Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LynneSin

(95,337 posts)
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 01:16 AM Jan 2014

Yes I watched "Flowers in the Attic". Here's my review (and yes spoilers).

Let's face it, I was a young-in when that book came out and it was such a shocking book that many parents wouldn't even let their kids read it. I know my mother refused to let me read the book but a school friend let me borrow her tattered copy of the book (which was borrowed by about a dozen other girls in the same issue). I had to hide that book for the week I was able to borrow it from a friend. I'm sure my mother would have tossed it if she knew I had read it.

So of course I wanted to see the lifetime movie. I always thought there was potential for a great movie in that book and the bad film made in 1987 was a joke - made "Mommie Dearest" look like an Oscar caliber movie. I thought there was alot of potential because one of my favorite actresses was playing the grandmother (I adore Ellen Burstyn) and I thought Heather Graham was a great choice to play the mother.

In the end I walked away disappointed but still felt that the movie lifetime did was a far cry better than the crappy 1987 version.

The failure really wasn't with Burstyn or Graham - they both did amazing job with the parts they played. Even the actors they had playing the older kids did a great job but the ones playing the younger kids really came across more like background bit roles. In the end was the failure to give the people creating this movie enough time to really build the drama in this movie.

Lifetime TV, which aired the show, only gave 2 hours for the movie. Mind you in the end it was only about 90 minutes plus all the commercials. Because of how short the movie was I really felt that they barely played up any of the real drama of the book. I know it's impossible to translate any book to movie and include every single chapter and word written but to me I thought the movie was more like an adaptation of the Cliff Notes of "Flowers in the Attic". Sure we got the gist of the plot line but in the end the true drama that was a part of this book wasn't really felt in the movie.

I heard they will be making "Petals in the Wind" (the sequel) but will be starting 10 years after the end of Flowers. Which means once again Lifetime TV will be cutting out a bulk of the drama to give us a condensed version of the movie. Will I watch it? Probably, I'm still a sucker for this book but at least I'll go into it not expecting much to come out of it.

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Yes I watched "Flowers in the Attic". Here's my review (and yes spoilers). (Original Post) LynneSin Jan 2014 OP
I was hoping for better. Liberal Veteran Jan 2014 #1
That series still hold place as the most shocking smut I have ever read. alphafemale Jan 2014 #2

Liberal Veteran

(22,239 posts)
1. I was hoping for better.
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 03:17 AM
Jan 2014

The premise has the makings of something creepy, disturbing, and entertaining.

What we have gotten so far is the Campfest '87 and Blahfest '14.

 

alphafemale

(18,497 posts)
2. That series still hold place as the most shocking smut I have ever read.
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 04:13 AM
Jan 2014


And I was 12ish?

Yeah multi generational teen incest is a bit hard to set to film.

Wasn't the last bit in the books about an intersexed character who had sex with hiesrself and was pregnant?
Latest Discussions»The DU Lounge»Yes I watched "Flowe...