Flowers in the Attic

My very first introduction to V.C. Andrews came when I was about 10 years old. My mother, usually very protective and conservative when it came to movies, actually let me watch a movie called "Flowers in the Attic." It was kind of an "I-think-you-can-handle-it; it'll-be-our-secret" moment. :-) I really liked it, and even though as an adult I think it's actually pretty tame, that movie retains, for me, an element of the taboo and outrageous. A few years after that I read the book and realized how sanitized it actually was.

I was so excited to learn that there was going to be a 2014 remake of "FItA." However, I was a little nervous to learn that Lifetime was going to be the venue. After reading the book, I thought that the only TV station that could do it justice would be HBO, Showtime or Starz. So nonetheless, I excitedly awaited the premier of this on Lifetime, so much so that I waited until midnight to catch the replay (I was spending MLK weekend in a cabin with some girlfriends and a few guys that I couldn't convince to tune in for the 8pm showing!). After viewing it, I decided that it was neither better nor no worse than the 80s film.

First of all, the Lifetime film was much closer to the novel, even down to small details like the picture of Hell in the room. Unlike the 80s film, in which the story took place in the present time (the 80s), the remake takes place in the correct time period, the 50s. This film succeeds in some places and fails in others.

The good: Again, very close to the novel. The film is also beautifully shot with gorgeous 50s period costumes and dark, Gothic eerie-ness. Ellen Berstyn as "The Grandmother," Olivia, was good. What's funny is she actually portrayed a three-dimensional character, as opposed to Louise Fletcher's 80s portrayal, which was more one-dimensional, but, to me, MUCH more evil and fun to hate. BUT when Ellen's Grandmother got nasty, she got NASTY very well! When a grown woman threatens a little kid and makes a fist, that's pretty disturbing! The actor who portrayed Chris was also good, or at least better than the one who portrayed the character in the original.

The neutral: The lead actress who played Cathy (Kiernan Shipka) portrayed her completely differently than the one that played her in the 80s film (Kristy Swanson). Instead of a sweet, quiet and occasionally angry girl, we get a very 21-st century, kind but sarcastic hard @$$. This could be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on your taste and/or how you interpreted the book.

The bad: Heather Graham is a gorgeous, sexy and talented actress. However, I can't help but feel that most of her talent must lie in comedy. She looked beautiful in the costumes, but I didn't care for her acting in this at all. And, well, this movie was kind of boring. Despite the producers actually showing some of the more tawdry details of the novels, I still felt that Lifetime held back. To me this was the opportunity to capture the craziness of the novel, and it just failed.

I did enjoy this, but it wasn't any better than the original film, unfortunately. It was just a slightly different version.

The movie is true to the book and it's not terrible... but Heather Graham must be the worst actress ever... her acting is horrible.

While this is technically more faithful to the novel than the previous adaptation, everything is crammed into 90 minutes so that the dramatic moments haven't time to properly breathe. It leaves the whole film feeling cold, emotionless, and oddly paced. Even an extra 15 minutes would have helped a little bit, but Ellen Burstyn tries her best to put her own stamp on the Grandmother role.

For those fans worried about the makers of this TV production not being faithful to the source material; this version is really wonderful. Featuring a beautiful, blond cast of talented actors, "Flowers in the Attic" makes the beloved Gothic novel come to life. With nice 1950's period detail, we follow the Dollanganger family to the sprawling Virginia mansion known as Foxworth Hall, a place filled with secrets and cruel deceptions. Four children will be hidden in an upstairs room by a selfish mother, determined to "win back her father's love," and thus inherit the vast Foxworth fortune. But you all know the story; this book series is such a big part of the childhood memories of so many people.

This new adaptation has it all; beautiful sets, top rate actors turning in frighteningly believable performances, and an intelligent script that shows absolute respect to the novel from 1979. It is obvious that everyone involved actually cared about what they were doing, which is rare for television movies, that so often look rushed and sloppily thrown together, just to meet a deadline. In other words, this movie has a heart. Veteran actress Ellen Buryston surprisingly lends the Grandmother a bit of a human side here, which in turn makes Corrine even more of an evil character. Not to say that the Grandmother isn't still terrifying; Buryston just gives her more depth. Heather Graham, usually known more for her beauty than her acting abilities, gives a surprisingly good performance as Corrine Foxworth; sweet, charming, selfish, and cruel; all at the same time. And later in the story, when she shows her true colors, it is quite frightening. She plays a great bitch. Cathy and Chris likewise were perfectly cast by two very talented young people. Cathy especially is multi-layered here, and she allows us to sympathize with her, without her acting too sweet, or innocent; here she is a "real person," a girl that we can relate to.

I can say that every major plot point of the novel was covered in this movie, except for one that I can remember; the passages in the novel where Chris lets Cory drink his blood, after the Grandmother has cut off their food supply, is sadly absent; sad because that is one of the most powerful images from the book, and shows just how much Chris loved his siblings. But every minute of it's short running time was used to maximum effect. At under 2 hours, we still get the feeling that the children are in that upstairs room for 2 years. And I have to say that this production has a gorgeous look to it as well. It must be mentioned too, that the controversial theme of incest is dealt with, and handled very tastefully; it is still shocking, but it never feels exploitative. I'm happy to say that this is a total success all around. If you are a fan of the novels, and haven't seen this movie version, i recommend that you give it a watch; I can't imagine anyone being disappointed with this one.

I have read the book, Flowers in the Attic. This is a Gothic type mystery where children were locked up in the attic not to be seen. V.C. Andrews was able to convey a dark and sinister atmosphere with Olivia Foxworth being a truly evil grandmother, showing them absolute contempt. Heather Graham portrays their mother, who becomes bored with her life and pursues a man who is supposedly their grandfather's attorney. She stays gone for long periods of time and brings back gifts which are supposed to compensate for her absence. Heather Graham is not right for this part. She comes across as rather vacant and bored, but does not project a sense of evil, which is well demonstrated in the novel. Ellen Burnstyn is an excellent actress and there is no doubt that she can barely tolerate her newly acquired grandchildren. She gives a fantastic performance.

There are gaps in this movie and the viewer is left wondering exactly why the daughter of Foxworth was alienated from her family. Heather does not even come across as a mother, but more like a best friend to her children. But maybe that is the intended effect. She obviously is not interested or does not care about their well-being.

Also in the book VC Andrews was able to convey a sense of anxiety and claustrophobia as the children feel suffocated from living in such close quarters with no freedom. You can feel their sense of doom and emotional deprivation, as they slowly realize that they are in a sort of prison and may never get out. The director, Chow does not give the viewer this feeling of doom. If there is a sense of frustration and anxiety with their surroundings, it is mild discontent compared to what the book shows. Without this psychological drama, it greatly diminishes the sense of doom, which Gothic novels are big on portraying.

I would not watch this movie again. I had a hard time following it and in a way kind of boring.