Sometimes reunion shows work, sometimes they don't. This and the other two from the 90s didn't.
The charm and innocence of the Walton kids as children, just didn't hold as adults. So, what partially made the original series attractive was completely missing from subsequent films. Then, of course, there are the chronic anachronisms. Hamner and the writers simply ignored the ages as established in the series. For example, John-Boy was born in 1916, and thus would have been 48 for his wedding. Based on that date, and having been 18 at his birth, Liv would have been born in 1898, which would put her at 66, while Michael Learned was actually a decade younger. Grandma was 77 in 1933, which means she'd be 108 for this show.
Throw in the fact that the in-laws all add little to a script, the bulk of whose material was contrived, plus the sudden birth of a baby during the wedding, pretty much implies that the whole purpose of the film was to make a film. It was completely lacking in the elements which made the series great.
The charm and innocence of the Walton kids as children, just didn't hold as adults. So, what partially made the original series attractive was completely missing from subsequent films. Then, of course, there are the chronic anachronisms. Hamner and the writers simply ignored the ages as established in the series. For example, John-Boy was born in 1916, and thus would have been 48 for his wedding. Based on that date, and having been 18 at his birth, Liv would have been born in 1898, which would put her at 66, while Michael Learned was actually a decade younger. Grandma was 77 in 1933, which means she'd be 108 for this show.
Throw in the fact that the in-laws all add little to a script, the bulk of whose material was contrived, plus the sudden birth of a baby during the wedding, pretty much implies that the whole purpose of the film was to make a film. It was completely lacking in the elements which made the series great.