User Reviews

I am not at all getting why lately Hallmark are casting actresses in late 30's and 40's which is absolutely fine but prompting them to behave like teenagers - being eg, being cutesy, vague and flakey and without mature coping.

The cast in this film is fine but the dialogue is really annoying and not at all age-appropriate.

The Australian scenery and wildlife are endearing and the background music not too intrusive. The pace and diversions of the story are fun and appropriate but let's use the skills of the cast in an age-appropriate fashion or cast younger actors. Both would work out a whole lot better.

The locations are beautiful, it was filmed someplace in Australia. It's a typical Hallmark type romance-comedy centered around a female lead with a male actor as romantic interest. Since the lead is always a female, that role is key to the success of the film. Like many rom-coms this one has a very poor script, with bad dialog. The plot has been rehashed so many times in rom-coms that it's boring. Casting Susie Abromeit was a mistake, she's not a polished actress who can pull off a lead roll. Julian Haig is ok as the love interest, but the supporting cast is mixed. With a bad script, not even good actors can turn it around.

There wasn't much to rave about here. Sadly, as with most GAF movies, the cast is second-rate at best. If they aren't using one of the few big names they poached from Hallmark as leads, the cast is full of unknowns and little-knowns. Definitely the case here. Story and plot had big holes never addressed in editing. It would have been interesting to know why the sister is living in a tiny hamlet in Australia. What does she do for a living? What brought her there? When the duster calls the lead while still home in Chicago it is mid-day in both places. In reality there is about 12 hours difference - they are literally on opposite sides of the earth. When the lead left Chicago and arrived in Australia it remained summer (based on lush flower gardens and relatively light weight clothes, esp for Chicago. It was def. Not winter there). Australia in southern hemisphere has seasons opposite to ours. Again in opposite hemispheres of the earth. Why was the male lead/local vet driving a truck with American-style steering wheel on left? Vehicles sold there have steering wheels on the right for driving on the left. In his first scene he is parked at the correct curb for left side driving. But in a later scene he appears to pull out from a curb on the right side of the street and drive away on the right. And why is he driving an American-style truck with the steering wheel on the left? Vehicles sold in Aust. Have sreering wheels on the right, British style. At first I thought I was filmed in North America despite being set in Australia, so it might have been a somewhat understandable mistake. But it was filmed in Brisbane. So why bother with a North American truck when they were surrounded by Australian ones? There were likely other mistakes as well. But I was so groggy from the boredom I probably missed them.

This movie just falls flat. I have no problem with predictability, these kind of movies are not meant to be groundbreaking, but that also means that the actors and their chemistry make or break the movie. In this case, they break the movie.

The two lead actors have zero chemistry. It doesn't feel like a hate-to-love scenario but rather like a couple of bratty toddlers bickering. All the nonverbal signs that communicate two people are into each other and represent that chemistry in a romantic movie feel forced. It makes the interactions between the two leads awkward. There is no feel of authenticity in the romance department.

However, that is easily explained by the quality of the two lead actors themselves. They both seem immature. The male comes across as an annoying teenage boy, and not in a cute way. Everything he says and does feels forced, like he's either intentionally trying to annoy the lady or he's trying really hard to pretend to like her, failing in both scenarios. The female is unfortunately much the same. At least she manages to pull of the "nice" part of her character somewhat okay.

The rest of the cast is okay. The older couple is charming enough to relieve the annoyance of the two main characters but the sister and her groom have no character. They both seem completely unbothered and particularly demanding and ungrateful for leaving the full wedding preparation up to the two main characters, so much so that it's completely unbelievable that the wedding in question is actually theirs.

In short, what is supposed to be a fairly straight-forward formula to pull off falls flat. It's like a piece of middle school drama, the kind you want to avoid.

Difficult to be critic or to applause it. Because the flowers, the little cangooroo , the venerable couple, the language of flowers and the origin of her name, Mercedes are pieces who real matters.

Not the main couple - all seems just forced in their case -, not the couple to marry, present as a sort of formality.

Indeed, nothing new , but at its end, I was temptated to define Love in Bloom as sweet film.

For details, for performance of old actors, for the try to save a pure unrealistic - to boring - story , for details and, in some measure, for good intentions expressions.

In short, a romance like so many others. No chemistry between main actors but obvious noble intentions.