Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

GazerRise Fantastic!

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

classicsoncall Boy, I don't know. The whole business about 'the secret' between the boy and his grandfather bothered me - a lot. I'm thinking about the role model implications on Pappy's (Scott Glenn) part, and the conflicted life young Luke (Logan Lerman) would have when the reality of witnessing two murders would finally kick in. The relationship between these two characters was admirable, but the lack of justice in bringing the truth forward is still upsetting me.Moving on. The film hooked me early when the narrator's voice theorizes about an old truck's optimal speed. In the mid Fifties, my Dad had a 1937 Chevy farm truck, and like Pappy's, it too had a top speed of thirty seven miles per hour. How weird is that? And that business about taking a bath every Saturday whether you needed it or not - I've heard that one too, but for real. In fact, (back to my Dad), he used to tell of an acquaintance who only washed his arms up to the point where a short sleeved shirt would cover the rest. Not making it up.So the hardscrabble life of an Arkansas cotton farm presented here seemed realistic enough to me. The era was depicted in a way that probably seems unbelievable today to modern viewers, what with a nickel matinée at the local theater, a five cent double cola and three cent popcorn. That seven fifty Cardinals jacket had to seem a world away to a kid like Luke, but through it all, the merit of hard work, rugged individualism and family values had a place in a bygone era that seems so distant today.What's almost an afterthought it seemed was the picture's title, as it takes on a quiet life of it's own before the story builds into a farm community event of sorts. I liked the idea that the Mexicans would pitch in to help with the chore, ostensibly to keep busy, but showing genuine friendship for a farmer who provides seasonal work year after year. The way the Chandlers share their meager bounty with the Latchers also demonstrated genuine compassion for others even less fortunate. When these Hallmark concepts work they work very well, but by ranging a little too far outside their traditional box, this film seemed to provide more questions than answers.

whpratt1 Greatly enjoyed John Grisham's great story about a warm and kind family in the South who had the hard task of picking Cotton for a living and never painting their home. All the actors did a fantastic job of portraying what a very hard life it was in 1952 trying to find Mexican help and poor White families to assist in the picking process. Grisham's book went into more detail and the picture sort of chopped up the entire story, especially the scene where Luke, a young boy takes a peek at a girl taking a swim in the nude. Luke also witnesses a murder and plays a funny trick on a Yankee Lady who has to use the OUT HOUSE! Great film which makes you laugh and CRY !

Katz5 I read John Grisham's novel over the summer and have to say that this movie is just too watered down. The book was grittier and should have been made into a theatrical movie, instead of becoming "Hallmarkized." With the music, the stiff acting and the script, I felt like I was watching The Waltons or a certain Michael Landon/Melissa Gilbert '70s show. Nothing wrong with a family movie, but the book had more of an edge and I think was closer to Grisham's real life experiences than this watered down version. Examples (SPOILERS ALERT): 1. Hank's sudden source of income. In the book he earned it gambling and spent a lot of time at the carnival. In fact, the entire carnival/wrestler segment, which stood out in the book, is missing from the movie. 2. The conflict between Hank and Cowboy seemed staged and silly. Cowboy didn't have a "West Side Story"-like switchblade in the book, either. It was a large buck knife, as I remember. 3. Tally was barefoot, indicating the poverty level of the Spurills. She was not wearing Keds. 4. The segments in the book between Tally and Cowboy were a little more intimate than just embracing in the fields. 5. The Latcher subplot was just an aside. In the book, it is a lot more significant.You get the point--this should have been a hard, PG-13 movie instead of a Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation (which will probably get a PG on video as there is a little violence, albeit very muted). In fact the only reason I watched this was because of Scott Glenn, who was perfect as Pappy. Maybe they'll try it again, for the theater!

islampure This movie had potential describing a southern family with a young boy at the center of it. I was disappointed in how the movie ended, because it did not leave the viewers with a sense of completion which I would expect out of a Hallmark movie.