5/10
Why??
1 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I agree with the other reviews, particularly the previous one - WHY did they take the story in this direction?? I get that the show's trying to show how the Ingalls deal with the hardships of life, and persevere to survive on the Prairie, but really, haven't they (in particular Mary) had enough?? She lost it for a while when she went blind, then again when she lost her unborn baby. Now THIS?? I have to admit that this episode really pulls you in and is gut-wrenching at times. The vision of Mrs. Garvey trying to save the baby in the fire just really got to me. Anyone with a child of their own (or anyone with a heart) would find that excruciatingly hard to watch. I just don't understand WHY the show had to kill off those 2 characters, especially like that!! And like the previous reviewer stated, no one likes to see people die in fires, and no one likes to see babies die, period. What was the point? I don't see how it moved the storyline forward for the show. It was hard enough when Charles & Caroline lost their son, but this is just pointless... I rated this episode 5 out of 10 because it's an extremely well-done episode, one of the most touching I remember seeing, but it left me sad and angry and confused. (NOT the best one to watch at 1:00 AM before going to bed!)
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed