Dreams of an inheritance turn into a nightmare for four innocent children who are locked in the deserted north wing of the family mansion, beaten by a vicious grandmother and tormented by a menacing caretaker. — Item Type: ... more »DVD Movie
"First off, I have to say that the movie barely even follows the same plot as the brilliant book. The were so many problems! In the book the oldest girl was supposed to be 12 when they came to the attic, in the movie she looks 15 or 16. In the book the grandmother didn't cut the oldest girls hair, she tried but Chris stopped her. And what happened to the incest? It carried such huge messages and themes in the book and in the movie there is none of it. I could go on for pages about the inconsistensies, even the ending is hugely different. I swear sometimes when they actually said something from the book I would think "Hey! That's kinda like Flowers In The-...oh yeah...". But to defend the makers of this movie a bit, this was before the entertainment industry relized how much it annoys people when they don't follow much loved books. I mean look at the 2 latest movies based on books, Lord Of The Rings and Harry Potter. They are two great books with movies that are good as well and stay true to them. I really wish they would remake the movie and have a movie for each book in the series. I think Flowers In The Attic was around 400 pages. When a 400 page book is squashed into an 85 minute movie it isn't pretty...But for a moment here lets forget about the book, now lets look at the problems with the stand alone movie. The acting was quite weak at times. Cory's voice was annoying but I actually respected that because it seemed more realistic. Another thing I like about the movie was how it showed that man digging the four graves, that was a very eerie well done scene. A shame it was only 4 seconds and the rest of the movie never had that eerie mood. A movie like this really should have that eerie mood. It all happened too fast. And you never got to know the characters well enough to feel bad for them. You never got to know the mother well enough to be shocked when the truth came out. Nothing was understood, there seemed to be a shortage of lines. And half the lines were chocked full of emotion that came to soon and too rushed. Instead of getting the feeling they were in the attic for years, you feel they were in the attic for 85 minutes, the time of the movie. It doesn't glide you from scene to scene, it puts more circles under the childrens eyes and tell you it's been a few months. And by skipping those few months we lose a lot of important dialoge and emotions that must have passed between the children. All in all you should really only watch this out of curiosity, not for entertainment, and not for a substitute of the book."
Katie | la quinta, CA United States | 12/09/2003
(1 out of 5 stars)
"I found the screen version of Flowers in the Attic disappointing at best. The story was not followed as well as it could have been and the acting was mediocre, especially Victoria Tennant who portrayed the mother, Corrine. She showed little to no emotion throughout the film. The rest of the actors were far from good. This was obviously an extremely low budget film.
If you've read the book and enjoyed it, leave it at that. It can't be improved upon. If you haven't read the book and are considering the film, don't waste your time or money. Read the book."
Good Golly Ms. Molly this one of the WORST interpretations o
Jenny J.J.I. | That Lives in Carolinas | 12/10/2007
(2 out of 5 stars)
"I read "Flowers in the attic" during my pre-teens and I was captured by the story and by the characters. I envisioned them to be almost doll like and beautiful and especially the mother. Usually when a woman is very beautiful she passes on her beautiful traits to her children. The first time I saw this movie was at the age 13. I sat there about as riveted as a 13 year old can be. And when it went off, I thought to myself "that was a pretty good movie". And I took that thinking with me, all through these years...until today, when I saw it for the second time. This time I watched the movie through an adult eye, and thought to myself, "Wow, this movie is really bad"
This is a classic Bad Movie element especially when the film is a book adaptation. It generally means that the filmmakers are afraid that they'll be unable to cram enough of the book's contents into the movie. For those who don't know, the story is about four beautiful children (Chris (Jeb Stuart Adams), Cathy (Kristy Swanson), Carrie (Lindsey Parker), and Cory (Ben Ryan Ganger), who are locked away in a room by their selfish mother (Victoria Tennant), with a filthy attic as their playground. Their cruel heartless Grandmother (Louise Fletcher) brainwashes the small children, Cory and Carrie, into thinking that they are "devil's spawn", and they are painfully malnourished. They live each day as if it were a year, sadly awaiting the truths that are to come from their greedy mother. The narration is used to jam as much expository dialog and back-story down our craw as we can stomach. The narrator is an older version of Cathy, the main character, looking back at the film's events. The movie was nothing compared to the book. Maybe a few scenes here and there to tell you that you are watching the movie version of "flowers in the attic", but nothing major. It did not keep me on the edge of my seat at all. I also read a book called "Garden of Shadows" which leads up to the story of "Flowers in the attic".
Come to fine out the studio snuck out the actually rating quietly. First, the story had to be changed to PG-13 rating so there's no incest at all--not even suggested. The tortures their grandmother puts them through were softened or eliminated entirely. They aren't up there for three years. And they completely changed the ending (although it WAS great to see the mother get it at the end). All the changes drained the story of any impact it might have had. Acting didn't help--Louise Fletcher is a great actress but her role was rather wooden and farce; Victoria Tennant was even worse as the mother; Kristy Swanson overplayed her role a LOT. Only Jeb Stuart Adams gave a halfway good performance. It was no great piece of acting but okay.
I would really love it if some really great director came out with the movie version of "Garden of Shadows" and as the follow up with a remake of "Flowers in the Attic". And if the movie is recreated I would really like to see that the characters look as if they are described in the book and also they should at least be real blondes and try not to leave out the most explosive scenes. People love drama and to leave out the most dramatic parts of the book makes no sense. Chris and Cathy's romance is essential as a theme of the book because it parallels the 'evil breeds evil' theme that the grandmother believes in and what the children come to realize later: what *true* evil is. To be fair to the movie, a faithful adaptation of the book would probably be way too grim for a movie (and get an NC-17 rating) but diluting it completely AND adding lousy acting isn't the way to go! "
More dramatics needed
L. Leach | Florida | 08/19/2005
(4 out of 5 stars)
"I will have to agree with some of the other reviewers, that this movie was fluffed, and a little too careful with the production of this movie. I feel that the director could have definitely included the incestuous act, as it would add a little more spice to it. I mean it was interesting to the point where it made you not want to leave until you found out what was going to happen, but if you collect movies like most of us, and you will be watching this more than once, then it could use some excitement. Excellent story line, and in the beginning, how their father died and they had to resort to living back home, where she escaped from years ago.Now, because of the mom's incestuous relationship with the children's father, how the grandmother was going to punish them all for the mothers sins,including the mom. very sick. very interesting.At the end, I would have liked to see more reaction from the mother's wedding party when the children finally escape from the attic and tell everyone during the ceremony of the mom's marriage, how they were locked in the attic all that time and how the younger son was poisoned by his own mother, AND NOW HERE SHE IS GETTING MARRIED TO A MAN WHO HAD NO IDEA SHE EVEN HAD CHILDREN. The mom, falls off the balcony and dies, the grandmother never pays for what she's done and is still alive, and the groom, just stood there with a slightly shocked look on his face. COME ON??????! Needs to be more dramatic but over all very interesting plot and story."
Not nearly as good as the book! ( I give the book 5 stars!)
"In my point of view, if you want to know the real story, read the book! I read the book before I saw the movie and I was VERY disappointed. The movie leaves out all of the feelings and losses of the characters, which is what makes the book amazing. The story is about four beautiful children (Chris, Cathy, Carrie, and Cory), who are locked away in a room by thier selfish mother, with a filthy attic as their playground. Their cruel heartless Grandmother brainwashes the small children, Cory and Carrie, into thinking that they are "devil's spawn", and they are painfully malnourished. They live each day as if it were a year, sadly awaiting the truths that are to come from their greedy mother. This book will capture the tears from your eyes, as you feel the trials and triumphs of four helpless children, locked away without care. I recommend the rest of the dollanganger series from V.C. Andrews, from the escape from the attic; to the return; and thier lives still haunted by the house; and a Pre-quel.
-Petals on the Wind,
-If there be Thorns,
-Seeds of Yesterday,
-and finally, Garden of Shadows."