A Valentine's Date

Thoroughly enjoyed the movie. I realize that most of Hallmark movies are predictable and soft but I think that is what I enjoy about them. The plot is a gentle play on a theme that we have seen over and over with other films but believable. Maybe the acting is a little more gentle than real life but many of us do not need gritty to get full enjoyment out of the film.

The single only criticism I have is that although the move is set in Texas, you are bout 1800 miles west of Texas, in California. The temps and the dirt and dust are similar, the music is actually very good and fits with my native state but guys we do not have countryside the same as depicted.

Keep making em and I will keep enjoying em.

Elisa Donovan and her on screen daughter live in New York where she is a high-powered executive with an important deal on. However, when her husband, from whom she is separated, sues for shared custody, she has to fly back to Texas to deal with the legal technicalities.

This perfectly ordinary and by-the-numbers romantic comedy, is considerably enlivened by a fine cast of long-time professionals, who manage to keep things bubbling along nicely. Cinematographer Kobi Zaig-Mendez consistently finds beautiful ways to shoot the frame, not only the people, but the backgrounds.

Although nothing in this movie will surprise you as novel and brilliant, there is more than enough in this to keep the watcher occupied.

Of course this is a "good" movie. If you're looking for good, clean, inoffensive and somewhat inspiring, this is the movie for you. Basically this is why I picked it at the videostore, because I'm tired of movies with violence, sex and witchcraft. So in this sense, it was great.

Now for the technical side of things... The story is more than predictable (despite what the cover says). First of all, the original set-up made me think so much of "Sweet Home Alabama" with Reese Witherspoon and What's His Name (Luke Wilson, I think?), even down to the "I didn't know he was an artist" side of things, although they really did not do anything with that last bit at all. I think the daughter was added just to avoid being accused of plagiarism. Speaking of the daughter, she's pretty good in her role, but the mom... I really had a hard time believing she really was her mom. She sounded like a babysitter trying to sound cool with a kid that she doesn't know too much. She overplays horribly most of the time. The husband is not as bad. The grandpa is the best. Of course we're talking Tom Skerritt.

I'm still waiting to see this Christian movie with a plot that is not so predictable I can resume the whole story in 3 sentences even before the titles from the beginning are finished; where the dialogue is meaningful, but not full of clichés; and where the acting is really professional. Not saying this to be mean, we're getting there, this is better than other things I've seen before. I'm hopeful it's coming soon! Meanwhile, I encourage the studio and the producers to keep working and getting better and better!

Laura (Elisa Donovan) left her husband Dylan (Brad Rowe) in Texas over four years ago. She took their young daughter to New York, where she got a great job in the banking business. In addition, she has slowly climbed the corporate ladder. As she explains, Laura was hoping her husband would follow HER, as a support for her dreams, but he loves it at his ranch in Texas. Over time, mother and daughter have made various visits to the Lone Star State. But, now, Dylan says enough! He wants shared custody of their daughter and a divorce. Summoned to court, Laura must face Dylan and get the issue settled. Unfortunately, the judge (Catherine Hicks) postpones the hearing until certain conditions are met. Thus, Laura has to bunk with her father (Tom Skerrit) and try to appease her boss on the phone for a week or so. Naturally, Laura and Dylan meet several times and its a reality that the attraction between them remains strong. Will this visit to the south wreak havoc on Laura's plans? This film is a nice romance but it has some major problems with credulity. Its very hard to believe that a husband, deprived of his wife and daughter, would wait four years to settle the matter. But, whatever. The cast is quite nice, with Donovan and Rowe shining as the stars and Hicks, Skerrit, Hicks, Tracey Gold, and John Schneider giving great support. Moreover, the scenery in Texas is lovely. Although it won't rank as a "must see" flick, romance fans who long for new material will find it acceptably entertaining.

I downloaded this for Apple TV for what I call my 'ironing ans folding laundry' movie watching--I look for sweet, relaxing, wholesome movies that will not need a lot of my attention. This movie kind of fit the bill, except for the fact that the entire time I kept thinking, "it makes NO sense at all!"

Basic premise: a single mother with a high-powered corporate job in NYC is suddenly ordered back to her small Texas town where her husband (they're separated but not divorced) has filed a petition for joint custody. Apparently, this goal-getter career woman who left her slow ranching community for more excitement and more challenges is STILL dumb enough to believe she could whisk off her daughter without her husband's approval, ignore his divorce petitions, and even return to Texas to confront the situation without the aid od a lawyer. I mean, seriously: who does this?

Behind this family movie is really a typical Christian message of social morality, marriage as forever in God's eyes and religion as a social cornerstone. Well okay--I don't believe it but I don't mind it, either. I'm fine with that.

It's the total irrelevant lack of logic that gets me! The character of the woman simply makes no sense. We're supposed to believe that she packed up and run off to NY without a second glance, that it never crossed her mind that her actions would have consequences. What idiot would believe they have such rights? Furthermore, the most heartbreaking aspect is the brilliant acting of the little girl playing the daughter. Obviously she misses her dad, her grandpa, and Texas. Why shouldn't she? What kid wouldn't? And yet, simply for purposes of the story--never mind the lack of logic--we have to hear throughout the entire movie about how mother and daughter barely ever manage to visit Texas, about how the dad can barely ever visit his kid in NY, about how far away NY is and soooooo expensive... ! I mean, really! On the one hand, the mother is supposed to have this incredible job, and the granddad a large TX spread, and the dad a successful ranch and yet NO ONE can scrap together 400 dollars top for a ticket doe the kid to be there during the summer, as any kid of divorce? Who believes this crap?

Whoever wrote this is not only an idiot but also clearly doesn't get women. Either this woman is narcissistic, selfish and blind or we are never meant to like her at all. What mover loves her daughter so little that she'd deprive her of her father?