I am not the best to judge a predictable and sappy movie, but I decided to give this Hallmark classic a try since I have liked the work of the main characters. What a disappointment. The scenery, for the most part, was nice, but that was about it. What I found interesting was the scene, early on, when Marty is being offered the deal from Clark and through her wet blouse you can clearly see a modern bra strap. The fish out of water (city girl in fancy duds trying to learn how to do basic chores around a farm) was ridiculous. Here she was, newly married and heading west and they dump food along the trail but not books? And Clark's line about how only a man SO in love with his headstrong wife would do such a thing. Try again. And they have basically only books. I did not see any tools in that wagon in the beginning, so how did these city folk think they were going to build a cabin and barn? And she "tames" the wild daughter and falls in love with the guy in the end. Zzzzzzzz.

The film is a good one as it deals with a new theme in a very serious way. The theme being that people, who have lost their mates, marry at once, to provide for surviving children and to ease their loneliness.We saw such sociological occurrences after the Holocaust when lonely survivors in displacement camps wed within 30 days of meeting one another.This film is a salute to the men and women of the 1880s in the west. Through hard work and relentless courage, they were able to survive the vicissitudes of nature.No, this film is not Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman but it's an earnest attempt to bring the struggles of the period down to a very personal level.While stunned by the tragic loss of her young husband, I found Katherine Heigl's performance here to be lacking. She needed more of a breakout in her role as the film went on. Only during the last 2 frames do we see a remote resemblance of that. Throughout the film, she seems to be just saying her lines without evoking any emotion whatsoever.Midkiff is better here; although, there are some parts where I thought he was trying another form of Elmer Gantry.As a whole, the film should be praised to its undertaking of difficult subject matter.

LOVE, based on a book series, is about a pregnant widow (Katherine Heigl) staying for awhile with a farmer (Dale Midkiff) who is a widower with a small daughter (Skye Bartusiak). Not surprisingly, she falls in love with the hardworking, God-fearing farmer, and hopes to stay and make a new life with him. Heigl and Midkiff turn in strong performances, and Bartusiak holds her own with these seasoned actors. The TV movie will remind many of LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRAIRIE, and coincidentally was directed by Michael Landon Jr., son of Michael Landon, star of LITTLE HOUSE. There's a spiritual element to the plot and several references to a higher power, but it is not laid on so thick as to harm the movie. Beautifully filmed.

I have seen this movie as well Loves Enduring Promise and Loves Long Journey. I have also read the whole series by Jannet Oke. Love Come Softly was wonderful and I really enjoyed it, but Loves Long Journey was completely changed. I was very disappointed and I am concerned how it is going to connect with the rest of the story because the movie changed it . I just wanted to bring this to your attention. I was very happy with Love Comes Softly, but the movies that followed were a great disappointment to me. I wonder how the story is going to continue with everything changing. I hope that the movies that follow will contain more of what really happened in the book.