Sunday, September 29, 2013
Saturday, September 21, 2013
Review: Flowers in the Attic (1987)
Principal cast: Louise Fletcher, Victoria Tennant, Kristy Swanson, Jeb Stuart Adams
Director: Jeffrey Bloom
Tags: Drama, Mystery, Thriller
The Basics: Based on the novel by V.C. Andrews, the film tells the story of four children (two teenagers and two pre-school aged kids) who are brought to their mother’s family estate after the tragic loss of their father. From day one the children receive nothing but hostility and hatred from their tyrannical, Bible beating grandmother who lock the four children into a single bedroom with access to a large attic. Locked away and hidden from the world, the children are captive to a grandmother who hates them for a sin they did not commit, and a mother who slowly disappears from their lives. The older of the children plot their escape; at first to find their lost mother, but the struggle for freedom becomes a fight for survival.
Recommendation: This is a dark family drama with elements of mystery, psychological thriller, and claustrophobic suspense; and fans of these styles should appreciate this film. Fans of V.C. Andrews’ novel will enjoy this movie as well.
My Two Cents *Spoiler Alert* For the most part, this film stays true to the source novel, taking only a few, yet substantial liberties, with the story (which we’ll get to shortly.) It starts off by showing the quaint yet happy all American life of the Dollanganger family, and in the next heartbeat, the lives of the main characters are derailed when the father is killed in an auto accident, forcing the mother and her four children to seek refuge with the grandmother, which turns out to be the veritable gates of Hell for the siblings. So, the film wastes no time in thickening the plot, and as soon as the tension is introduced, it never lets up. As soon as the viewer begins to catch their breath, something else happens to tighten the atmosphere and keep the tension going. And, unlike many thrillers of today, there are no cheap, superlative jump scares or false alarms to give any semblance of reassurance. It isn't made clear as to how until later in the film, but from the moment the four kids enter their bedroom prison, the audience just knows their lives are in danger.
The casting for this movie was as close to perfect as one is going to get. Louise Fletcher is downright frightening in her role as the hateful, Bible armed grandmother. Her physically overpowering and hostile stage presence fit the character so perfectly that one could believe she walked right out of the pages of the novel onto the screen. Victoria Tennant also does a very good job as Corrine, especially in the way she portrays the evolution of her character from token housewife and mother to a murderous, self-serving upper class socialite. Both Kristy Swanson and Jeb Stuart Adams do a wonderful job in showing how their respective characters grow from naïve and optimistic children into broken hearted young adults who have to fight for their own survival as well as their younger siblings. And, Ben Ganger and Lindsay Parker perfectly fit into the rolls of the young twins: the powerfully loud Carrie and the adorably sweet Cory. It’s impossible not to melt when little Cory, stricken with illness looks up and quietly utters, “Hello John” as his last words on Earth.
As I said, there were some liberties taken from the novel in making this film; some of which are understandable, some not so much. Number one; in the novel, the children were locked away in the room and attic for over three years, while in the film, the time frame is closer to one year. I can imagine that this was done to accommodate the fact that the film would be shot over a period of months rather than years; and while older actors could pull off the growth from 14 to 17, it would be harder to pull off a growth from five to eight in that time frame. That could be a reason, but in the novel, Carrie and Cory barely grew in their seclusion because they had barely any exposure to sunlight and fresh air, and their diet was far from balanced. I could see this as not an easy decision to make, especially when considering the audiences that have not read the book.
The second element that was changed for the film was the relationship between the older children. In the novel, Christopher and Cathy grow into physical, emotional; intellectual, and most importantly, sexual maturity during their time in the attic; but their captivity and the abuse they suffer has it’s effect on this growth. In a way, the Dollanganger children have become a sort of family unit with the older children becoming parents to the younger twins. This, coupled with their fight for survival causes a sexual link between the two which leads to a climactic act of incest. Their fight for survival and their surrogate parentage for the twins are present in the film, but the sexual aspect is left out. I can imagine this was done to keep the movie from being rated R, and while it doesn’t bother me per se, I still think this was an important plot element to show the coming of age of the two older kids and how it is twisted by the greed of their mother and the hatred of their grandmother.
To me, there was only one liberty taken from the book that has no excuse, which is the plot line and ultimate fate of Corrine, the mother. The film stays true to a point. She starts out by keeping her children a secret until her dying father forgives her for marrying her Uncle and writes her back into his will, and as soon as he passes away, they get the money and can start a new life. Throughout the story, Corrine visits her children less and less. Fearing for her life, the two older children find a way to leave the room and explore the house, only to find that their mother is living in extreme comfort and happiness while they suffer in their prison. According to the grandfather’s will, if it is discovered that Corrine had children from her marriage to her uncle, even after the grandfather passed on, she would be disinherited all over again and would have nothing, which prompts Corrine to attempt to murder her children in an attempt to keep them a secret forever. In the film, the children confront their mother during her wedding to Bart Winslow, the family lawyer, and in a tussle with Cathy, Corrine in thrown from a balcony and hanged to death with her own wedding veil. In the novel, Corrine marries Bart Winslow halfway through the story and tells her children about her wedding and their honeymoon to Europe. Bart lives with the family in their giant house, and during one of their nighttime searches, Cathy sees him sleeping in a chair and lightly kisses him as he sleeps (which becomes important in the next book of the series.) When the children leave the house in the end, the mother is very much alive. The reason for this change is a little less clear, but I can guess that it was changed to give the movie a more climactic ending. It might have also been altered to end the movie with a sense of justice; that Corrine did not win the fight and does not get the money, or her life. I still think this was a mistake seeing as how Corrine is an important presence in the second novel, which was intended to be made into a movie as well. There is a definite social commentary made by this story about the evil of wealth and the lengths some will go to in order to acquire/keep hold of their gold. It shows how the desire for riches and comfort can corrupt the human soul, and it is the innocent that will pay the price for their greed. But this is a story about a family; about death and survival, good and evil; love and hate, with both God and the devil watching.
The Breakdown
Cast Performance - Perfect. The cast shines in this film. There is not one performance that is less that great, and I almost never say that.
Violence - Mild. There is some hard slapping, including a strike against a young child.
Nudity - none. Plot elements that would have called for nudity were omitted.
Ambience/Music- Excellent. The bedroom and attic set were almost exactly as they were described in the book. The main theme of the movie is memorable and beautifully haunting.
Overall rating: 4.5/5.0
Interesting Notes
-Louise Fletcher and Kristy Swanson were both given scripts for the second book of the series, “Petals on the Wind.” The movie never went into production. Swanson described the movie as “all sex.”
-Kristy Swanson was introduced to V.C. Andrews, and the author said that she was just how she pictured Cathy.
-V.C. Andrews makes a cameo appearance in this film (she’s a old lady washing the windows.) Sadly, the author passed away before the film was released.
Director: Jeffrey Bloom
Tags: Drama, Mystery, Thriller
The Basics: Based on the novel by V.C. Andrews, the film tells the story of four children (two teenagers and two pre-school aged kids) who are brought to their mother’s family estate after the tragic loss of their father. From day one the children receive nothing but hostility and hatred from their tyrannical, Bible beating grandmother who lock the four children into a single bedroom with access to a large attic. Locked away and hidden from the world, the children are captive to a grandmother who hates them for a sin they did not commit, and a mother who slowly disappears from their lives. The older of the children plot their escape; at first to find their lost mother, but the struggle for freedom becomes a fight for survival.
Recommendation: This is a dark family drama with elements of mystery, psychological thriller, and claustrophobic suspense; and fans of these styles should appreciate this film. Fans of V.C. Andrews’ novel will enjoy this movie as well.
My Two Cents *Spoiler Alert* For the most part, this film stays true to the source novel, taking only a few, yet substantial liberties, with the story (which we’ll get to shortly.) It starts off by showing the quaint yet happy all American life of the Dollanganger family, and in the next heartbeat, the lives of the main characters are derailed when the father is killed in an auto accident, forcing the mother and her four children to seek refuge with the grandmother, which turns out to be the veritable gates of Hell for the siblings. So, the film wastes no time in thickening the plot, and as soon as the tension is introduced, it never lets up. As soon as the viewer begins to catch their breath, something else happens to tighten the atmosphere and keep the tension going. And, unlike many thrillers of today, there are no cheap, superlative jump scares or false alarms to give any semblance of reassurance. It isn't made clear as to how until later in the film, but from the moment the four kids enter their bedroom prison, the audience just knows their lives are in danger.
The casting for this movie was as close to perfect as one is going to get. Louise Fletcher is downright frightening in her role as the hateful, Bible armed grandmother. Her physically overpowering and hostile stage presence fit the character so perfectly that one could believe she walked right out of the pages of the novel onto the screen. Victoria Tennant also does a very good job as Corrine, especially in the way she portrays the evolution of her character from token housewife and mother to a murderous, self-serving upper class socialite. Both Kristy Swanson and Jeb Stuart Adams do a wonderful job in showing how their respective characters grow from naïve and optimistic children into broken hearted young adults who have to fight for their own survival as well as their younger siblings. And, Ben Ganger and Lindsay Parker perfectly fit into the rolls of the young twins: the powerfully loud Carrie and the adorably sweet Cory. It’s impossible not to melt when little Cory, stricken with illness looks up and quietly utters, “Hello John” as his last words on Earth.
As I said, there were some liberties taken from the novel in making this film; some of which are understandable, some not so much. Number one; in the novel, the children were locked away in the room and attic for over three years, while in the film, the time frame is closer to one year. I can imagine that this was done to accommodate the fact that the film would be shot over a period of months rather than years; and while older actors could pull off the growth from 14 to 17, it would be harder to pull off a growth from five to eight in that time frame. That could be a reason, but in the novel, Carrie and Cory barely grew in their seclusion because they had barely any exposure to sunlight and fresh air, and their diet was far from balanced. I could see this as not an easy decision to make, especially when considering the audiences that have not read the book.
The second element that was changed for the film was the relationship between the older children. In the novel, Christopher and Cathy grow into physical, emotional; intellectual, and most importantly, sexual maturity during their time in the attic; but their captivity and the abuse they suffer has it’s effect on this growth. In a way, the Dollanganger children have become a sort of family unit with the older children becoming parents to the younger twins. This, coupled with their fight for survival causes a sexual link between the two which leads to a climactic act of incest. Their fight for survival and their surrogate parentage for the twins are present in the film, but the sexual aspect is left out. I can imagine this was done to keep the movie from being rated R, and while it doesn’t bother me per se, I still think this was an important plot element to show the coming of age of the two older kids and how it is twisted by the greed of their mother and the hatred of their grandmother.
To me, there was only one liberty taken from the book that has no excuse, which is the plot line and ultimate fate of Corrine, the mother. The film stays true to a point. She starts out by keeping her children a secret until her dying father forgives her for marrying her Uncle and writes her back into his will, and as soon as he passes away, they get the money and can start a new life. Throughout the story, Corrine visits her children less and less. Fearing for her life, the two older children find a way to leave the room and explore the house, only to find that their mother is living in extreme comfort and happiness while they suffer in their prison. According to the grandfather’s will, if it is discovered that Corrine had children from her marriage to her uncle, even after the grandfather passed on, she would be disinherited all over again and would have nothing, which prompts Corrine to attempt to murder her children in an attempt to keep them a secret forever. In the film, the children confront their mother during her wedding to Bart Winslow, the family lawyer, and in a tussle with Cathy, Corrine in thrown from a balcony and hanged to death with her own wedding veil. In the novel, Corrine marries Bart Winslow halfway through the story and tells her children about her wedding and their honeymoon to Europe. Bart lives with the family in their giant house, and during one of their nighttime searches, Cathy sees him sleeping in a chair and lightly kisses him as he sleeps (which becomes important in the next book of the series.) When the children leave the house in the end, the mother is very much alive. The reason for this change is a little less clear, but I can guess that it was changed to give the movie a more climactic ending. It might have also been altered to end the movie with a sense of justice; that Corrine did not win the fight and does not get the money, or her life. I still think this was a mistake seeing as how Corrine is an important presence in the second novel, which was intended to be made into a movie as well. There is a definite social commentary made by this story about the evil of wealth and the lengths some will go to in order to acquire/keep hold of their gold. It shows how the desire for riches and comfort can corrupt the human soul, and it is the innocent that will pay the price for their greed. But this is a story about a family; about death and survival, good and evil; love and hate, with both God and the devil watching.
The Breakdown
Cast Performance - Perfect. The cast shines in this film. There is not one performance that is less that great, and I almost never say that.
Violence - Mild. There is some hard slapping, including a strike against a young child.
Nudity - none. Plot elements that would have called for nudity were omitted.
Ambience/Music- Excellent. The bedroom and attic set were almost exactly as they were described in the book. The main theme of the movie is memorable and beautifully haunting.
Overall rating: 4.5/5.0
Interesting Notes
-Louise Fletcher and Kristy Swanson were both given scripts for the second book of the series, “Petals on the Wind.” The movie never went into production. Swanson described the movie as “all sex.”
-Kristy Swanson was introduced to V.C. Andrews, and the author said that she was just how she pictured Cathy.
-V.C. Andrews makes a cameo appearance in this film (she’s a old lady washing the windows.) Sadly, the author passed away before the film was released.
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Bob's Quick Look - The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones (2013)
Based on the first book of the bestselling series, this film centers on a teenage girl who is thrust into a world of dark mysticism when her mother disappears, and evil forces hunt for her and an ancient artifact her mother was hiding. As she searches for her lost mother, and learns about the angel blood in her veins and the power she possesses, she is torn between her closest friend and the young warrior who is sworn to protect her.
*Spoiler alert* I’ve heard quite a few people describe this movie as Harry Potter meets Twilight. I can see that. As with both, the main story element centers on a “normal” person being thrust into a supernatural environment. Visually, it has a bit in common with the Harry Potter films; especially with the scenes inside “the Institute” and visual effects such as the dimensional portal. It also carries the love triangle aspect and the teenage target audience of the Twilight saga.
Even though this film would not have to reach far to do so, it does possess a level of sophistication that these other two franchises lack. Even though there were times that felt like the writers wanted to take us from point a to point be a little too quickly, the movie had a good flowing motion with a decent balance of action scenes and story telling to keep the plot moving. And I will say that this is a beautiful movie to watch on the big screen.
While the motion was fluid for the most part, it does get choppy at a couple of points. It also seemed at times that there were things going on that one might understand if they had read the novel. When I saw this movie, I had not, so I was left with questions such as, “Why could Simon not see Jace in the club, but could see him later on?” This is answered in the book but not the movie, as far I remember.
All in all, I would say this is a pretty good summer movie; visually striking with an interesting premise. This film could have used a rewrite or two of the script before being filmed with focus on the fact that not everyone in the theater has read the book.
All in all, I would say this is a pretty good summer movie; visually striking with an interesting premise. This film could have used a rewrite or two of the script before being filmed with focus on the fact that not everyone in the theater has read the book.
Monday, September 2, 2013
Quick Look: Back to School (1986)
People in the Movie: Rodney Dangerfield, Keith Gordon, Sally Kellerman
Director: Alan Metter
Pigeonhole: Comedy
Basics: Thornton Melon (Dangerfield) is a millionaire businessman who owns the successful chain of clothing stores called "Tall and Fat". His son, Jason (Gordon), is a freshman at Grand Lakes University, but is questioning his desire to continue at GLU after a mediocre first term. Thornton decides to enroll - having never gotten a higher education himself - to motivate his son, and to party, but quickly learns that his challenges in the classroom are not like the challenges of being a successful entrepreneur. Somehow, Thornton is able to balance his academic life and personal life by starting a romance with one of his professors, Dr. Diane Turner (Kellerman).
Recommendation: Back to School has some of the actors and elements of the best 80's comedies including: Dangerfield's irreverent "no respect" type humor; Robert Downey, Jr. in a supporting role; William Zabka as the bully/ antagonist to one of the main characters; Sam Kinison as a history professor and Burt Young as the sloppy, low-talking manservant. While it is not the "best" movie for any one of the actors, it is a funny, well-paced movie, and you get exactly what you are expecting.
At the Dead Man's Party we Twist and Shout: **spoiler alert**
After divorcing his cheating, gold-digging wife at the beginning of the film, Thornton hops in his limo to visit his son at school. Jason tells his dad he does not like it there; he did not make the diving team his first semester, his only friend is Derek (Downey), and he is not doing "that great" in class. Thornton's answer to move in with Jason and Derek - by buying several rooms on Jason's floor and remodeling them into a giant party suite - and enrolling in classes. Thornton falls for his literature professor, Dr. Turner, (on the first day of his class, no less) which has the typical ups and downs of a fling in a comedy.
While the plot unfolds in a very formulaic manner, there are enough laughs to keep it moving along. Kinison is a professor of Contemporary American History who likes to unleash his crazy screaming on students. Oingo Boingo headlines Thornton's dorm party "of the year" with a nice musical bit. Zabka, known for his high school bullying in Karate Kid and Just One of the Guys, graduates to college, to bully Jason as the captain of the swim team. At the end of the film Thornton shows off his ultimate trick dive called the "Triple Lindy" to win a swim meet, in a kind of Animal House/ Revenge of the Nerds 80's victory.
Extras:
- Dangerfield was actually a trick diver in his younger days
- The film was shot mostly at the University of Wisconsin- Madison
Director: Alan Metter
Pigeonhole: Comedy
Basics: Thornton Melon (Dangerfield) is a millionaire businessman who owns the successful chain of clothing stores called "Tall and Fat". His son, Jason (Gordon), is a freshman at Grand Lakes University, but is questioning his desire to continue at GLU after a mediocre first term. Thornton decides to enroll - having never gotten a higher education himself - to motivate his son, and to party, but quickly learns that his challenges in the classroom are not like the challenges of being a successful entrepreneur. Somehow, Thornton is able to balance his academic life and personal life by starting a romance with one of his professors, Dr. Diane Turner (Kellerman).
Recommendation: Back to School has some of the actors and elements of the best 80's comedies including: Dangerfield's irreverent "no respect" type humor; Robert Downey, Jr. in a supporting role; William Zabka as the bully/ antagonist to one of the main characters; Sam Kinison as a history professor and Burt Young as the sloppy, low-talking manservant. While it is not the "best" movie for any one of the actors, it is a funny, well-paced movie, and you get exactly what you are expecting.
At the Dead Man's Party we Twist and Shout: **spoiler alert**
After divorcing his cheating, gold-digging wife at the beginning of the film, Thornton hops in his limo to visit his son at school. Jason tells his dad he does not like it there; he did not make the diving team his first semester, his only friend is Derek (Downey), and he is not doing "that great" in class. Thornton's answer to move in with Jason and Derek - by buying several rooms on Jason's floor and remodeling them into a giant party suite - and enrolling in classes. Thornton falls for his literature professor, Dr. Turner, (on the first day of his class, no less) which has the typical ups and downs of a fling in a comedy.
While the plot unfolds in a very formulaic manner, there are enough laughs to keep it moving along. Kinison is a professor of Contemporary American History who likes to unleash his crazy screaming on students. Oingo Boingo headlines Thornton's dorm party "of the year" with a nice musical bit. Zabka, known for his high school bullying in Karate Kid and Just One of the Guys, graduates to college, to bully Jason as the captain of the swim team. At the end of the film Thornton shows off his ultimate trick dive called the "Triple Lindy" to win a swim meet, in a kind of Animal House/ Revenge of the Nerds 80's victory.
Extras:
- Dangerfield was actually a trick diver in his younger days
- The film was shot mostly at the University of Wisconsin- Madison
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)