الزهور في العلية

Bears almost no resemblance to the book (unfortunately). Two of these kids are big enough to have jumped the grandmother AND the butler and gotten the hell out of there. They wander around like meek little mice and refuse to question their mothers sanity. They make half-hearted attempts to escape but not really. The boy is the worst when it comes to standing up for the kids. They let this bible-thumping crazy grandmother reek havoc on their lives and their mothers (who's already nuts). She's (the mother) already allowed the grandmother to pay her back for what she considers 17 years of sin. It just goes on and on till the writer and director have decided they're never going to get the book on film. They shrug their shoulders and walk away from the film at the end. This might be a great re-make in a few years with a well-thought-out script, a good director and especially a good cast.

Virginia Andrews' immensely popular best selling novel must have been a sensational read, however as a movie it does not come off as well, mainly due to the lack of professionalism from those who brought it to the big screen. Jeffrey Bloom's (screenwriter and director) direction is stale as he merely tells the story, as though we've never heard it before, whilst the players do little but act out their parts. Louise Fletcher's grandmother character is sufficiently unnerving, but she is not able to do enough with it. "Flowers in the Attic" is a disturbing story, but it's told too 'matter of fact' to have any real impact. Monday, January 3, 1994 - Video

Great movie terrible story so sad and the sadist part is there are way too many children with parents or guardians that treat there children horrible! This movie makes you really think.

I read Flowers in the Attic (under the Finnish title Flowers of the darkness)) as a teenager. I did not know it was supposedly scandalous in USA for it's content: violence was melodramatic instead of hardhittingly realistic and the romantic(ized) incest fantasy was just that: PG spice. There was no sleazy, trashy horror scum in this book - V C Andrews is not Jack Ketchum or even Stephen King - just Gothic romance melodrama. The movie kept the striking Old dark house setting and entertainingly villainous Christian fanatics, but took away the incest. Rats! Louise Fletcher, the depraved nurse torturing mentally ill in the socially critical One flew over cuckoo's nest, was again the source of evil - in all Andrews books everybody over 25 was the necessary evil - and Kirsty Swanson was blonde enough to play the "innocent" heroine Cathy.

i think this is a very effective horror movie,but without blood and guts.the movie is filled with an air of dread and depression,and i found it hard to watch,but i did manage to get through it.the last time i tried to watch it,i had to stop it after about 15 minutes.to me,Louise Fletcher is absolutely terrifying as the wicked,evil grandmother.the movie doesn't go into as much depth as the novel(by V.C Andrews) on which it is based,but i think that would take at least a 2 part mini series.i wouldn't recommend this movie if you are feeling down.also just keep in my mind that they did leave quite a bit out compared to the novel.otherwise,i would recommend it,especially if you like Gothic style horror,which i think this is.for me,"Flowers in the Attic" is a 3.5/5

The original quartet of books (Flowers in the Attic; Petals on the Wind; Let There be Thorns; Seeds of Yesterday) combined to tell a controversial and powerful tale of abuse, incest, betrayal, murder, mental distress and collapse, and hidden family secrets. The characters leapt off the page and the situations were memorable. This film, I'm sorry to say, is feeble and doesn't get even halfway near to doing justice to Virginia Andrews' work. As the key character, Cathy, Kirsty Swanson is all wrong, while her siblings Chris, Carrie, and Cory (played by Jeb Stuart Adams, Lindsay Parker, and Ben Ryan Ganger) don't engage the interest. Perhaps the most interesting character in the film is Corrine, their mother, played by Victoria Tennant, and given a bit of characterisation. I just think the material is pretty unfilmable without it veering into pseudo-* or just becoming a catalogue of violence. Stick to the books and avoid this.