Tied for the best movie I have ever seen

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

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

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

I really wish I'd bailed on this film after the first 30 minutes.So we start with a very unhappy marriage -- with a workaholic protagonist -- and end with an unsatisfying and unconvincing resolution. (If the protagonist is meant to be transformed/reborn at the end, shouldn't he at least show a little emotion?)Another reviewer mentioned having to pay attention and perhaps my concentration lapsed a little, but I did wonder at one point whether there was a "Christmas miracle" that saw a wooden baby from a Nativity scene transmogrify into a flesh-and-blood baby. (That, at least, might have explained the wooden performance.)And while I thought the Judge's motivation was reasonably clear, I never understood the Sheriff's. It seemed like the Sheriff was there as a plot device to throw the protagonist together with the Judge (i.e. by slashing his tyres).I suspect the blame lies at the door of a poor script and poor casting, esp. of the protagonist.

Christmas Child is better than a lot of movies I can name that cost ten times as much to make. I thought the opening scenes between Moses and Megan Follows were excellent and they had good chemistry and excellent dialog. Sadly, when Follows leaves the story, it seems to lose a lot of energy and slow way down.While not full of holes, neither is it seamless or easy to follow especially from an emotional standpoint. The messages are highly positive but delivered in a slow way through the eyes of the troubled protagonist who seems to fail to appreciate what he is given. His emotional distance and alienation do not "develop" along with the story thereby keeping the emotonal tempo from moving upward to match what he is learning on his "Quest".The final problem I had with it was that the return of Follows to the story (thereby wrapping up a major, major plot line) is given short shrift and bypasses the serious and emotionally fulfilling aspects. I have a feeling that this would have been handled at more and better length in the written version.So, for trying to tell a good story and show with some realism a "slice of life" that is far more common and more real than typical Hollywood tripe, I give it credit. The actors are very good throughout and there are many moments that will make you think.

When Jack went to the courthouse to obtain his birth records, he gave his date of birth as December 24, 1964. When Jack was escorted by the judge to the graveyard/tombstone sight and revealed Carmen's tombstone, the date of her death was December 26, 1963, two days after giving birth to Jack. How could Carmen be Jack's birth mother if she gave birth a year prior to Jack's birthday? And what was the meaning of the picture of the Reverend with two boys? The film lead you to believe that the current Reverend could be Jack's brother. The actors even look alike. Was one of the boys Jack and the other his brother who is the current Reverend?

William R. Moses really out-did himself this time. He brings life and depth to all his parts. He's a truly believable artist. Great Smile and wonderful personality. I was pleased that he chose to do a Max Lucado story, One of my favorite stars in a movie by one of my favorite authors. What a great pair. I hope they do more stories together in the future. William brings quality to any movie or show he plays in. He has a great attitude and gives powerful performances. He is so versatile in his acting. I have seen him play heroes and villains, all done with great talent and charm. I adore William R. Moses and hope one day I would be so fortunate to meet him.