Imagine the movie tagline... "Two families, forced together; one group are elitist snobs who believe they're better and more virtuous than anyone else, the other group welcome their makeshift family into their lives without reservation, judgement or animosity for the holidays, but together they'll learn the true value of Christmas together."
From that, you would expect the old "rich snobs Vs down-to-earth hard-working/poor family" trope, but in this case they've flipped how the families act. That itself could have been an interesting concept, but in the usual examples, the 'rich' family learn the error of their ways, and learn to enjoy Christmas with the normal/everyday/poor family. In this version, the everyday family act like spoilt brats and elitist snobs, and we're still expected to side with them and like them.
The first film wasn't great, but it was a bit of silly festive fun. This sequel is, honestly, quite awful. There are a few relatively amusing scenes that could have aided toward a better movie, which is why I'm not giving it one star, but they are few and far between. It's also reasonably acted and produced (for this kind of movie).
James (Asa Butterfield) and Hayley (Cora Kirk), are the archetypal "rich lad from, aristocratic family" and "poor girl from peasant stock", who's families collide in a mishmash of preconceptions and stereotypes. It kind of worked in the first film, but it was aided by the two leads spending the film apart, because you didn't get the chance to feel the lack of chemistry that comes over in this lacklustre sequel.
But... On to the 'good' stuff... The main story revolves around Hayley getting the wrong end of the stick, and thinking James is going to propose. During this initial setup, she and her family enjoy a luxurious stay in a five star hotel, taking advantage of the clothes and food, whilst James' family end up in a hovel that that was meant for Hayley's family (all because they were unwilling to accept the generosity of James' family - in addition, the location is too absurd even for the 'rich/poor' contrast of the story). Bear in mind, though, Hayley's family are more than willing to take FULL advantage of the luxury during the accidental switch.
Later, when James discovers Hayley's mistaken assumption, he decides (albeit drunkenly) to propose anyway, because he had wanted to and only held back by her earlier request. In typical "oh no! I can see what's coming!" fashion, he practices his sincere proposal with an old friend. Hayley of course witnesses this for the sake of drama, then acts like the most spoilt brat possible...
For starters, James had not seen his friend in years, so would not have been making a genuine proposal to her at this point, and Hayley knew that. In addition, she has also discovered James has an incredible opportunity to go to film school abroad and she acts all put-out, as if he had not been willing to tell her, and acting as if it was a personal slight against her, because, despite his offer to take her with him, she's "not a charity case and can't afford to be in his world." Bear in mind, at this point James had only learnt about his opportunity the day before, and had clearly been trying to find a chance to tell her about it during the day... So he gets his good fortune thrown back in his face and expected to feel guilty, as if it's a personal insult to Hayley. She moans about how she would always be the odd-one-out in his world, despite being welcomed into his family with open arms. So, who is the one with the issues there?
Simultaneously, Hayley's family throw James' family's generosity back in their faces and act all insulted by it, as if they had been dragged kicking and screaming to this glorious holiday in the snowy Alps, when they REALLY just wanted to be home for Christmas (in Macclesfield). Remember, they had been perfectly willing to revel in every moment of luxury till this point... At the other family's expense, who had welcomed them with open arms and were totally willing to pay for everything. The worst they could be accused of is the father's American girlfriend being a little egotistical. She wasn't even nasty or horrible to them! Quite the opposite, she welcomed them and spent time with them and eventually had fun with them, despite their boorish behaviour.
Then, after many protestations to make the "rich" family feel guilty, Hayley's family decide to fly home (on Christmas day, no less...). James does the expected thing of stopping the plane to apologise for doing nothing wrong, and then the families all spend a 'happy' Christmas together again. Hayley's family are willing to accept the generosity of James's family once more, of course (because it's convenient), despite still moaning that "Christmas should be at home."
James' father's American girlfriend is even expected to apologise for implying the ungrateful, elitist snobs should have shown a little gratitude earlier, after acting like spoilt brats!
Overall, it ends up being an unsatisfying tale, because you feel James almost made a lucky escape from the snobs who looked down their noses at he and his family but, instead, the fool chases after the ungrateful girl anyway, who then condescends to give him a 'second chance'...
From that, you would expect the old "rich snobs Vs down-to-earth hard-working/poor family" trope, but in this case they've flipped how the families act. That itself could have been an interesting concept, but in the usual examples, the 'rich' family learn the error of their ways, and learn to enjoy Christmas with the normal/everyday/poor family. In this version, the everyday family act like spoilt brats and elitist snobs, and we're still expected to side with them and like them.
The first film wasn't great, but it was a bit of silly festive fun. This sequel is, honestly, quite awful. There are a few relatively amusing scenes that could have aided toward a better movie, which is why I'm not giving it one star, but they are few and far between. It's also reasonably acted and produced (for this kind of movie).
James (Asa Butterfield) and Hayley (Cora Kirk), are the archetypal "rich lad from, aristocratic family" and "poor girl from peasant stock", who's families collide in a mishmash of preconceptions and stereotypes. It kind of worked in the first film, but it was aided by the two leads spending the film apart, because you didn't get the chance to feel the lack of chemistry that comes over in this lacklustre sequel.
But... On to the 'good' stuff... The main story revolves around Hayley getting the wrong end of the stick, and thinking James is going to propose. During this initial setup, she and her family enjoy a luxurious stay in a five star hotel, taking advantage of the clothes and food, whilst James' family end up in a hovel that that was meant for Hayley's family (all because they were unwilling to accept the generosity of James' family - in addition, the location is too absurd even for the 'rich/poor' contrast of the story). Bear in mind, though, Hayley's family are more than willing to take FULL advantage of the luxury during the accidental switch.
Later, when James discovers Hayley's mistaken assumption, he decides (albeit drunkenly) to propose anyway, because he had wanted to and only held back by her earlier request. In typical "oh no! I can see what's coming!" fashion, he practices his sincere proposal with an old friend. Hayley of course witnesses this for the sake of drama, then acts like the most spoilt brat possible...
For starters, James had not seen his friend in years, so would not have been making a genuine proposal to her at this point, and Hayley knew that. In addition, she has also discovered James has an incredible opportunity to go to film school abroad and she acts all put-out, as if he had not been willing to tell her, and acting as if it was a personal slight against her, because, despite his offer to take her with him, she's "not a charity case and can't afford to be in his world." Bear in mind, at this point James had only learnt about his opportunity the day before, and had clearly been trying to find a chance to tell her about it during the day... So he gets his good fortune thrown back in his face and expected to feel guilty, as if it's a personal insult to Hayley. She moans about how she would always be the odd-one-out in his world, despite being welcomed into his family with open arms. So, who is the one with the issues there?
Simultaneously, Hayley's family throw James' family's generosity back in their faces and act all insulted by it, as if they had been dragged kicking and screaming to this glorious holiday in the snowy Alps, when they REALLY just wanted to be home for Christmas (in Macclesfield). Remember, they had been perfectly willing to revel in every moment of luxury till this point... At the other family's expense, who had welcomed them with open arms and were totally willing to pay for everything. The worst they could be accused of is the father's American girlfriend being a little egotistical. She wasn't even nasty or horrible to them! Quite the opposite, she welcomed them and spent time with them and eventually had fun with them, despite their boorish behaviour.
Then, after many protestations to make the "rich" family feel guilty, Hayley's family decide to fly home (on Christmas day, no less...). James does the expected thing of stopping the plane to apologise for doing nothing wrong, and then the families all spend a 'happy' Christmas together again. Hayley's family are willing to accept the generosity of James's family once more, of course (because it's convenient), despite still moaning that "Christmas should be at home."
James' father's American girlfriend is even expected to apologise for implying the ungrateful, elitist snobs should have shown a little gratitude earlier, after acting like spoilt brats!
Overall, it ends up being an unsatisfying tale, because you feel James almost made a lucky escape from the snobs who looked down their noses at he and his family but, instead, the fool chases after the ungrateful girl anyway, who then condescends to give him a 'second chance'...