Flowers In the Attic 3: If There Be Thorns
 

I wouldn't be surprised if nobody answers this thread, coz I doubt anyone has even seen the sequel as the original is quite bad.

But I just noticed a third installment has come out and the genre has now gone from drama/thriller to just plain drama. My God... The sequel was unexciting enough, do anybody really want to see the rest of this series??? Not me.

It's as riveting as the Little House on the Praire.

You liked the movie?

I have watched all the movies thus far; no, they are not that great but i watch them cause I read all the books was I was young and I really enjoyed them.

::stick out tongue::

I gave the third movie about 15 minutes and then I gave up on this series.

To me it's just not a very good or interesting story.

Hey, at least you gave it a try ::wink::

Hell yea I did. 2 god damn movies!! ::mad::::danger::::sad::

seen the first movie and didnt rate it. i remember, as a kid, the images of the ghostly kids trapped in an attic on the book covers terrified me! Remember the rats by James herbert, god everyone seemed to own that book

Don't know of any of James Herbert's work, but now you made me curious.

Managed to find "Deadly Eyes" (Aka The Rats) on youtube and watching it now.

Thanks! ::smile::

you probably wont thanks me after watching it. Everyone seemed to love herbert in the 80s and the films of him always eemed to be lame (the survivor, fluke etc). My abiding memory as a kid is of people with herbert and king books lined up next to each other

I saw The Survivor right after The Rats. I wouldn't call either of them bad, but I would like to see both movies remade on a bigger budget, coz the stories are pretty cool. I would also like to see "The Fog" being made. ::smile::

like most people, i'd never read the fog, but i assumed the film was the film version of the book. Amazing how many people still don't know it isnt. I've since read it and i think the film is a lot better than the actual book! Neither film is that bad, but they suffer from the usual horror syndrome of great book/middling film

Well, the book's cover does look a lot like the movie cover, so I can easily understand why people would think they're the same story. So did I. Most of his books has some pretty cool cover artworks, I must say.

I managed to find the mini series The Secret of Crickley Hall and started on the first episode, but as I was working on something at the same time it just got to play in the background. Very few scenes in this first episode made me turn around out of interest, so I'll have to give it another try some other day, coz the story sounds right up my alley.

I loved flowers in the attic I didn't, know that there where sequel or two I'm going to have to see them.

Well, don't say I didn't warn you, Wildfire.::wink::

Loved this thread. when I lived in the States a couple of years ago, I heard about FITA for the first time - despite having studied world lit for years, I'd never heard of the books.

I really tried to get through the first book, despite the warnings from American friends. I never got to a really scary part, but I could see why it might have some guilty-pleasure quality with the whole sibling incest theme and all, but nothing that I wrote was "horror" as such. Maybe if I'd read it BEFORE my late 20's...

If there was a good movie version made, I'd watch it, but from what I've read they tend to clean them up, which I suppose would make them even less scary than the books and not even have the controversy of the sibling incest theme.

Ah well, thanks for the warning, I'll just wait until someone decides to do it properly. Sibling incest and all. ... Aaaand I'm just going to stop writing the words "sibling incest" now, excuse me...

Both versions of the first novel included the sexual blossoming between the siblings, and that was hot and all. Just didn't make it remotely scary. Neither did the evil granny. Just made the story dramatic, but none of the versions succeded in making the story actually scary even tho the ingredients were there. But i didn't feel like any of the 2 versions left anything out. So go ahead. ::smile::

REALLY?? They included the hot sibling incest?

I thought I'd read that this one: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3074694/?ref_=nv_sr_2

didn't and the one with nurse Ratched didn't neither, was that wrong? In that case, let me at 'em! Wouldn't want to miss all the hot sibling incest!

I would say both versions contain sibling passion, but not exactly sex (the remake has a mild sex scene).

What's your last question??

Sounds pretty boring. Why don't they do a scary version, with serious hot sibling incest?

That's not a real question, I'm done, beg your pardon etc.

Oh yes... If only it'd been a porno. ::sad::

That's.... No! Twisting my words!

I just figured maybe HBO could do a series where they don't censure all the HSI is all...

Yea, you're pretty sick. I like that. ::cool::

Considering the overall forum topic, aren't we all somewhat disturbed??

At any rate, I do appreciate your appreciation of my particular niche of sickness and I'm sure you're a very twisted individual in your own special way too ::wink::

No doubt.

you two shoud try 'heavy r' its the site i go for some of my deviant needs!

"Dirty whore has big steamy shit".


I prefer to believe I'm not that sick. But thanks for the thought.

Thanks for the warning, I'll stick to the basic redtube as well

Didn't know that there were more flowers in the attic movies I only have the first one.

You actually own the movie?

We found it at the flea market.

Oh. Good. Hopefully you found it dirt cheap.

$5.00 Ill say that's cheap. It was in great condition. It is a vhs too.

::shocked::

My deviancy has being found out yikes!::danger::

Better believe it. lol

I really liked the first i never knew they made others

I've been trying to rent If There Be Thorns at Family Video but it's always rented out; they only have 2 copies of it.