Three Wise Women (2010)

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

I wondered when someone would think of a movie plot that brought people out of the past and future together with the present. Well, "Three Wise Women" is such a film. That it's the same person at three different periods in Liz/Ellie/Beth's life only adds to the bizarre aspects of this sci-fi fantasy. By its title and time of the year this is supposed to be a Christmas movie. But in reality, it's a far-fetched fantasy plot that is more sci-fi than Christmas (think of "Back to the Future," "Doctor Who," etc.). The film starts out with the date 2040 and all kinds of traffic in the sky. This is the old Hollywood approach to showing futuristic developments. Then it bounces back to 1989 - before the Internet. Then forward another 16 years. All of this time travel is allowed - outside of the screenplay calling for it of course, by the power of a guardian angel. Naturally, as with other modern renditions of angels, this one has to be funny and frustrated. It's hard to judge the acting in this TV movie because of the far-out plot and all the bouncing around. The screenplay is terrible. One thing that stands out as not being very accurate is the make-up for Dr. Liz (played by Amy Huberman). The film repeatedly shows her not sleeping at night. Yet she looks to be a beauty queen each day. Anyone who misses that much sleep is going to show big shadows under the eyes and have a lack of energy -- no matter how much coffee they drink. The idea that this film is a modern rendition of Charles Dickens's "Christmas Carol" is laughable. This isn't an old-fashioned type of Christmas film by any stretch of the imagination. It fits in that category of romance films released during the holiday season. It's not a very good movie - I watched it only because it came in a multi-film DVD purchase.

BEWARE OF FALSE REVIEWS & REVIEWERS. SOME REVIEWERS HAVE ONLY ONE REVIEW TO THEIR NAME. NOW WHEN ITS A POSITIVE REVIEW THAT TELLS ME THEY WERE INVOLVED WITH THE MOVIE. IF ITS A NEGATIVE REVIEW THEN THEY MIGHT HAVE A GRUDGE AGAINST THE FILM . I HAVE REVIEWED OVER 200 HOLIDAY FILMS. I HAVE NO AGENDA.This film is not as bad as other reviewers have posted. It's not fantastic but it is worth watching. In this film a girl around Christmas witnesses her father having an affair. and it shatters her. She now goes through the motions of life without experiences of love and joy that life has to offer her.Years after she witnesses her father affair her guardian angel is sent to show her the error her ways. She is now a successful doctor and getting married but is she happy? If you see this popping up on TV don't avoid it. It has a message about "love" and "forgiving".If you truly want to see a great version of "A Christmas Carol" then watch the 1938 Version with Reginald Owen as Scrooge. That film seems to get better with age.

This reworking of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" is pleasant, even interesting, but nothing most viewers would want to see more than once.The "ghosts" in this incarnation of the tale are the main character's past and future selves, and her elfin guardian angel, Tom (Hugh O'Conor).At this writing, there are some confusions in the public knowledge regarding this film.1. Why does the IMDb data base list the USA as the film's country of origin, when all the actors are Irish? 2. Why does the IMDb one-line plot summary say, "A woman set to get married on Christmas Eve...," when the bride to be says in the movie's dialog that her wedding date will be December 26? Confusions aside, the best way to understand this film is to watch it.On the other hand, in an attempt maintain clarity, the principal character's three incarnations are given different nicknames for the three times in her life that appear in the film (and for the three actors that play her): Ellie (Lauren Coe), Ellen/Liz (Amy Huberman), and Beth (Fionnula Flanagan).One thing that's not confusing, at least to this viewer, is the career potential for Lauren Coe, who plays young Ellie, and Ellen's ersatz assistant. Methinks that as she becomes more well-known, comparisons to Ellen Page will be inevitable.

I know that Hallmark have a very specific audience they are trying to reach, so please forgive me if I am biased by not being in their target demographic.Basically, the movie is a retelling of A Christmas Carol (you know, Scrooge visited by 3 ghosts to help change his ways - Charles Dickens), only it's three Irish women (supposedly) and it's a Guardian Angel instead of a Ghost. I'm not really sure, but anyway.Did it work? No it did not. The script was laughable, and aside from Fionnula Flanagan (this movie was far beneath her) the acting was awful. It was a good plot idea, but it fell flat. Dickens must be turning in his grave. We switched over to "Scrooged" half way, a much better reworking of Dicken's classic novel.Hallmark have made it their business to do heartfelt uplifting movies every Christmas, what they lack is the ability. I think reruns of other classic movies in this genre would make much more sense at this time of year. There's many, many to choose from.