Miss M When I first started the movie I though "Well, this girl has everything, a good job, a boyfriend who is not an idiot, and she seems happy with it" Ha, couldn't be more wrong. I really checked this, the main character, "Mary" doesn't ACTUALLY smile until the movie reached the hour (maybe a small grin before). I read a review in which it was stated that there is nothing about thanksgiving and it's all about the romance, let me tell you something: WRONG. I think that the main plot here is Mary trying to enjoy Thanksgiving again after what happened with her parents. And it's done thanks to the memories in the house her aunt left her. The romance can be considered a sub plot. Speaking of subplot, I found Rick's and Ashley's subplot totally useless. Why Hallmark, why? For once I though the boyfriend was not going to be an idiot, and maybe he wasn't at all, he was doing suggestions to Mary about what to do with the house - It was none of his business though - but all he was thinking was profit. And it can clearly be seen that those two were not in a happy relationship. Despite a few things, the plot was okay, so were the characters. I was a bit annoyed at times with Mary, but Everett made up for her, he is ADORABLE, and so passionate about Thanksgiving and the house however I didn't feel any chemistry between the actors.I don't know if it's because we don't celebrate this holiday in my country or that I didn't feel anything with the movie because of all the things mentioned above but i'm definitely not watching this again. Maybe it's worth the watch, only once on a boring afternoon.

adoptshelterpetstoday When the 2013 previews aired, I could hardly wait to see another new great Hallmark movie with a seasonal theme!HA!Much to my surprise and great dismay,"The Thanksgiving House" was lousy! In retrospect, it was actually the fore-runner...the predictor...the warning...of Hallmark's 2013 line of lousy new Christmas movies to come!...(which continued in to 2014).Considering readers have already read the plot above, I was disappointed that this movie ONLY had a minute relationship to T/g...that the house was questioningly built over the site of the first T/g feast......wow.It was if they had to throw something in about T/g for the reason of the title...the title that alluded to the movie primarily having a T/g plot.....BUT it was nothing more than a romance...and NOT a charming one at all.ALL of the players' parts and acting were of course consistent with the plot: pointless and boring.I always watch the new disappointing seasonal movies at least twice for a fair judgment...but this disappointing movie did not improve. It never became enjoyable as is.

Irie212 Thanksgiving has a special interest for me, or I might not have watched "The Thanksgiving House," which is an exceptionally well made chick flick. In it, the romance at the center also serves as metaphor, because it has a weighty theme: about sitting down to dinner with someone who might, or might not, be your enemy. My regret is that more parallels weren't drawn between our modern Thanksgivings and the legendary first one, because more interesting similarities were there to be drawn, and the movie would have been richer for suggesting them-- and I do mean suggesting, very lightly suggesting, because this isn't a documentary.Briefly, the plot revolves around the land occupied by a house at 825 Mayflower Road in Plymouth, Mass. (fictional address, of course), which a local historian/archaeologist named Mather suspects was the site of the legendary first Thanksgiving. The house now belongs to a lawyer named Mary, and the movie opens with a scene in her law office, where she exposes a man in his attempt at insurance fraud. So she's in the business of finding the truth, which is good, but as a lawyer, her real motives are serving her client, keeping the firm profitable, and climbing the corporate ladder. Right there we have a parallel: are the hard truths about early American history something we want exposed, at the expense of our more immediate day-to-day motives and beliefs? After all, to many Native Americans in New England and around the country, Thanksgiving is considered a "Day of Mourning."After that scene, I expected a connection to a larger theme: exposing the myth that has been built up around that original Thanksgiving, a myth that buries the truth about colonists and pilgrims who, after that one-time feast in 1621, were less likely to dine together than to scalp each other. (Yes, Europeans scalped Indians. In fact, colonial leaders placed a bounty on scalps, which encouraged the practice so much that even Native children were scalped for the money. Indians used scalping as proof of a kill in battle.)Little true history is revealed, which is fair enough: little is known about the first Thanksgiving. (Indeed, there are competing "first" claims from Virginia and Florida, among others.) There is a classroom scene, in which a teacher talks about the Wampanoag sitting down with pilgrims to give thanks, and a student asks "How'd that work out for the Wampanoag?" The teacher somberly, evasively replies, "In the long run, not so well." Not so well... that's putting it mildly. But the truth is not chick- flick material, and I therefore appreciate that such a scene was included at all. I only wish there had been more such references, necessarily oblique, to America's "aboriginal sin," as it is called. The film could also, for example, have had a passing remark about the fact there was only ever that one Thanksgiving, in 1621. Indians and pilgrims became enemies. Another missed opportunity, an important one given the house which is at the center of the plot: Indians did not hold private land, so a point could have been made about how Mary comes from the European heritage of land-owning, so she does not even want an archaeological examination of her property. How she comes to share her property would have made a useful food-for-thought parallel.And speaking of food, here, for what it is worth, is my special interest in Thanksgiving. I am a part of an initiative called Thanksgiving Table, which encourages all North Americans to add a Native American element to their Thanksgiving feast.

boblipton Emily Rose's great-aunt has just died and left Emily her house in Plymouth. Justin Bruening is an amateur archaeologist who has proof that the house is the site of the first Thanksgiving. It's a good set-up for a Hallmark romantic comedy and they carry it out nicely, aided by a supporting cast whose characters all know each other. No one is obnoxious; they simply want different things and that causes the conflicts. This is the definition of a good work of fiction, in which the story arises from character.The plot is good, the writing is good and the actors are good. However, while I wish all Hallmark romcoms were as good as this, I have some issues with the production that will probably strike most people as too picky. One is the fact that all of these people are natives of Massachusetts and only Adam Kaufman has even the faintest trace of a Yankee accent; he sounds like he comes from South Boston. The other is that they might have shot this in Massachusetts in the fall. While there are some setting helicopter shots to establish that, yes, this is Boston and yes, this is Plymouth, they clearly shot the exteriors some place else in the late spring. I spotted some tulips that looked like June and while dead leaves are scattered around, there is no sign of autumn colors. The credits indicate Simi Valley.These are, as I said, niggling issues. Nonetheless, they prevent it from being much more than average good.