Sadly Over-hyped

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

I have read Montana Sky over and over. Unfortunately I wish I could give the TV movie a 10 out of 10. I feel that the characters for Ben and Adam could have been chosen better to suit the description of the book. Ben is made to be a true tough rugged and handsome built rancher. A quote from the book says "...and looks fabulous in Levi's...it's a fine butt, and I have excellent eyesight." Tess made those statements. In the movie Ben leans in Willa refrigerator and his butt isn't fabulous in those jeans at all. I really like John Corbett in his earlier films but this was one I wished that he wasn't in. Now Adam was described as having "...hair that streamed to his shoulders...a face a beautiful as a painting." I understand you can't always match exactly the character but at least close would have been nice. When characters (in reality the author)make descriptions about other characters you get a certain picture and expectation of them. I definitely recommend the book to everyone!!! Nora Roberts truly is an amazing writer and i love every book I have read of hers.

**** Spoilers ****Nice little movie, but I have several issues with it.* Mixing a chick-flick and a thriller does not work. Obviously too little time to in depth develop both plots. * Two psychopathic killers are a little too much and way too implausible for a movie that is primarily a female buddy movie. * The family pet gets killed. I knew Charlie was toast when I saw that first cattle killed by a psycho and that over-long dog-human thing between him and Lily. I would finally love to see a thriller again where the family pet ain't killed. It is predictable and boring. * Both whackos are disposed of in exactly the same way. They should have come up with something better. But why 2 independently acting psychopaths in the first place??? * Character development implausible and forced. Why exactly is Willa all a sudden falling in love with this Ben guy? And why is the strumpet-sister interested in the wooden Sheriff? * Characters chlichéd. * Behavior implausible: For three women who are beset by two psychopathic killers, have employees and pets killed and find their remains, are abducted etc. the characters are extremely unconcerned. Willa finds the corpse of the slain farmhand and in the next scene's just looking neutral or slightly smiling.???? * Another plot-hole as an example: Psychopathic killers roam the property and nobody arms himself (Willa occasionally carries a lever action gun, Ben doesn't until the plot needs it and drops it into his hands from heaven) or hires security guards or obtains direct protection by law enforcement. All they do is tell each other to be careful while they sit around on an outlying farm, waiting for the next victim to discover. Sheesh ...The movie is not bad, but it ain't worth your time when you're short of it. I continued watching only because Ashley Williams looks cute with a cowboy hat. But they finally lost me when that second psycho half-brother popped up out of nowhere.

I thought this movie was excellent. John Corbett is always excellent. I thought they should have picked someone a little older for his love interest but the actress playing the lead role as the cowgirl daughter did a great job in the role. I wish John Corbett would do more lead roles. He is one of the sexiest actors around but I don't think he gets enough credit. The location picked for filming was a beautiful area. I think this is a movie I could see more than once and still want to see it again. Nora Roberts is one of my favorite authors and I can't wait for Blue Smoke to be aired next week. Angels Fall was a fantastic movie also and I hope to see it again.

I wondered how they were going to pack all of Roberts' truly great 'Montana Sky' into two hours. Sad to say, they couldn't.The basic premise packed three relationships, four, counting the sisters themselves, over a year's time, along with all the mysterious happenings within that period. Only the barest of bones of the story were touched on and even those were rewritten and reworked. Other than the names of the characters, hardly anything, including the events, how they unfolded, and how they were resolved, resembled the original story.As to the actors: Both Laura Mennell as 'Lila' and Charlotte Ross as 'Tess' fit the concept I had of them, but although Ashely Williams did a wonderful job, I couldn't see her as the 'Willa' I imagined in the book. I so adore John Corbett, he was one of the reasons I looked forward to the movie. He had the perfect personality for 'Ben', though in real life he's a good ten years or more older than the character he portrayed. I guess it made sense that 'Nate's' occupation was changed from lawyer to sheriff and Aaron Pearl was good in the re-scripted role. Nathaniel Arcand played a convincing 'Adam'.I couldn't help but think as I read 'Montana Sky', then watched it, that the novel would have been much better adapted to a mini-series. It would have allowed the characters and the events to be fleshed out and evolve as they deserved. In comparison, Angels Fall made a much better transition from book to screen in that it didn't have as much ground to cover and could afford to have some parts dropped without losing the essence of the story.