Of the numerous sources I used in a recent study of the Song, Pope's felt the most dated. I originally read this commentary in the late 1980's, and thought it was good then. Now I find it a bit too exhausting. Pope's historical background is second to none, but it can take him a very long time to work through all the material to bring his own thoughts out, and I find I disagree with him as often as not. Garrett, Longman, and Hess make the text far more accessible than does Pope.
The introduction is massive and thorough. The history of interpretation and bibliography were very helpful. Pope champions the cultic interpretation of the book, but his handling of exegetical problem passages is still helpful.