Connect with us

Published

on

Based on V. C. Andrews’ 1979 novel of the same name, Jeffrey Bloom’s Flowers in the Attic is a little better than some critics suggest. That’s not to say you’ll love it, but let me go through a few details here and make a light defense of the film. To begin with, plenty of horror fans will come forward and suggest it’s not a horror film. While I understand the sentiment, my initial response is usually, “Who cares?” However, I do think there are plenty of horror elements here. In fact, it doesn’t hurt that Wes Craven was originally considered to direct it. Obviously, if you’ve read the title, I think this movie has themes similar to those found in The People Under the Stairs, and I’ll elaborate more on that in a bit.

The second predictable critique of Flowers in the Attic will be of the acting. Yet again, I understand the criticism. Victoria Tennant, Kristy Swanson, and Jeb Stuart Adams don’t offer the most commanding performances committed to film. However, let’s not forget about Louise Fletcher, who definitely takes control of this film, giving a performance similar to what she accomplished in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. As you watch, you may be enraged by her, as she puts everyone through hell due to sins of the past.

The result should make us ask: Should one’s perceived morality justify unrelenting cruelty? Might that urge exist beforehand, with the sadistic impulse requiring righteous justification? In fact, could it be that justification itself adds to the depravity of our actions, by masking punishment as a virtue? All of these disturbing (and, let’s face it, semi-kinky) questions unfold in Flowers in the Attic.

A Strange Tale

So, what specifically happens in this story? (Obviously, one might wish to avoid reading further if they don’t want any kinds of “spoilers.”) After the death of her husband (Marshall Colt), Tennant’s character, Corrine, moves into the mansion of her estranged father, Malcolm (Nathan Davis). She hopes her father will forgive her, then rewrite his will to hand over his estate after his death. However, Corrine’s mother, played by Fletcher, is perpetually going to punish Corrine and her children, Chris (Adams) and Cathy (Swanson) and 5-year-old twins Cory (Ben Ganger) and Carrie (Lindsay Parker).

Advertisement

Basically, these kids are, well, “kidnapped” for years by their grandmother’s estate as their mom tries to gain her father’s love (and fortune). At the same time, they are all ostensibly waiting for his funeral to escape the grandmother’s sadism. The siblings are imprisoned, only getting a sense of freedom when she’s out. Things get desperate when their mother gradually abandons them, with no plans to sneak the children out of the house. Basically, her greed ends up trumping their need.

Symbolism and the Comparison You Came Here For

Aside from flowers and an attic, Flowers in the Attic has some symbolism built into the plot. Obviously, these children live where their mother lives, yet they might as well be separated by thousands and thousands of miles. They first arrive in town as strangers to their grandmother, even though they’re related. It’s not like they have no place to stay, but end up feeling like they’d be better off lost. These are all themes of abandonment. Also, even though their grandmother considers herself well-raised and moralistic, she’s no better than the proverbial slob raised in a barn.

Again, people sometimes question if this is horror, but some of these family members are no better than deranged killers. In fact, considering that Wes Craven was considered to direct, I can’t help but wonder if this story partly influenced Craven’s later film, The People Under the Stairs. Both feature characters too psychologically damaged to defend themselves against their wealthy captors. Noticeably, they are basically disarmed (none of the victims carry a gun). Both stories feature perverted mother and father roles.

Then, of course, you have imagery like the attic door or, in The People Under the Stairs, kidnapped children locked away in a basement. In Flowers in the Attic, when the kids see their grandfather for the first time, it’s not like the old man simply refuses to accept them — he attacks them and seems like a monster.

Really, the main difference is that, in Flowers, the grandmother has hired some henchmen who prevent the kids from escaping. In People, the Mommy (Wendy Robie) and Daddy (Everett McGill) characters compel kids (Brandon Adams, A. J. Langer) into hiding, too. As perhaps the ultimate thematic crossover, kids also end up spying through walls in Flowers in the Attic. Though it lacks the bloody scenes prominent in The People Under the Stairs, the adults in Flowers in the Attic seem perfectly capable of burying young bodies in the woods.

Advertisement

One Last Bit of Trivia

The final scene of Flowers was filmed at Greystone Mansion in Beverly Hills, California. The 2007 film There Will Be Blood also filmed parts at Greystone Mansion, as well as films like Austin Powers in Goldmember, The Big Lebowski, Cabin Boy, Death Becomes Her, Eraserhead, Ghostbusters II, The Golden Child, The Muppets (film) (Kermit’s mansion), Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man franchise, Stripes, and The Witches of Eastwick. Also, soap operas like The Young and the Restless and The Bold and the Beautiful have used the location, and even the music video to “I’d Do Anything for Love (But I Won’t Do That)” by Meatloaf features Greystone.

What are your thoughts on Flowers in the Attic? Is it similar at all to The People Under the Stairs or does this idea belong locked away in a basement or attic?

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movies n TV

Low point or a daring experiment? Halloween VI (1995) Review

Published

on

To a lot of fans, this is the film that killed the franchise. It says a lot that the next installment is yet another retcon. Halloween VI: The Curse of Michael Myers attempts to explain Michael’s unrelenting evil, which lead to mixed opinions from longtime fans. There are two cuts of the film, theatrical vs producer’s. For a lot of people, the latter is the only one worth mentioning. Aiming to be as accurate as possible, I will be talking about the producer’s cut. Let’s begin! 

Plot

We start Halloween VI with a six-year time jump from part five. Jamie is now barefoot and recently pregnant, running away from Michael as he wants her baby. While she manages to hide the little one away, Michael finally gets his hunger satiated by killing her. The moment is one of the most brutal ways in the franchise up until that point. Rest in peace, Jamie, you held your ground for as long as you could, the sequels were just too relentless. 

The movie then cuts to a whole different scene going on. We have a new family living in the Myers house and their youngest child is hearing voices telling him to kill his loved ones. Tommy Lloyd is watching the family, played by none other than Paul Rudd in his first-ever theatrical role. Tommy still carries trauma from the events all those years ago when Laurie Strode was babysitting him. So when he finds Jamie’s baby, his part in the story becomes even more essential. 

Advertisement

Dr Loomis also stars in what was Donald Pleasance’s final role before his passing. He and Tommy try to stop Michael once and for all before the cycle can repeat itself. As it turns out, Michael is a victim of a druid cult which makes him want to kill his family members every Halloween. Thorn, the cult in question, thinks they can control Michael and make him do their bidding. This results in catastrophe and Michael goes berzerk and kills all the cult members. Once again, it’s one of the most gruesome montages for the franchise up until that point.  

Tommy and Kara are left to face Michael on their own which they manage to do with some corrosive liquid and good luck. However, nothing stays dead in this franchise as it’s soon revealed Michael somehow escaped and this time Dr Loomis might not be so lucky… 

Overall thoughts

I would say for me personally Halloween VI definitely ranks somewhere near the bottom. The whole point of Michael is that there is no rhyme or reason to his killings and this film tries to go against that. I am glad the mistake was rectified by the upcoming installment. There were still some good things about it, such as Paul Rudd’s acting that reveals some raw talent as far as I’m concerned, as well as some direction choices and musical score. However, I also think it absolutely deserves all the criticism that it gets. 

Advertisement
2.5 out of 5 stars (2.5 / 5)

Continue Reading

Movies n TV

American Horror Stories, The Thing Under The Bed

Published

on

We’ve reached the final episode of American Horror Stories, season three. After the ups and downs of the season, I didn’t know what to expect. I felt that we were due a big finish, Killer Queens. But I feared we were in for a big letdown.

As it turns out, The Thing Under The Bed was neither.

The story

We begin our story with a little girl named Mary, who is scared of something under her bed. She sneaks out of her room, only to be caught by her father and sent back to sleep. And of course, there is something horrible waiting for her under her bed.

Debby Ryan in American Horror Stories.

This scene cuts away to a woman named Jillian. She has strange dreams, including one about Mary. But her husband, Mark, doesn’t want to hear about it. He’s only interested in a little lovemaking because he wants a baby. Jillian doesn’t, which makes total sense because she’s already married to one. But her irritation with her childish husband goes away when he goes away. And by goes away, I mean he’s sloppily devoured by something vicious under their bed.

Advertisement

What worked

In short, this episode just worked. The acting was professional and believable. The cinematography and lighting work were wonderful, adding spooky effects and startling moments without impairing visibility.

Best of all, the story was solid. There were no plotholes to be found. Our main character, Jillian, was relatable and sympathetic.

This was maybe my favorite part of the story. I thought Jillian was a remarkably sympathetic character. She was dealt a hand she never asked for, having her husband slaughtered in their bedroom. I don’t think she missed him, so much as she was afraid of the legal ramifications of being caught with literal blood on her hands.

Then, when it would have been safest for her to just lay low and save up for a good defense attorney, she instead goes into unlikely hero mode. She does her best to save people, putting herself in legal and physical danger. It’s hard not to root for her.

It’s also a little hard not to root for the antagonist, too. I don’t want to ruin the twist for you, so I’m going to tread lightly here. But it’s great when you have an antagonist who might be off their rocker, but also maybe has a point.

Advertisement

What didn’t work

I can only really think of one complaint with this episode. And that is how frequently one character says the word Chickadee. And if you’ve seen the episode, you know what I am talking about.

I get it, he has a pet name for his daughter. It’s adorable. It’s meant to convey that the two of them have a healthy loving relationship and I get it. We all get it. Blind monks get it. But the fact remains that no parent on Earth calls their kid by their pet name every single time they speak an individual sentence to them. It was just too damn much.

All in all, this was a good episode. It was a classic story, turned on its head, told by professionals from start to finish. And I hope that if there is another season, we see more stories like this one. But after the efforts put into this season at large, I wouldn’t be surprised if this is the last we see of American Horror Stories.

4 out of 5 stars (4 / 5)

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movies n TV

American Horror Stories, Leprechaun

Published

on

If you’ve watched enough short-form horror anthology shows, you’ll notice that some stories are mainstays. Each show seems to put on the same sort of episodes, with the occasional surprising storyline that we’ve never (or at least rarely) seen before.

Leprechaun was an example of a repeated story—the story of a greedy thief whose punishment far outweighs the crime.

The story

We begin our story in 1841, with a drunk man leaving the bar one late night. He’s distracted by something glowing at the end of the well. When he reaches down for the glowing thing, he falls in. Moments later, he screams.

We then cut to the modern day. The well is still there, and now it’s surrounded by a dying town. In this town lives a young man named Colin. He’s married, his wife is pregnant, and he’s out of work. Like many of his friends.

Advertisement
Hudson Oz in American Horror Stories Leprechaun.

Desperate for cash, Colin and his friends decide to rob a bank. They put together an Equate version of Ocean’s Eleven, and break in one night. But, of course, they find that the gold is nothing more than bait. And the creature waiting for them is something they never expected.

What worked

The first thing I want to point out is how real this episode felt. At least to anyone currently living in the same small town they grew up in. These characters felt like guys I went to school with. Guys I would see at the bar.

I appreciated the real anger and frustration these characters are feeling. Especially Colin. He’s bitter, and maybe he has a right to be. He did exactly what he was supposed to do to succeed. He went to school and invested in his career, and yet now he’s out of work and struggling to support his family. I probably don’t need to tell you how that feels. Because of this, we can all kind of understand why he was tempted to rob a bank.

I also want to talk about the fact that this was, as I said, an often-explored story. That can be a bad thing, but it can also be a good thing. This story is told over and over because it’s a good story. A relatable story. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

What didn’t work

That being said, this version didn’t try to do much to break out of the mold.

Because we have seen this story so many times, most of us could tell the story themselves. I would have expected something new, or some twist. But, in the end, the story didn’t bring anything new to the discussion.

Advertisement

Maybe because of this, the ending left a lot to be desired. Trapped in the basement of the bank, everyone just sort of stares at everyone else, until the thieves give up. And that’s it. The ending wasn’t scary, shocking, or funny. It was just sad, on multiple levels.

Overall, this was an okay story. It was entertaining, if not surprising. I would compare this episode to homemade macaroni and cheese. Everyone’s got their own version, they’re all pretty good, and none of them are exciting.

There’s just one episode left in this season of American Horror Stories. Let’s hope they’ve saved the best for last.

3.5 out of 5 stars (3.5 / 5)

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending