long after the movie is over.
Although this movie may be worse than I remembered, I still consider it a guilty pleasure. The story is quite barebones, the characters are underdeveloped, and the animation can be unsettling and uncanny. Despite these significant flaws, I find myself watching it almost every year because it has a cozy and warm feel to it. Robert Zemeckis and his talented team genuinely tried their best to create a timeless Christmas classic, and in some ways, they succeeded. This movie remains beloved, particularly among those of us who grew up in the 2000s and watched it every Christmas. It's hard to explain why I keep returning to this film, considering its many issues and the fact that the book is far superior. While it may not rank among my favorite Christmas movies, I still derive enjoyment from it, despite it arguably being a poor adaptation of the original material. Compared to other lesser adaptations of children's books, like the live-action Grinch movie, I can at least acknowledge that this film made an effort to be faithful to its source material, whether that was for better or for worse.
(Final Grade: C+)