MovieChat Forums > Miracle on 34th Street (1994) Discussion > The 5 Most Wildly Illegal Court Rulings ...

The 5 Most Wildly Illegal Court Rulings in Movie History by Cracked


http://www.cracked.com/article_18815_the-5-most-wildly-illegal-court-rulings-in-movie-history_p2.html


The Crime: Assault, Insanity

The Ruling: Sane and Santa Claus

Stop and think about the implications of this. The judge basically gave this one guy the power to lay claim to every Christmas card, decoration and jingle that bears his name or likeness and claim a royalty for its use.

So LOL... discuss...

reply

[deleted]

I could suspend my disbelief in the original. Even though the implication would not hold up in a real world courthouse, the idea sounds credible in the movie. Remember, we aren't supposed to suspend our disbelief, but the film makers have to get us to do it.

In the original, the post office, despite the reason for the decision being questionable, decide that this man is Santa Clause. It is decided in court that they have no choice but to recognize him as Santa Clause.

In the remake "We believe in God, so Santa must be real, and this man is Santa." What kind of *beep* is that?

reply

Isn't that how the law works? You persuade the judge and the jury to see things your way?

"Do you even remember what you came here to find?"

reply

In the remake "We believe in God, so Santa must be real, and this man is Santa." What kind of *beep* is that?

It's "thank god they gave us all money to make this piece of sh!t movie" kind of cr@p, that's what it is.




I want the doctor to take your picture so I can look at you from inside as well.

reply

It kills me that the remake takes itself seriously.

It's clear in the original the the judge isn't that good of a judge and he's just looking for any excuse not to rule against Kringle because he wants to get re-elected. He doesn't care that his ruling is bunk. In the remake, the judge seems to think he's had some sort of epiphany about the nature of faith and reality.

reply

I like the implication that Kris Kringle could trademark all things Christmas!

It's that man again!!

reply

Actually both rulings were unnecessary. The state's burden was that Kris Kringle was a a danger to himself and others. If you follow the case carefully you would see that the state didn't prove their point. Therefore the Judge could have summarily dismissed the case and released him. Before this movie came out a law school actually had students prove this to be a valid verdict. (Sorry I cant remember which one)

reply

Yeah, but it was a different time and place . Today, old Kris would be a Senator. We have kids today run staples and other hardware through the fleshy parts of their faces and other private areas and demand puppies and Crayolas when they get triggered, but they're all sane..

The Judge certainly had the power to summarily dismiss the case against Kris, but he was afraid that doing so would affect his appointment. Let's not forget that this stranger called himself Kris Kringle, insisted he was Santa, and did indeed thump Sawyer's skull.

Still, the judge was looking for any possible way that he could dismiss the case without looking like he was showing sympathy or favoritism and the Post Office unwittingly provided it.

reply