Bless All the Dear Children

Why is the character of Erich Schiller made reference to in the listing for this episode? It was apparently the same actor with that brief appearance on the train, yet no reference is made to the Season 5 character during the scene.

It's not my favourite either. Aside from the silly kidnapping, the scenes at Walnut grove with Nancy and the Christmas tree, the other children etc. all felt so contrived, as though they knew the end was nigh but had to put out one (bad) movie.

It's just a shame when compared to the season 8 Christmas episode that this one isn't up to LHOP standards.

I'm going to watch this again tomorrow - see if I can get into the Christmas spirit; I know it's not the best, but I plan on watching other episodes too.

No, it still sucked...I think just knowing that it was filmed in June aside from the ridiculous plot makes it a stinker. Pity that it was the final episode ever broadcast - not a good way to go out.

I really like that episode.

Im debating, if I want to see this Christmas movie. Not one of my favorite episodes either.

Krissy wrote:

I agree Christmas at Plum Creek is really good. I enjoyed that episode.

I watched this movie again and i still DON'T like it. Just a very bad movie. " An Avonlea Christmas" Was better. Maybe i shouldn't say this but I feel it was really Almanzo's fault Rose gets kidnapped.  It just seemed out of character for him leave her alone well  he went off.

I haven't watched "an Avonlea Christmas" in so long but I really love that movie.

Not only does it make no sense that Almanzo leaves Rose, at that point, Isaiah didn't have a temper or drinking issue so him getting in a fight made no sense either.

But do you think back then maybe there was not a high incidence of child kidnappings? And maybe people just trusted other people more. Especially if you lived in Walnut Grove. Everyone was like family there.

But it has been a long time since I last saw this episode, so I can't remember the exact details of when Rose gets left alone.

amyk wrote:

But do you think back then maybe there was not a high incidence of child kidnappings? And maybe people just trusted other people more. Especially if you lived in Walnut Grove. Everyone was like family there.

But it has been a long time since I last saw this episode, so I can't remember the exact details of when Rose gets left alone.

Rose wasn't necessarily alone. Almanzo was outside with her and a fight from the saloon with Isaiah spilled out onto the street. Laura had asked Almanzo to watch Rose so she could go into the toy store and buy Rose something, but when the fight broke out, Almanzo went to help Isaiah. That's when the woman who had lost a baby--she had just come out of the toy store--picked up Rose.

bethandmanly wrote:

amyk wrote:

But do you think back then maybe there was not a high incidence of child kidnappings? And maybe people just trusted other people more. Especially if you lived in Walnut Grove. Everyone was like family there.

But it has been a long time since I last saw this episode, so I can't remember the exact details of when Rose gets left alone.

Rose wasn't necessarily alone. Almanzo was outside with her and a fight from the saloon with Isaiah spilled out onto the street. Laura had asked Almanzo to watch Rose so she could go into the toy store and buy Rose something, but when the fight broke out, Almanzo went to help Isaiah. That's when the woman who had lost a baby--she had just come out of the toy store--picked up Rose.

Oh yes, that is what happened. I think Laura may even blame Mr. Edwards that Rose got kidnapped later on in the episode when she is really upset. It's been a long time since I saw this one. I really liked it previously though. I think the little boy was really cute, and I'm glad that things worked out the way they did. I felt sorry for the woman who kidnapped Rose, even though she was definitely wrong to do that.

Just finished watching this one and crying my way through the final 15 or 20 minutes or so....but first, for the things I dislike about it:

1) I believe that Michael Landon's voiceover at the beginning said it was 1896. But Laura was born in 1867, I think, so that would make her 29 years old!

2) Would it really ever be that warm in Minnesota for Christmas? I did find something about a 70 degree temperature being recorded somewhere in Minnesota in February of 1896, so maybe it really was a very warm year? Still, I would have preferred, for the final Christmas episode, that they pull out all the stops including the snow machines and have some snow for Walnut Grove for Christmas. Or at least not be running around in short sleeves like it's in the 80s.

3) I still can't stand Nancy. If only she had some redeeming quality shown in this episode....

4) Also miss Harriet so much. Sad that she was not in this or THE LAST FAREWELL.

5) I also think they should have made Rose crying for her mother, at least some of the time. It was like Rose doesn't care who she is with and that she is having the time of her life, but I think a child of that age would be crying for her mother!


But now for the good:

1) Well, I admit that I do cry when Mr. Montague brings the Christmas gifts as Santa Claus, not so much because of the gifts but because of the change of heart we know he had and how I think he saw that gift-giving does not have to just be some kind of crass commercialism but can really be an expression of love.

2) And I also cry over the miracle star shining and showing the way to Samuel. Also, are we to assume that the shelter Samuel was laying under was made by him or perhaps miraculously built by God or an angel? Maybe Jonathan was there to build it, just like he was there when Laura had run away??

3) While it seems rather contrived, I'm glad that Samuel got his family in the end. Still, it seems like the Norrises would need to go to the orphanage and legally adopt him. He's not just a lost puppy that can be handed off to anyone who will take him! He's such a cute little boy, though.

amyk wrote:

1) I believe that Michael Landon's voiceover at the beginning said it was 1896. But Laura was born in 1867, I think, so that would make her 29 years old!

Rose would also be 10 years old, since she was born in 1886.  

amyk wrote:

2) Would it really ever be that warm in Minnesota for Christmas? I did find something about a 70 degree temperature being recorded somewhere in Minnesota in February of 1896, so maybe it really was a very warm year? Still, I would have preferred, for the final Christmas episode, that they pull out all the stops including the snow machines and have some snow for Walnut Grove for Christmas. Or at least not be running around in short sleeves like it's in the 80s.

That year, the Midwest had experienced a long Indian summer, but by Thanksgiving temperatures were well below average with some areas reporting record breaking cold (-50).  

amyk wrote:

3) While it seems rather contrived, I'm glad that Samuel got his family in the end. Still, it seems like the Norrises would need to go to the orphanage and legally adopt him. He's not just a lost puppy that can be handed off to anyone who will take him! He's such a cute little boy, though.

I always thought that, too. Charles and Caroline had to go through a process to adopt Albert, so how could Almanzo just leave Samuel with that couple and say he would let the orphanage know?